Articles by Veli-Pekka Järveläinen

Forests have been economically important for Finnish private forest owners at all times, but the use of forests has changed markedly since 1920s, when forests were mainly used for collecting household timber, and the cuttings were often exploitative because of the farmer’s need for money. The present situation is totally different. Need for household timber is marginally small, and private forestry produces mainly timber for sale. The sales of timber have increased, but due to better forest management the growing stock in the private forests has increased. The article discusses how the changes in values of forest owners has and will affect the stage of private forestry.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

An empirical analysis of the Finnish non-industrial private forest owners indicates that forestry extension has an effect on the supply of timber and the use of cutting potentials. This effect appears to be indirect rather than direct. The use of extension services is likely to increase the frequency of timber sales, which in turn, increases the use of the allowable cut via increased volume of actual cuttings. Forestry extension can also be considered as an intermediate variable through which certain background conditions and owner characteristics affect the use of cutting potential.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

Research concerning the forest owners’ behaviour plays an important role in the evaluation of the effectiveness of forest policy on small woodlots. This is because the effects of forest policy measures on forestry are indirect and channelled through the behaviour of a forest owner. In this paper some basic concepts and methodological problems of forest owner studies are discussed. First, the concepts ’forest owner’ and ’forestry behaviour’ are defined on the basis of general sociological term, social role. Second, the problem of explanation and the selection of the explanatory model in forest owner studies is discussed. In this connection the heuristic nature of the selection of the explanatory model is underlined. It is pointed out that the proper explanatory mode in forest owner studies is decisively dependent on the objectives of the study or on the kind of information that will be obtained by the study. In such studies that intend to serve the planning and implementation of forest policy, it seems necessary to aim at causal explanations, and to analyse the general determinants and factors that can be manipulated in forest owners’ behaviour.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

This collection of nine articles considers theoretical and methodological aspects as well as empirical research problems associated with the elevation of the effectiveness of forest policy measures on small woodlands. The papers presented concern aspects of research strategy in studying forest owner’s behaviour (Järveläinen) and causality as a conceptual frame for forest policy analysis (Tikkanen); an econometric analysis on the effects of public forest policy in Finland (Tikkanen); a survey concerning the private forest owners and the forestry assistance program in Eastern Canada (Madigan and Jones); the forestry co-operative as a policy measure (Tanaka) and the subsidies and efficiency in forestry co-operatives (Brabänder); the forest as a capital asset (Eid) and effectiveness of forest taxation reform as a means of economic policy (Riihinen); and the influence of Swedish forestry policy on the annual cut of private woodlot owners (Lönnstedt).

The PDF includes a summary in Finnish.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: –

This paper comments on the article written by Simo Hannelius that is published in the same issue of Silva Fennica (Who is the non-farmer forest owner? Silva Fennica 14 no. 4). Hannelius suggests that researchers dealing with the behaviour of private forest owners should change their classification to agree with the concepts presented in the Farm Economy statistics, and that the recommended concept of farmer forest owner is understood as a forest owner who has taxable net incomes (state taxation) from farming. Other private forest owners would be classified as non-farmers. Veli-Pekka Järveläinen states in his opinion that when distinguishing a farmer and a non-farmer, the key criterion should be the profession, which has been proved to be an important parameter in behavioural research.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

The development of a society often involves deep-going changes in its economic and social structure. According to the theory of cumulative growth, the economic changes attached to industrialization and modernisation of a society are characterized by the regional differentiation of economic activities. Expansive growth centres, areas with spreading effects, and back-wash areas will develop due to the dynamic forces of cumulative development.

The impact of industrialization and modernization on society as a whole usually manifests itself in an achievement of many of the welfare objectives considered desirable. There are, however, differences between the industries or other economic activities in respect to their effect on the economic or social life of a society or a region. The special feature of forestry and forest industry is that they are more concerned with rural districts than most other economic pursuits. The differentiation effect of forestry and forest industries is not as pronounced as that of certain other industries. Especially the back-wash effects remain rather weak.

In traditional, non-industrialized society the establishment of forestry activities may have an important role in the beginning of economic and social development which is rational from the point of view of the local communities as well as of the society as a whole. However, forestry may also have influences which one can see as socially undesirable. As far as traditional rural societies are concerned, one basic problem is that the establishment of forestry activities may advance the disintegration of ancient social institutions and structures. On the other hand, in a modern, industrialized society one primary function of forestry seems to be to maintain and strengthen the rural social structures and to equalize the regional differences caused by cumulative development. However, the role of forestry in rural development is likely to decrease when the industrialization and modernization progresses, for instance, because the increasing urban population will use forests for purposes other than forestry, such as recreation and nature conservation.

The PDF includes a summary in Finnish.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown
• Riihinen, E-mail: pr@mm.unknown

The task of the study was to describe the opinions of the forestry experts engaged in the State forestry organization and the organization for promotion of private forestry, and of the appointed representatives in the organization for the promotion of private forestry concerning the official forestry administration and its development. The study material was based on two samples, one of 240 forestry experts and the other of 290 appointed representatives. The data was compiled by mail inquiry.

Forestry experts were found to rate the success of the official forestry administration in its tasks lower than did the appointed representatives. Both the forestry experts and appointed representatives were of the opinion that the official forestry administration has been most successful in accomplishing timber production and least successful in the tasks concerning multiple use of forests. The results also indicate that 44% of the forestry experts were of the opinion that the most suitable organization model would be a uniform state organization for both the State, and private owned forests. About a third of the forestry experts considered that the best model would be two different state organizations, one for the State forests and the other for the private forests. 62% of the appointed representatives were of the opinion that the best solution would be to retain the official forestry administration such as it is now.

The PDF includes a summary in English.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

The task of this study was to gather all available information concerning timber-sales behaviour of private forest owners and to try to find the probable trends in this behaviour. The initiative for the study came from the Central Association of Finnish Forest Industries.

In Finland there are areas of timber savings and those of overcutting. These are mainly explained by regional variation in prosperity of forest owners. There are also several individual factors affecting timber sales behaviour. Without major changes in forest policy the annual variation in quantity cut in Finland is increasing and the degree of cutting seem to remain below the allowable cut.

The PDF includes a summary in English.

• Hahtola, E-mail: kh@mm.unknown
• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown
• Reunala, E-mail: ar@mm.unknown

Among the users of factor analysis there seems to be a tendency to extend the use of this method to tasks where it suits poorly. It is therefore important to emphasise at least the following aspects: 1) More critical attention should be paid to problems of interpretation especially at situations where method is aimed at analysing the causal relationships among the variables; 2) The study problem should be stated so clearly as to make it plausible to evaluate the suitability of factor model to the problem.

The PDF includes a summary in English.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

The purpose of this study was to find out about the forest owner’s views on silviculture and any forest management work he had carried out. The data is based on interviews of 289 forest owners in municipalities of Jämsä and Karstula in Central Finland in 1966. The forest owners were a random sample of all males in the municipalities, who alone or together with their wives were in the possession of at least 2 ha of cultivated land and 10 ha of forests.

The forest owners’ attitudes towards silviculture were generally favourable. A common opinion was that money spent on silviculture is a paying proposition (88%), that forest management is better today than it used to be (87%), that cultivation of forests is an economic proposition (81%), and that few owners manage their forests properly unless forced by the law (79%). The need for planning silvicultural measures was also generally accepted (78%).

However, few agreed that the legally imposed silvicultural fee is necessary, that the new silvicultural methods were practicable, or that money he invested in silviculture is profitable to the forest owner. Only 45% agreed that forestry experts have sufficient understanding of the owner’s needs. One third of the forest owners had carried out the following silvicultural tasks: forest cultivation, forest drainage or forest fertilization, on a minimum area of five hectares. Forest cultivation had been carried out by 63%, forest drainage by 44% and forest fertilization by 16% of the respondents. Vast majority (90%) had employed forest experts and a many nearly every year, mainly for marking the trees to be felled.

In the more rural municipality of Karstula, the forest owners’ views towards forestry was more favourable than in the semi-industrialized Jämsä.

The PDF includes a summary in English.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown

The aim of the present study was to describe the diffusion of the professional insight in forestry taking place among forest owners and as factors attached thereto. The material is based on interviews of 289 forest owners in municipalities of Jämsä and Karstula in Central Finland in 1966. The forest owners were a random sample of all males in the municipalities, who were in the possession of at least 2 ha of cultivated land and 10 ha of forest.

Mass media (papers, radio and television) was an important source of information for the forest owners. Forest educational events are specially planned to spread information on forestry to forest owners, but 40% told that they had never participated any such event. Only 8% had got professional forest education. Knowledge concerning forests and forest management may also be inherited from the forest owner’s parents, or in discussions with professional forest officers or neighbours. About 73% of the forest owners had been in touch with professional foresters at least once during the last three years.

A third of the forest owners regarded professional insight their most important source of information on forestry, a little smaller group considered instruction in forestry questions the most important source. The third largest group had achieved their knowledge on forestry on own experience and inherited knowledge. Forest owners favouring mass media, own experience and inherited knowledge were often owners of a small forest holding.

The PDF includes a summary in English.

• Järveläinen, E-mail: vj@mm.unknown
• Vadén, E-mail: tv@mm.unknown