IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v139y2022ics1389934122000284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Embedding non-industrial private forest owners in forest policy and bioeconomy issues using a Living Lab concept

Author

Listed:
  • Arnould, Maxence
  • Morel, Laure
  • Fournier, Meriem

Abstract

International policies have set sustainable development goals that put emphasis on bioeconomy strategies based on renewable resources. The forestry sector, by providing bio-based products, is expected to take part in this bioeconomy with, among other things, the reduction of society's dependence on fossil fuels. Nevertheless, in Europe, the forestry sector is facing an increase in the number of small private forest ownerships, called non-industrial private forests (NIPF), where wood mobilization is difficult due to both ownership fragmentation and the lack of interest of non-industrial forest owners in existing forest-wood chains. Although many policy instruments have been put in place to address this situation, the problem persists for two main reasons. First, a lack of use of policy instruments by forest owners and second, a lack of collaboration between stakeholders. To provide solutions, we propose a methodology to design territorial projects with non-industrial forest owners in the framework of a Living Lab innovation process. This paper presents both the general method developed and analyzed through open and user-centered innovation concepts and its practical implementation in the Vosges department in France. Our results show how the Living Lab approach can improve the acceptance, adoption and use of policy instruments by NIPF owners and how it promotes multi-stakeholder collaborations to design and deploy innovative solutions. The main interest of our study is to provide a methodology to pilot a forestry Living Lab for policy makers and practitioners, based on rigorous concepts of innovation management. Finally, future developments and limitations of our study are discussed in a global research perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2022. "Embedding non-industrial private forest owners in forest policy and bioeconomy issues using a Living Lab concept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:139:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122000284
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934122000284
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102716?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. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Ficko, Andrej & Lidestav, Gun & Ní Dhubháin, Áine & Karppinen, Heimo & Zivojinovic, Ivana & Westin, Kerstin, 2019. "European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 21-31.
    3. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    4. Laurent Dupont & Laure Morel & Claudine Guidat, 2015. "Innovative public-private partnership to support Smart City: the case of “Chaire REVES”," Post-Print hal-01332233, HAL.
    5. Edwards, Peter & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2013. "Towards a European forest policy — Conflicting courses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 87-93.
    6. Kubeczko, Klaus & Rametsteiner, Ewald & Weiss, Gerhard, 2006. "The role of sectoral and regional innovation systems in supporting innovations in forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(7), pages 704-715, October.
    7. Krassimira Paskaleva & Ian Cooper & Per Linde & Bo Peterson & Christina Götz, 2015. "Stakeholder Engagement in the Smart City: Making Living Labs Work," Public Administration and Information Technology, in: Manuel Pedro Rodríguez-Bolívar (ed.), Transforming City Governments for Successful Smart Cities, edition 127, pages 115-145, Springer.
    8. Teder, Meelis & Kaimre, Paavo, 2018. "The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-62.
    9. Ida Grundel & Margareta Dahlström, 2016. "A Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Approach to Regional Innovation Systems in the Transformation to a Forestry-Based Bioeconomy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(4), pages 963-983, December.
    10. Lillian Hansen & Hilde Bjørkhaug, 2017. "Visions and Expectations for the Norwegian Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    11. Wim Schwerdtner & Rosemarie Siebert & Maria Busse & Ulf B. Freisinger, 2015. "Regional Open Innovation Roadmapping: A New Framework for Innovation-Based Regional Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, February.
    12. Maria Cerreta & Alessia Elefante & Ludovica La Rocca, 2020. "A Creative Living Lab for the Adaptive Reuse of the Morticelli Church: The SSMOLL Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Gert-Jan Nabuurs & Marcus Lindner & Pieter J. Verkerk & Katja Gunia & Paola Deda & Roman Michalak & Giacomo Grassi, 2013. "First signs of carbon sink saturation in European forest biomass," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 792-796, September.
    14. Rauch, Peter & Wolfsmayr, Ulrich J. & Borz, Stelian Alexandru & Triplat, Matevž & Krajnc, Nike & Kolck, Matthias & Oberwimmer, Roland & Ketikidis, Chrysovalantis & Vasiljevic, Aleksandar & Stauder, Mi, 2015. "SWOT analysis and strategy development for forest fuel supply chains in South East Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 87-94.
    15. Laurent Dupont & Joëlle Mastelic & Nathalie Nyffeler & Sophie Latrille & Eric Seulliet, 2019. "Living lab as a support to trust for co-creation of value: application to the consumer energy market," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 53-78.
    16. Rametsteiner, Ewald & Weiss, Gerhard, 2006. "Innovation and innovation policy in forestry: Linking innovation process with systems models," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(7), pages 691-703, October.
    17. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2021. "Developing the persona method to increase the commitment of non-industrial private forest owners in French forest policy priorities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    18. Valkeapää, Annukka & Karppinen, Heimo, 2013. "Citizens' view of legitimacy in the context of Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 52-59.
    19. Ladu, Luana & Imbert, Enrica & Quitzow, Rainer & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "The role of the policy mix in the transition toward a circular forest bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    20. Stoettner, Evelyn M. & Ní Dhubháin, Áine, 2019. "The social networks of Irish private forest owners: An exploratory study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 68-76.
    21. Danley, Brian, 2019. "Forest owner objectives typologies: Instruments for each owner type or instruments for most owner types?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 72-82.
    22. Danley, Brian, 2019. "Forest owner objectives typologies: instruments for each owner type or instruments for most owner types?," CERE Working Papers 2019:7, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    23. Kilcline, Kevin & Dhubháin, Áine Ní & Heanue, Kevin & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2021. "Addressing the challenge of wood mobilisation through a systemic innovation lens: The Irish forest sector innovation system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    24. Dvarioniene, Jolanta & Gurauskiene, Inga & Gecevicius, Giedrius & Trummer, Dora Ruth & Selada, Catarina & Marques, Isabel & Cosmi, Carmelina, 2015. "Stakeholders involvement for energy conscious communities: The Energy Labs experience in 10 European communities," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 512-518.
    25. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    26. Dobrynin, Denis & Smirennikova, Elena & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2020. "Non-state forest governance and ‘Responsibilization’: The prospects for FPIC under FSC certification in Northwest Russia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    27. Laurent Dupont & Joëlle Mastelic & Nathalie Nyffeler & Sophie Latrille & Eric Seulliet, 2019. "Living lab as a support to trust for co-creation of value: application to the consumer energy market," Post-Print hal-02010217, HAL.
    28. Petucco, Claudio & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2015. "Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners’ management priorities on the timber harvest decision—A case study in France," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 152-166.
    29. Geng, Aixin & Yang, Hongqiang & Chen, Jiaxin & Hong, Yinxing, 2017. "Review of carbon storage function of harvested wood products and the potential of wood substitution in greenhouse gas mitigation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 192-200.
    30. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    31. Weiss, Gerhard & Ludvig, Alice & Živojinović, Ivana, 2020. "Four decades of innovation research in forestry and the forest-based industries – A systematic literature review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    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. Di Letizia, Gerardo & De Lucia, Caterina & Pazienza, Pasquale & Cappelletti, Giulio Mario, 2023. "Forest bioeconomy at regional scale: A systematic literature review and future policy perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Daniela Firoiu & George H. Ionescu & Teodor Marian Cojocaru & Mariana Niculescu & Maria Nache Cimpoeru & Oana Alexandra Călin, 2023. "Progress of EU Member States Regarding the Bioeconomy and Biomass Producing and Converting Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Christina-Ioanna Papadopoulou & Efstratios Loizou & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis, 2022. "Priorities in Bioeconomy Strategies: A Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Hetemäki, L. & D'Amato, D. & Giurca, A. & Hurmekoski, E., 2024. "Synergies and trade-offs in the European forest bioeconomy research: State of the art and the way forward," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(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. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2021. "Developing the persona method to increase the commitment of non-industrial private forest owners in French forest policy priorities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. Ekström, Hanna & Danley, Brian & Clough, Yann & Droste, Nils, 2024. "Barking up the wrong tree? - A guide to forest owner typology methods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. 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).
    5. Winkel, Georg & Lovrić, Marko & Muys, Bart & Katila, Pia & Lundhede, Thomas & Pecurul, Mireia & Pettenella, Davide & Pipart, Nathalie & Plieninger, Tobias & Prokofieva, Irina & Parra, Constanza & Pülz, 2022. "Governing Europe's forests for multiple ecosystem services: Opportunities, challenges, and policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Fedoua Kasmi & Ferney Osorio & Laurent Dupont & Brunelle Marche & Mauricio Camargo, 2022. "Innovation Spaces as Drivers of Eco-innovations Supporting the Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Post-Print hal-03590438, HAL.
    7. Takuya Takahashi & Takahiro Tsuge & Shingo Shibata, 2022. "Innovativeness of Japanese Forest Owners Regarding the Monetization of Forest Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-11, February.
    8. Triplat, Matevž & Helenius, Satu & Laina, Ruben & Krajnc, Nike & Kronholm, Thomas & Ženko, Zdenka & Hujala, Teppo, 2023. "Private forest owner willingness to mobilise wood from dense, small-diameter tree stands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Ohmura, Tamaki & Creutzburg, Leonard, 2021. "Guarding the For(es)t: Sustainable economy conflicts and stakeholder preference of policy instruments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    11. Banos, Vincent & Deuffic, Philippe & Brahic, Elodie, 2022. "Engaging or resisting? How forest–based industry and private forest owners respond to bioenergy policies in Aquitaine (Southwestern France)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    12. Callegari, Beniamino & Nybakk, Erlend, 2022. "Schumpeterian theory and research on forestry innovation and entrepreneurship: The state of the art, issues and an agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    13. Kilcline, Kevin & Dhubháin, Áine Ní & Heanue, Kevin & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2021. "Addressing the challenge of wood mobilisation through a systemic innovation lens: The Irish forest sector innovation system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    14. Ana Slavec, 2022. "Underrated Innovativeness of Micro-Enterprises Compared to Small to Medium Enterprises in the Slovenian Forest-Wood Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Giurca, Alexandru & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "Deconstructing substitution narratives: The case of bioeconomy innovations from the forest-based sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    16. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.
    17. Holopainen, Jani & Mattila, Osmo & Pöyry, Essi & Parvinen, Petri, 2020. "Applying design science research methodology in the development of virtual reality forest management services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    18. Hayter, Roger & Clapp, Alex, 2020. "Towards a collaborative (public-private partnership) approach to research and development in Canada’s forest sector: an innovation system perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    19. Gerd Lupp & Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Josh J. Huang & Amy Oen & Stephan Pauleit, 2020. "Living Labs—A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Hag Mo Kang & Dae Sung Lee & Soo Im Choi & Sohui Jeon & Chong Kyu Lee & Hyun Kim, 2020. "Problems and Challenges: A Private Forest Purchase Method for National Forest Expansion in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.

    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:139:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122000284. 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.