IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i4p2119-d748124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovativeness of Japanese Forest Owners Regarding the Monetization of Forest Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Takuya Takahashi

    (School of Environmental Science, University of Shiga Prefecture, Hikone 522-8533, Japan)

  • Takahiro Tsuge

    (Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Sophia University, Tokyo 102-8554, Japan)

  • Shingo Shibata

    (Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Sophia University, Tokyo 102-8554, Japan)

Abstract

The monetization of forest ecosystem services requires actors to innovate and tackle difficulties. We conducted a questionnaire survey with forest owners—important actors in implementing monetization—to investigate their innovativeness in Japan. We measured innovativeness regarding monetization by asking whether the owner was interested in, planning for, or had implemented four types of monetization: (i) multifunctional payments, (ii) habitat payments, (iii) non-wood forest product (NWFP) sales, and (iv) forest service industries. Based on the ordered probit analyses of 312 responses, we find that ownership type, age, holding size, and the purpose of forest ownership are associated with owners’ innovativeness indices. Private and corporate owners, ones in their thirties, forties, or fifties, and with larger holding sizes are more innovative than others. Regional characteristics are not relatively important in terms of innovativeness. However, clear ownership purposes, such as investment and non-wood forest products (NWFP), are positively correlated with the indices. These findings shed new light on the entire process of innovation from conceptualization to implementation, as well as practices in under-researched geographical areas in Asia.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2119-:d:748124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2119/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2119/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cai, Mattia & Pettenella, Davide & Vidale, Enrico, 2011. "Income generation from wild mushrooms in marginal rural areas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 221-226, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Nordén, Anna & Coria, Jessica & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Lagergren, Fredrik & Lehsten, Veiko, 2017. "Divergence in stakeholders' preferences: Evidence from a choice experiment on forest landscapes preferences in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 179-195.
    4. Lunnan, Anders & Nybakk, Erlend & Vennesland, Birger, 2006. "Entrepreneurial attitudes and probability for start-ups--an investigation of Norwegian non-industrial private forest owners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(7), pages 683-690, October.
    5. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Wilkes-Allemann, Jerylee & Ludvig, Alice & Hogl, Karl, 2020. "Innovation development in forest ecosystem services: A comparative mountain bike trail study from Austria and Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    7. 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).
    8. James Salzman & Genevieve Bennett & Nathaniel Carroll & Allie Goldstein & Michael Jenkins, 2018. "The global status and trends of Payments for Ecosystem Services," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(3), pages 136-144, March.
    9. Bingham, Logan Robert, 2021. "Vittel as a model case in PES discourse: Review and critical perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Côté, Marc-André & Gilbert, Diane & Nadeau, Solange, 2015. "Characterizing the profiles, motivations and behaviour of Quebec's forest owners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 83-90.
    13. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. Kang, Shiteng & Kroeger, Timm & Shemie, Daniel & Echavarria, Marta & Montalvo, Tamara & Bremer, Leah L. & Bennett, Genevieve & Barreto, Samuel Roiphe & Bracale, Henrique & Calero, Claudia & Cardenas, , 2023. "Investing in nature-based solutions: Cost profiles of collective-action watershed investment programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Quétier, Fabien & Calvet, Coralie & Levrel, Harold & Wunder, Sven, 2020. "Biodiversity offsets and payments for environmental services: Clarifying the family ties," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. 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).
    6. Montero-de-Oliveira, Fernando-Esteban & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2023. "Under what conditions do payments for environmental services enable forest conservation in the Amazon? A realist synthesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Yan, Haiming & Yang, Huicai & Guo, Xiaonan & Zhao, Shuqin & Jiang, Qun'ou, 2022. "Payments for ecosystem services as an essential approach to improving ecosystem services: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    8. 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).
    9. Núñez-Regueiro, Mauricio M. & Hiller, Josh & Branch, Lyn C. & Núñez Godoy, Cristina & Siddiqui, Sharmin & Volante, José & Soto, José R., 2020. "Policy lessons from spatiotemporal enrollment patterns of payment for ecosystem service programs in Argentina," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    10. Perevochtchikova, Maria & Castro-Díaz, Ricardo & Langle-Flores, Alfonso & Von Thaden Ugalde, Juan José, 2021. "A systematic review of scientific publications on the effects of payments for ecosystem services in Latin America, 2000–2020," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    11. Bingham, Logan Robert, 2021. "Vittel as a model case in PES discourse: Review and critical perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    12. Štěrbová, Martina & Stojanovski, Vladimir & Weiss, Gerhard & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2019. "Innovating in a traditional sector: Innovation in forest harvesting in Slovakia and Macedonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Benjamin S. Thompson, 2021. "Corporate Payments for Ecosystem Services in Theory and Practice: Links to Economics, Business, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    14. Kaiser, Josef & Krueger, Tobias & Haase, Dagmar, 2023. "Global patterns of collective payments for ecosystem services and their degrees of commodification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    15. Brownson, Katherine & Anderson, Elizabeth P. & Ferreira, Susana & Wenger, Seth & Fowler, Laurie & German, Laura, 2020. "Governance of Payments for Ecosystem Ecosystem services influences social and environmental outcomes in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    16. Seeland, Klaus & Godat, Joël & Hansmann, Ralf, 2011. "Regional forest organizations and their innovation impact on forestry and regional development in central Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 353-360, June.
    17. Zhenglei Xie & Bing-Bing Zhou & Hanzeyu Xu & Le Zhang & Jing Wang, 2020. "An Agent-Based Sustainability Perspective on Payment for Ecosystem Services: Analytical Framework and Empirical Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    18. 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).
    19. 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.
    20. 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).

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2119-:d:748124. 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.