Private forest landowners’ awareness of forest boundaries: case study in Japan

References

• Andersson M, Gong P. 2010. Risk preferences, risk perceptions and timber harvest decisions — an empirical study of nonindustrial private forest owners in northern Sweden. For Policy Econ. 12:330–339. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.02.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creamer SF, Blatner KA, Butler BJ. 2012. Certification of family forests: what influences owners’ awareness and participation? J For Econ. 18:131–144. doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2011.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Nordlund A, Olsson O, Westin K. 2012. Beliefs about urban fringe forests among urban residents in Sweden. Urban For Urban Greening. 11:321–328. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2012.02.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feliciano D, Bouriaud L, Brahic E, Deuffic P, Dobsinska Z, Jarsky V, Lawrence A, Nybakk E, Quiroga S, Suarez C, et al. 2017. Understanding private forest owners’ conceptualisation of forest management: evidence from a survey in seven European countries. J Rural Stud. 54:162–176. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.06.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer PA, Charnley S. 2012. Private forest owners and invasive plants: risk perception and management. Invasive Plant Sci Manage. 7:375–389. doi:10.1614/IPSM-D-12-00005.1.
   Google Scholar
• Forestry Agency. 2009. Annual report on trends in forest and forestry in Japan fiscal year 2009. Japan: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.
   Google Scholar
• Forestry Agency. 2013. Trends in forestry and forestry in 2013; [accessed 2018 May 14]. http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/kikaku/hakusyo/25hakusyo/pdf/zen1-1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Forestry Agency. 2016. Current situation of forest owners’ co-operative association; [accessed 2018 May 14]. http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/keiei/kumiai/pdf/280401.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Forestry Agency. 2017. National and local system WG submissions on how to deal with forests where it is difficult to identify the owner; [accessed 2020 Mar 13]. https://www5.cao.go.jp/keizai-shimon/kaigi/special/reform/wg6/291128/pdf/shiryou5-2-2.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Forestry Agency. 2018. Chapter I. Development of a new forest management system; [accessed 2020 May 23]. https://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/kikaku/hakusyo/29hakusyo_h/summary/s01.html.
   Google Scholar
• Furukawa Y. 2004. New environmental forest policy by local government and people’s participation: case studies on Kochi Prefecture and Yusuhara Town (Feature Articles for the Symposium). Jpn For Econ Soc. 50(1):39–52. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Häggqvist P, Lejon S, Lidestav G. 2014. Look at what they do - a revised approach to communication strategy towards private forest owners. Scand J For Res. 29:697–706. doi:10.1080/02827581.2014.960894.
   Google Scholar
• Hasegawa M, Pulhin JM, Inoue M. 2013. Facing the challenge of social forestry in Japan: the case of reviving harmonious coexistence between forest and people in Okayama Prefecture. Small-scale For. 12:257–275. doi:10.1007/s11842-012-9210-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi M, Noda I. 2005. Factors affecting owners’ attitude toward forest operations: an analysis of data from questionnaire survey at Kumamoto, Japan. Jpn For Econ Soc. 51:1–9. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi M, Noda I, Yamada Y. 2006. Factors affecting owners’ attitude toward forest management: an analysis of data from surveys at Oita, Japan. Jpn For Econ Soc. 52:1–11. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi M, Oka H, Tanaka W. 2011. Decision making of forest owners and social relationships: A view from transaction cost economics. Jpn For Econ Soc. 57:9–20. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Hujala T, Pykäläinen J, Tikkanen J. 2007. Decision making among Finnish non-industrial private forest owners: the role of professional opinion and desire to learn. Scand J For Res. 22:454–463. doi:10.1080/02827580701395434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hujala T, Tikkanen J. 2008. Boosters of and barriers to smooth communication in family forest owners’ decision making. Scand J For Res. 23:466–477. doi:10.1080/02827580802334209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kashiwai Y, Furukawa Y, Kawata I. 1997. A study on forest management of absentee forest owners: A case study of Okawa and Honkawa village in Reihoku Area of Kochi Prefecture. Appl For Sci. 6:5–8. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Katano Y. 2013. Property status of “absentee landlords” of small-scale forests in a depopulated area. Pap Environ Infor Sci. 27:187–192. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Katano Y. 2016a. The Underlying conditions of abandoned forests in the underpopulated area: an analysis on forest thinning behavior by resident and non-resident owners. Jpn For Econ Soc. 62:21–30. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Katano Y. 2016b. The conditions of forestry management in depopulated areas of Japan: forest management behaviors of non-resident owners. J Environ Inform Sci. 44:99–110.
   Google Scholar
• Kittredge DB, Gianotti AG, Hutyra LR, Foster DR, Getson JM. 2015. Landowner conservation awareness across rural-to-urban gradients in Massachusetts. Biol Conserv. 184:79–89. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.01.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline J, Alig J, Johnson L. 2000. Fostering the production of nontimber services among forest owners with heterogeneous objectives. For Sci. 46:302–311.
   Google Scholar
• Knoot TG, Rickenbach M, Silbernagel K. 2015. Payments for ecosystem services: will a new hook net more active family forest owners? J For. 113:210–218. doi:10.5849/jof.12-104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komatsu City. 2020. Statics of Komatsu city; [accessed 2020 May 18]. https://www.city.komatsu.lg.jp/shiseijoho/16/1/6451.html
   Google Scholar
• Kondo H. 2010. Use of geographic information system (GIS) and global positioning system (GPS) for forestry activity focused on forest owners’ cooperatives and some considerations of forest information in Japan. Jpn J For Plan. 42:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Markowski-Lindsay M, Stevens T, Kittredge DB, Butler BJ, Catanzaro P, Dickinson BJ. 2011. Barriers to Massachusetts forest landowner participation in carbon markets. Ecol Econ. 71:180–190. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.08.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of agriculture, forestry and fisheries. 2017. 2015 Census of agriculture and forestry in Japan report and data on the results; [accessed 2020 March 13]. https://www.e-stat.go.jp/en/stat-search/files?page=1&layout=datalist&toukei=00500209&tstat=000001032920&cycle=0&tclass1=000001077437&tclass2=000001097415
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. 2016. Status of grasping actual condition of owner unknown land; [Accessed 2018 May 14.] http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001207188.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. 2012. For absentee village owners of farmland and forest. Results of an Internet survey; [accessed 2020 Mar 13]. http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/000205857.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. 2017. Material from the first session of the special subcommittee of the land policy subcommittee of the national land council; [accessed 2020 Mar 13]. https://www.mlit.go.jp/policy/shingikai/totikensangyo02_sg_000108.html
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. 2020. Cadastral survey website; [accessed 2020 Mar 13]. http://www.chiseki.go.jp/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Mostegl NM, Pröbstl-Haider U, Jandl R, Haider W. 2019. Targeting climate change adaptation strategies to small-scale private forest owners. For Policy Econ. 99:83–99. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakazato T, Noguchi T. 2007. The problem of forest management with forest land owners living outside villages. For Econ. 60:1–12. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Petucco C, Abildtrup J, Stenger A. 2015. Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners’ management priorities on the timber harvest decision—A case study in France. J For Econ. 21:152–166. doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2015.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polomé P. 2016. Private forest owners motivations for adopting biodiversity-related protection programs. J Environ Manage. 183:212–219. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryukoh H. 1992. A trend and future focused questions of absentee forest ownership (The actual state and the problems of absentee forest ownership (I)). For Econ. 45:1–7. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Sakai M. 1993. Forest owner’s mind to forest management and problems of forest resources. For Econ. 46:20–21. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Shiraishi N. 1994. An analysis of forestry operation’s intensity from the viewpoint of accessibility. J Jpn For Soc. 76:218–223. (In Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• Takala T, Hujala T, Tanskanen M, Tikkanen J. 2017. The order of forest owners’ discourses: hegemonic and marginalised truths about the forest and forest ownership. J Rural Stud. 55:33–44. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.07.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamura K (2015). Attempts to categorize family forestry management entities using agriculture and forestry census votes. Japan forestry society convention presentation database. The 126th Japan Forestry Society Convention. p. 7.
   Google Scholar
• Tian N, Poudyal NC, Lu F. 2018. Understanding landowners’ interest and willingness to participate in forest certification program in China. Land Use Policy. 71:271–280. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uemura K. 2017. A study on the influence of land registration system and cadastral survey on unknown owner land. Jpn J Real Estate Sci. 31:91–99. doi:10.5736/jares.31.3_91.
   Google Scholar
• Yamaba A, Nakagoshi N. 1999. The structure of resident’s consciousness on management of rural forest. J Jpn For Soc. 81:139–146.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Sun X, Butler BJ, Prestemon JP. 2015. Harvesting choices and timber supply among landowners in the Southern United States. Can J Agric Econ. 63:409–429. doi:10.1111/cjag.12060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar