IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v109y2019ics1389934119301820.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability of Nordic non-timber forest product-related businesses – A case study on bilberry

Author

Listed:
  • Hamunen, Katri
  • Kurttila, Mikko
  • Miina, Jari
  • Peltola, Rainer
  • Tikkanen, Jukka

Abstract

Nordic forests settings are characterised by private forest ownership and free access to forests, creating a specific societal context for harvesting non-timber forest products (NTFPs). The aim of this study is to define the set of criteria and indicators (C&I) to evaluate the sustainability of NWTPs' commercial supply chains in the Nordic forests. The set of C&I, including 13 sub-criteria and 48 indicators, was defined based on earlier research. As a case study, the developed set of C&I was tested with four bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus) supply chains. Experts evaluated the fulfilment of indicators in each chain, and example consumers gave weights to the criteria. The results reveal that there is a lack of sustainability especially in social dimension, for example in involving forest owners and the local community. Weights given by the example consumers highlight their preferences, in this case rights of employees. The set of C&I defined serves especially companies operating in NTFP businesses; it helps to perceive the sustainability gaps in operations of companies. Moreover, the set of C&I is a tool to promote discussions with stakeholders and test the sustainability of new business models for the developing branch of business. As a next step, the C&I defined needs to be further tested in different levels and with different NTFPs.

Suggested Citation

  • Hamunen, Katri & Kurttila, Mikko & Miina, Jari & Peltola, Rainer & Tikkanen, Jukka, 2019. "Sustainability of Nordic non-timber forest product-related businesses – A case study on bilberry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:109:y:2019:i:c:s1389934119301820
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934119301820
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102002?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. Mikelis Grivins & Talis Tisenkopfs & Zaklina Stojanovic & Bojan Ristic, 2016. "A Comparative Analysis of the Social Performance of Global and Local Berry Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-20, June.
    2. Ludvig, Alice & Tahvanainen, Veera & Dickson, Antonia & Evard, Camille & Kurttila, Mikko & Cosovic, Marija & Chapman, Emma & Wilding, Maria & Weiss, Gerhard, 2016. "The practice of entrepreneurship in the non-wood forest products sector: Support for innovation on private forest land," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 31-37.
    3. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    4. Lähtinen, Katja & Myllyviita, Tanja & Leskinen, Pekka & Pitkänen, Sari K., 2014. "A systematic literature review on indicators to assess local sustainability of forest energy production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1202-1216.
    5. Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    6. Michael Cuthill, 2010. "Strengthening the ‘social’ in sustainable development: Developing a conceptual framework for social sustainability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 362-373, 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. Charlotta Hedberg & Irma Olofsson, 2022. "Negotiating the Wild West: Variegated neoliberalisation of the Swedish labour migration regime and the wild berry migration industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(1), pages 33-49, February.
    2. Thiago Vargas Maldonado & Francesca Allievi & Luiz Panhoca, 2021. "Sustainability of the Amazon Nut in Mato Grosso: An Application of the MuSIASEM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-20, August.

    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. Huber, P. & Hujala, T. & Kurttila, M. & Wolfslehner, B. & Vacik, H., 2019. "Application of multi criteria analysis methods for a participatory assessment of non-wood forest products in two European case studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 103-111.
    2. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2010. "Set choice problems with incomplete information about the preferences of the decision maker," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 371-379, November.
    3. Carlson, Laura A. & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Social sustainability in the ready-made-garment sector in Bangladesh: an institutional approach to supply chains," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(2), March.
    4. Poduška, Zoran & Nedeljković, Jelena & Nonić, Dragan & Ratknić, Tatjana & Ratknić, Mihailo & Živojinović, Ivana, 2020. "Intrapreneurial climate as momentum for fostering employee innovativeness in public forest enterprises," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Wilson, Christopher & van der Velden, Maja, 2022. "Sustainable AI: An integrated model to guide public sector decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    6. Christoph Schunko & Christian R. Vogl, 2018. "Is the Commercialization of Wild Plants by Organic Producers in Austria Neglected or Irrelevant?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, October.
    7. Tom Koch & Mark Ridgley, 2000. "The Condorcet's Jury Theorem in a Bioethical Context: The Dynamics of Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 379-392, September.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1255-1286 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.
    10. Olivier, Michelle M. & Howard, Johnathon L. & Wilson, Ben P. & Robinson, Wayne A., 2018. "Correlating Localisation and Sustainability and Exploring the Causality of the Relationship," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 749-765.
    11. Jamie P. Monat, 2009. "The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(6), pages 492-508, October.
    12. Yang, Taho & Wen, Yuan-Feng & Wang, Fang-Fang, 2011. "Evaluation of robustness of supply chain information-sharing strategies using a hybrid Taguchi and multiple criteria decision-making method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(2), pages 458-466, December.
    13. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2020. "Maximum likelihood solutions for multicriterial choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 299-308.
    14. Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Eduarda Asfora Frej & Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli, 2021. "Combining holistic and decomposition paradigms in preference modeling with the flexibility of FITradeoff," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(1), pages 7-47, March.
    15. Michelle M. Olivier & Benjamin P. Wilson & Jonathon L. Howard, 2016. "Measuring Localisation Regionally to Form a Bhutanese Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    17. Beynon, Malcolm J. & Wells, Peter, 2008. "The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: A PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 384-394, June.
    18. Robin Hogrefe & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2023. "The Social Dimension of Corporate Sustainability: Review of an Evolving Research Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-22, February.
    19. Loetscher, Thomas & Keller, Jurg, 2002. "A decision support system for selecting sanitation systems in developing countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 267-290, December.
    20. P P Sutton & R H Green, 2007. "Choice is a value statement. On inferring optimal multiple attribute portfolios from non-optimal nominations," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(11), pages 1526-1533, November.
    21. Živojinović, I. & Weiss, G. & Wilding, M. & Wong, J.L.G. & Ludvig, A., 2020. "Experiencing forest products – An innovation trend by rural entrepreneurs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(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:eee:forpol:v:109:y:2019:i:c:s1389934119301820. 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.