IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v73y2016icp90-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of knowledge in evidence-informed voluntary conservation of Finnish forests

Author

Listed:
  • Salomaa, Anna
  • Paloniemi, Riikka
  • Hujala, Teppo
  • Rantala, Salla
  • Arponen, Anni
  • Niemelä, Jari

Abstract

Despite calls for evidence-based policies, the process of using evidence in forest conservation policy implementation has remained unclear. In this paper, we focus on voluntary conservation and investigate complex ways to use evidence in implementation of the Forest Biodiversity Programme METSO in Finland. Data were collected via nine focus group discussions involving a total of 59 forest conservation stakeholders. Through interpretative qualitative analysis, we found that forest owners' and forest advisers' awareness of the voluntary instrument and the smooth interplay of knowledge types are important factors in implementing voluntary conservation. Knowledge use should be locally bound for policy implementation to be effective. Social relationships enable integrating local knowledge. Forest owners, advisers, authorities and other actors interpret scientific and other knowledges (and simultaneously co-produce new knowledge) in practical action. We conclude that educating forest advisers, informing forest owners, and increasing collaboration can enhance evidence flows from research to practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Salomaa, Anna & Paloniemi, Riikka & Hujala, Teppo & Rantala, Salla & Arponen, Anni & Niemelä, Jari, 2016. "The use of knowledge in evidence-informed voluntary conservation of Finnish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 90-98.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:73:y:2016:i:c:p:90-98
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116302684
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.004?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. Nagasaka, Kenji & Böcher, Michael & Krott, Max, 2016. "Are forest researchers only scientists? Case studies on the roles of researchers in Japanese and Swedish forest policy processes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 147-154.
    2. Ellefson, Paul V., 2000. "Integrating science and policy development: case of the national research council and US national policy focused on non-federal forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 81-94, May.
    3. Simo Sarkki & Jari Niemelä & Rob Tinch & Sybille van den Hove & Allan Watt & Juliette Young, 2014. "Balancing credibility, relevance and legitimacy: A critical assessment of trade-offs in science–policy interfaces," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 194-206.
    4. Korhonen, Katri & Hujala, Teppo & Kurttila, Mikko, 2013. "Diffusion of voluntary protection among family forest owners: Decision process and success factors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 82-90.
    5. Appelstrand, Marie, 2002. "Participation and societal values: the challenge for lawmakers and policy practitioners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 281-290, December.
    6. Spilsbury, Michael J. & Nasi, Robert, 2006. "The interface of policy research and the policy development process: challenges posed to the forestry community," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 193-205, March.
    7. Carlsson, Julia & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola & Öhman, Karin & Nordström, Eva-Maria, 2015. "Combining scientific and stakeholder knowledge in future scenario development — A forest landscape case study in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 122-134.
    8. Klenk, Nicole Lisa & Wyatt, Stephen, 2015. "The design and management of multi-stakeholder research networks to maximize knowledge mobilization and innovation opportunities in the forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 77-86.
    9. Hasanagas, Nikolaos D., 2016. "Managing information in forest policy networks: Distinguishing the influential actors from the “postmen”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 73-80.
    10. Janse, Gerben, 2006. "Information search behaviour of European forest policy decision-makers," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 579-592, August.
    11. Stevanov, Mirjana & Böcher, Michael & Krott, Max & Krajter, Silvija & Vuletic, Dijana & Orlovic, Sasa, 2013. "The Research, Integration and Utilization (RIU) model as an analytical framework for the professionalization of departmental research organizations: Case studies of publicly funded forest research ins," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 20-28.
    12. Janse, Gerben, 2008. "Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe -- A survey on both sides of the science/policy interface," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 183-194, January.
    13. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    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. Takala, Tuomo & Brockhaus, Maria & Hujala, Teppo & Tanskanen, Minna & Lehtinen, Ari & Tikkanen, Jukka & Toppinen, Anne, 2022. "Discursive barriers to voluntary biodiversity conservation: The case of Finnish forest owners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Pynnönen, Sari & Salomaa, Anna & Rantala, Salla & Hujala, Teppo, 2019. "Technical and social knowledge discontinuities in the multi-objective management of private forests in Finland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Bin Zhao & Xin Huangfu, 2023. "The More Training, the More Willingness? A Positive Spillover Effect Analysis of Voluntary Behavior in Environmental Protection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Miljand, Matilda & Bjärstig, Therese & Eckerberg, Katarina & Primmer, Eeva & Sandström, Camilla, 2021. "Voluntary agreements to protect private forests – A realist review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    5. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, M, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.
    6. Joa, Bettina & Schraml, Ulrich, 2020. "Conservation practiced by private forest owners in Southwest Germany – The role of values, perceptions and local forest knowledge," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    7. Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Ikonen, Piia & Rantala, Mirja & Miettinen, Janne & Kuittinen, Suvi & Hujala, Teppo & Mehtätalo, Lauri & Pappinen, Ari, 2020. "Grounds for improving the implementation of game-oriented forest management – A double sampling survey of Finnish forest owners and professionals," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Ramirez, Luisa F. & Belcher, Brian M., 2020. "Crossing the science-policy interface: Lessons from a research project on Brazil nut management in Peru," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    10. Laakkonen, Anu & Hujala, Teppo & Pykäläinen, Jouni, 2019. "Integrating intangible resources enables creating new types of forest services - developing forest leasing value network in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 157-168.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Hasanagas, Nikolaos D., 2016. "Managing information in forest policy networks: Distinguishing the influential actors from the “postmen”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 73-80.
    4. Hickey, Gordon M., 2013. "International developments in the administration of publicly-funded forest research: A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-8.
    5. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2011. "Government science in forestry: Characteristics and policy utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 37-45, January.
    6. Klenk, Nicole Lisa & Wyatt, Stephen, 2015. "The design and management of multi-stakeholder research networks to maximize knowledge mobilization and innovation opportunities in the forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 77-86.
    7. Janse, Gerben, 2008. "Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe -- A survey on both sides of the science/policy interface," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 183-194, January.
    8. Real, Alejandra & Hickey, Gordon M., 2013. "Publicly funded research: A participative experience from the Chilean Native Forest Research Fund," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 37-43.
    9. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    10. 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.
    11. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    12. Dhanush Dinesh & Dries Hegger & Joost Vervoort & Bruce M. Campbell & Peter P. J. Driessen, 2021. "Learning from failure at the science–policy interface for climate action in agriculture," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1-24, January.
    13. Koch, Susanne, 2018. "“Identifying enabling factors of science-policy interaction in a developing country context: A case study of South Africa's environment sector”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 36-45.
    14. Janina Heim & Max Krott & Michael Böcher, 2018. "Nomination and inscription of the “Ancient Beech Forests of Germany” as natural World Heritage: multi-level governance between science and politics," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 599-617, August.
    15. Wallin, Ida & Carlsson, Julia & Hansen, Hans Peter, 2016. "Envisioning future forested landscapes in Sweden – Revealing local-national discrepancies through participatory action research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 25-40.
    16. Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke A. & Hengeveld, Geerten M. & de Jong, Rutger, 2017. "Analysing scenario approaches for forest management — One decade of experiences in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 222-234.
    17. Lindstad, Berit H, 2018. "‘What's in it for me?’ — Contrasting environmental organisations and forest owner participation as policies evolve," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 80-86.
    18. Do, Thi Huong & Krott, Max & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Multiple traps of scientific knowledge transfer: Comparative case studies based on the RIU model from Vietnam, Germany, Indonesia, Japan, and Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    19. Cvitanovic, C. & Hobday, A.J. & van Kerkhoff, L. & Marshall, N.A., 2015. "Overcoming barriers to knowledge exchange for adaptive resource management; the perspectives of Australian marine scientists," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 38-44.
    20. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.

    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:73:y:2016:i:c:p:90-98. 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.