IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v12y2010i6p423-431.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Swedish forest commons -- A matter of governance?

Author

Listed:
  • Holmgren, Eva
  • Keskitalo, E. Carina H.
  • Lidestav, Gun

Abstract

Around 100 years ago, when Crown land in the interior of northern Sweden was privatized, part of the forest land was set aside as forest commons. Today, there are 33 such forest commons jointly managed and owned in common mainly by private forest owners. The forest commons may be looked upon as a means by which the state controls the production of and returns from the forests belonging to small and less affluent forest owners. Further, an attempt has been made to use the forests as a tool to move the self-interests of these small forest owners closer to providing public goods. Forest commons thus hold a contested status, as private lands under public control and as a partly de-regulated form of ownership. This paper examines the extent to which forest commons are currently managed directly by the government, comparing this with the general trend in forest policy towards governance and less prescriptive measures, which often take account of market and participative goals. Building upon Appelstrand (2007), this paper describes the major policy instruments relevant for forest commons from 1861 to 2005. We conclude that direct government management remains dominant, with the major legislation pertaining to forest commons dating back to the 1950s. While governance may seem to be inherent in the forest commons concept, the development of governance has not been fully realised given the relatively strict government-steered framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Holmgren, Eva & Keskitalo, E. Carina H. & Lidestav, Gun, 2010. "Swedish forest commons -- A matter of governance?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 423-431, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:6:p:423-431
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389-9341(10)00056-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Kissling-Naf, Ingrid & Bisang, Kurt, 2001. "Rethinking recent changes of forest regimes in Europe through property-rights theory and policy analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 99-111, November.
    2. Nilsson, Sten, 2005. "Experiences of policy reforms of the forest sector in transition and other countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 831-847, November.
    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. Caballero, Gonzalo, 2015. "Community-based forest management institutions in the Galician communal forests: A new institutional approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 347-356.
    2. Louda, Jiří & Dubová, Lenka & Špaček, Martin & Brnkaľáková, Stanislava & Kluvánková, Tatiana, 2023. "Factors affecting governance innovations for ecosystem services provision: Insights from two self-organized forest communities in Czechia and Slovakia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    3. Sandström, Stefan & Poudyal, Mahesh & Lejon, Solveig Berg & Lidestav, Gun, 2016. "Absent neighbours and passive shareholders – The issue of residency and involvement in the management of a forest common," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 205-217.
    4. Lidskog, Rolf & Löfmarck, Erik, 2016. "Fostering a flexible forest: Challenges and strategies in the advisory practice of a deregulated forest management system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 177-183.
    5. Gatto, Paola & Bogataj, Nevenka, 2015. "Disturbances, robustness and adaptation in forest commons: Comparative insights from two cases in the Southeastern Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 56-64.
    6. Ambrose-Oji, Bianca & Lawrence, Anna & Stewart, Amy, 2015. "Community based forest enterprises in Britain: Two organising typologies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 65-74.

    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. Kajanus, Miika & Leban, Vasja & Glavonjić, Predrag & Krč, Janez & Nedeljković, Jelena & Nonić, Dragan & Nybakk, Erlend & Posavec, Stjepan & Riedl, Marcel & Teder, Meelis & Wilhelmsson, Erik & Zālīte, , 2019. "What can we learn from business models in the European forest sector: Exploring the key elements of new business model designs," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 145-156.
    2. Slunge, Daniel & Ekbom, Anders & Loayza, F. & Guthiga, P. & Nyangena, Wilfred, 2011. "Can Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment of REDD+ Improve Forest Governance?," Working Papers in Economics 493, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    3. Irimie, Doru Leonard & Essmann, Hans Friedrich, 2009. "Forest property rights in the frame of public policies and societal change," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 95-101, March.
    4. Kant, Shashi, 2003. "Extending the boundaries of forest economics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 39-56, January.
    5. Nichiforel, Liviu & Keary, Kevin & Deuffic, Philippe & Weiss, Gerhard & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Winkel, Georg & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Gatto, Paola & Gorriz Mi, 2018. "How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 535-552.
    6. Gedifew Sewenet Yigzaw, 2019. "Forest Management In Dangila Woreda, Ethiopia: Bird Eyes View On Agamengi Community Forest," Prizren Social Science Journal, SHIKS, vol. 3(1), pages 13-17, April.
    7. Ahmet Tolunay & Türkay Türkoglu & Marine Elbakidze & Per Angelstam, 2014. "Determination of the Support Level of Local Organizations in a Model Forest Initiative: Do Local Stakeholders Have Willingness to Be Involved in the Model Forest Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Ali, Tanvir & Ahmad, Munir & Shahbaz, Babar & Suleri, Abid, 2007. "Impact of participatory forest management on financial assets of rural communities in Northwest Pakistan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 588-593, August.
    9. Nordberg, Mats, 2007. "Ukraine reforms in forestry 1990-2000," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 713-729, February.
    10. Shahbaz, Babar & Ali, Tanvir & Suleri, Abid Q., 2011. "Dilemmas and challenges in forest conservation and development interventions: Case of Northwest Pakistan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 473-478, July.

    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:eee:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:6:p:423-431. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.