IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnljfs/v69y2023i6id193-2022-jfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the propensity of Italian and German forest owners towards forest certification for ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Emanuela Lombardo

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy)

Abstract

This study analyses the perception of the relationship between forest certification and the production of ecosystem services by Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) sustainable forest management (SFM) certification holders. In addition, the psychological constructs that govern the use of certification for ecosystem services are investigated. Specifically, online questionnaire surveys were submitted to a sample of Italian and German forest owners and managers to study reasons for and against and global motives to adopt certification for ecosystem services through the application of Behavioural Reasoning Theory (BRT). Results show that respondents believe that certification can better support ecosystem services related to 'regulation and maintenance' and the conservation of biodiversity. On the other hand, the application of BRT has only been partially useful in explaining the psychological factors towards the adoption of ecosystem services certifications. In any case, attitudes and reasons for certainly had a significant influence on the intention to adopt certifications. Apart from the scientific implications, these results have practical applications for policymakers who can focus on the dissemination of the certification of ecosystem services by trying to support through eco-policies, the attitudes and reasons for expressed by forest owners.

Suggested Citation

  • Emanuela Lombardo, 2023. "Analysis of the propensity of Italian and German forest owners towards forest certification for ecosystem services," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(6), pages 266-276.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:69:y:2023:i:6:id:193-2022-jfs
    DOI: 10.17221/193/2022-JFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/193/2022-JFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/193/2022-JFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/193/2022-JFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krause, Marlen S. & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2019. "The intention of companies to invest in biodiversity and ecosystem services credits through an online-marketplace," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Lalani, Baqir & Dorward, Peter & Holloway, Garth & Wauters, Erwin, 2016. "Smallholder farmers' motivations for using Conservation Agriculture and the roles of yield, labour and soil fertility in decision making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 80-90.
    3. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Franz, Kristin & Lorenz, Martin & Moning, Christoph & Olschewski, Roland & Rödl, Anne & Schneider, Heike & Schröppel, Bettina & Weller, Priska, 2018. "Forest ecosystem services in rural areas of Germany: Insights from the national TEEB study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Karppinen, Heimo, 2010. "Professional judgment in non-industrial private forestry: Forester attitudes and social norms influencing biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 136-146, February.
    5. Karppinen, Heimo, 2005. "Forest owners' choice of reforestation method: an application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 393-409, March.
    6. Sreen, Naman & Dhir, Amandeep & Talwar, Shalini & Tan, Teck Ming & Alharbi, Fatimah, 2021. "Behavioral reasoning perspectives to brand love toward natural products: Moderating role of environmental concern and household size," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    7. Derek W. Thompson & Eric N. Hansen, 2012. "Institutional Pressures and an Evolving Forest Carbon Market," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(6), pages 351-369, September.
    8. Daeseong An & Seonggoo Ji & Ihsan Ullah Jan, 2021. "Investigating the Determinants and Barriers of Purchase Intention of Innovative New Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paluš, Hubert & Marcineková, Lenka & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2024. "Was stakeholder participation in the PEFC revision process successful in Slovakia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Umut Ünal & Rıfgı Buğra Bağcı & Mertcan Taşçıoğlu, 2024. "The perfect combination to win the competition: Bringing sustainability and customer experience together," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 4806-4824, July.
    2. Karppinen, Heimo & Berghäll, Sami, 2015. "Forest owners' stand improvement decisions: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 275-284.
    3. Arlixcya Vinnisa Anak Empidi & Diana Emang, 2021. "Understanding Public Intentions to Participate in Protection Initiatives for Forested Watershed Areas Using the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Case Study of Cameron Highlands in Pahang, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Popa, Bogdan & Niță, Mihai Daniel & Hălălișan, Aureliu Florin, 2019. "Intentions to engage in forest law enforcement in Romania: An application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 33-43.
    5. Jang-Hwan Jo & Taewoo Roh & Jongmin Hwang & Kyeong-hak Lee & Changbae Lee, 2020. "Factors and Paths Affecting Payment for Forest Ecosystem Service: Evidence from Voluntary Forest Carbon Market in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    6. Slavec, Ana & Hoeben, Annechien D. & Moreno-Torres, Miguel & Primožič, Lea & Stern, Tobias, 2023. "When intentions do not matter: Climate change mitigation and adaptation innovations in the Forest-based sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Pereira Lima, Flávia & Pereira Bastos, Rogério, 2020. "Understanding landowners’ intention to restore native areas: The role of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    8. Qin, Botao & Shogren, Jason, 2023. "Endogenous Social Norms, Mechanism Design, and Payment for Environmental Services," MPRA Paper 112878, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Olza Donazar, Luis & Montero Eseverri, Eduardo & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "The challenges of coordinating forest owners for joint management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 100-109.
    10. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Cai, Xiang & Adjei, Mavis & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Obuobi, Bright, 2022. "Citizens’ intention to invest in municipal solid waste to energy projects in Ghana: The impact of direct and indirect effects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    11. Talwar, Shalini & Kaur, Puneet & Kumar, Sushant & Salo, Jari & Dhir, Amandeep, 2022. "The balancing act: How do moral norms and anticipated pride drive food waste/reduction behaviour?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Kautish, Pradeep & Paço, Arminda & Thaichon, Park, 2022. "Sustainable consumption and plastic packaging: Relationships among product involvement, perceived marketplace influence and choice behavior," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    14. Grace B. Villamor & Andrew Dunningham & Philip Stahlmann-Brown & Peter W. Clinton, 2022. "Improving the Representation of Climate Change Adaptation Behaviour in New Zealand’s Forest Growing Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, March.
    15. Joa, Bettina & Winkel, Georg & Primmer, Eeva, 2018. "The unknown known – A review of local ecological knowledge in relation to forest biodiversity conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 520-530.
    16. Shalini Talwar & Puneet Kaur & Octavio Escobar & Sai Lan, 2022. "Virtual reality tourism to satisfy wanderlust without wandering," Post-Print hal-04325590, HAL.
    17. Derek W. Thompson & Eric N. Hansen, 2012. "Institutional Pressures and an Evolving Forest Carbon Market," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(6), pages 351-369, September.
    18. Talwar, Shalini & Kaur, Puneet & Escobar, Octavio & Lan, Sai, 2022. "Virtual reality tourism to satisfy wanderlust without wandering: An unconventional innovation to promote sustainability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 128-143.
    19. Lima, Flávia Pereira & Bastos, Rogério Pereira, 2019. "Perceiving the invisible: Formal education affects the perception of ecosystem services provided by native areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    20. Abadi, Bijan & Yadollahi, Arash & Bybordi, Ahmad & Rahmati, Mehdi, 2020. "The discrimination of adopters and non-adopters of conservation agricultural initiatives in northwest Iran: Attitudinal, soil testing, and topographical modules," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:69:y:2023:i:6:id:193-2022-jfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.