IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i10p1653-d924621.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women’s Woodland Owner Network: A Comparative Case Study of Oregon (the United States) and Austria

Author

Listed:
  • Pipiet Larasatie

    (Department of Wood Science and Engineering, College of Forestry, Oregon State University, 119 Richardson Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Dagmar Karisch-Gierer

    (Forest Training Centre Pichl, Rittisstraße 1, 8662 St. Barbara im Mürztal, Austria)

  • Alice Ludvig

    (Institute of Forest, Environmental and Natural Resource Policy, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna (BOKU), Feistmantelstr. 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

Gender equality, as a preferred social norm based on both ethical considerations and legislative demands, can be boosted by networking. However, the concept of organizational networks is too often associated with old boys’ clubs or old boy networks that effectively exclude women, thus limiting their potential. As a result, there is a movement to form women-inspired networks, to address the experiences of women with a goal for increasing their perceptions of belonging and engagement. So how do such networks operate in practice? This research focuses on the organizational differences and commonalities in two women’s woodland owner networks, one in the US and one in Austria, in order to understanding how participation in networks influence the advancement of women in the forest sector. Based on expert interviews, we found that both cases well reflect current networking potential for strengthening the capabilities of women engaging in network activities. Regardless of country women in similar circumstances tend to have similar networks. Yet, there are some differences even among these organized networks operating with similar targets. Results also show the limitations of sole networking approaches for the enhancement of women’s positions in the men-dominated forest sector. We suggested more action in terms of active equality policies, such as mentoring/networking programs, family friendly policies, and quota/sensibilization measures for boards and selection committees to increase the gender balance in the sector and its related industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Pipiet Larasatie & Dagmar Karisch-Gierer & Alice Ludvig, 2022. "Women’s Woodland Owner Network: A Comparative Case Study of Oregon (the United States) and Austria," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1653-:d:924621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1653/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1653/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marieke Brink & Yvonne Benschop, 2014. "Gender in Academic Networking: The Role of Gatekeepers in Professorial Recruitment," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 460-492, May.
    2. Tallberg, Teemu, 2003. "Networks, Organisations and Men: Concepts and Interrelations," Working Papers 495, Hanken School of Economics.
    3. Azmat, Ghazala & Boring, Anne, 2020. "Gender Diversity in Firms," IZA Policy Papers 168, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Sultana, P., 2006. "Gender and local floodplain management institutions: a case study from Bangladesh," IWMI Working Papers H043910, International Water Management Institute.
    5. repec:ilo:ilowps:344117 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Gustafson, Joseph L., 2008. "Tokenism in policing: An empirical test of Kanter's hypothesis," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-10, March.
    7. Sultana, Parvin & Thompson, Paul, 2006. "Gender and local floodplain management institutions: a case study from Bangladesh," CAPRi working papers 57, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Kristina Johansson & Elias Andersson & Maria Johansson & Gun Lidestav, 2020. "Conditioned openings and restraints: The meaning‐making of women professionals breaking into the male‐dominated sector of forestry," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 927-943, November.
    9. Mahoney, James & Goertz, Gary, 2004. "The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 653-669, November.
    10. Michael Fritsch & Martina Kauffeld-Monz, 2010. "The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 44(1), pages 21-38, February.
    11. Andersson, Elias & Lidestav, Gun, 2016. "Creating alternative spaces and articulating needs: Challenging gendered notions of forestry and forest ownership through women's networks," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 38-44.
    12. Gerring, John, 2004. "What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 341-354, May.
    13. Maria Johansson & Lisa Ringblom, 2017. "The Business Case of Gender Equality in Swedish Forestry and Mining - Restricting or Enabling Organizational Change," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 628-642, 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. Pipiet Larasatie & Chorirotun Nur Ulifah, 2023. "Mother Leads with Her Heart: A Case Study of Women Worker Leaders in the Men-Dominated Forestry Sector," Merits, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Johansson, Kristina & Johansson, Maria & Andersson, Elias, 2023. "All talk and no action? Making change and negotiating gender equality in Swedish forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(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. Johansson, Kristina & Johansson, Maria & Andersson, Elias, 2023. "All talk and no action? Making change and negotiating gender equality in Swedish forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Kristina Johansson & Elias Andersson & Maria Johansson, 2022. "Restructuring masculinities and reshaping inequalities: Negotiations of (gendered) sales work and relations in an industrial organization," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 1008-1024, July.
    3. Kuhlman, Juulia & Hamunen, Katri & Vainio, Annukka, 2024. "Active forest ownership – Perception of Finnish women forest owners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Esther Mwangi & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Yan Sun, 2009. "Does Gender Influence Forest Management? Exploring Cases from East Africa and Latin America," CID Working Papers 40, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Parvin Sultana & Paul Thompson, 2008. "Gender and local floodplain management institutions: a case study from Bangladesh," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 53-68.
    6. Barrero-Amórtegui, Yady & Maldonado, Jorge H., 2021. "Gender composition of management groups in a conservation agreement framework: Experimental evidence for mangrove use in the Colombian Pacific," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    7. Kristina Johansson & Elias Andersson & Maria Johansson & Gun Lidestav, 2020. "Conditioned openings and restraints: The meaning‐making of women professionals breaking into the male‐dominated sector of forestry," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 927-943, November.
    8. Bergstén, Sabina & Andersson, Elias & Keskitalo, E. Carina H., 2020. "Same-same but different: Gendering forest ownership in Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    9. Jessica Weber, 2023. "Coordination Challenges in Wind Energy Development: Lessons from Cross-Case Positive Planning Approaches to Avoid Multi-Level Governance ‘Free-Riding’," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-25, October.
    10. Ilana Shpaizman, 2020. "The end–means nexus and policy conversion: evidence from two cases in Israeli immigrant integration policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 713-733, December.
    11. Stichman, Amy J. & Hassell, Kimberly D. & Archbold, Carol A., 2010. "Strength in numbers? A test of Kanter's theory of tokenism," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 633-639, July.
    12. António Madureira & Nico Baken & Harry Bouwman, 2011. "Value of digital information networks: a holonic framework," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-30, April.
    13. Andersson Fredrik O. & Ford Michael, 2017. "Entry Barriers and Nonprofit Founding Rates: An Examination of the Milwaukee Voucher School Population," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 71-90, January.
    14. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    15. Wertheim-Heck, Sigrid C.O. & Vellema, Sietze & Spaargaren, Gert, 2015. "Food safety and urban food markets in Vietnam: The need for flexible and customized retail modernization policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 95-106.
    16. Elena Casprini & Tommaso Pucci & Lorenzo Zanni, 2023. "From growth goals to proactive organizational resilience: first evidence in women-led and non-women-led Italian wineries," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1017-1036, April.
    17. Ines Wagner, 2015. "EU posted work and transnational action in the German meat industry," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 21(2), pages 201-213, May.
    18. Jorge I. León Balderrama & Lydia V. Gutiérrez López & J. Crisóforo Carrazco Escalante, 2019. "Análisis comparativo de la red de flujos de conocimiento e información tecnológica en dos regiones líderes en el cultivo de camarón en México," Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, vol. 27(2), pages 9-32, June.
    19. Shuli Gao & Yanli Guo & Jianbin Chen & Lin Li, 2016. "Factors affecting the performance of knowledge collaboration in virtual team based on capital appreciation," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 119-131, June.
    20. Jonas Radbruch & Amelie Schiprowski, 2023. "Committee Deliberation and Gender Differences in Influences," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 398, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1653-:d:924621. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.