Young forest owners in Finland find it difficult to deviate from prevailing forest industry norms, a recent study by the University of Eastern Finland and the Natural Resources Institute Finland finds. The researchers interviewed young translocal forest owners, aged 18–30, living in the greater Helsinki area.

Published in Forest Policy & Economics, the study reveals that young translocal forest owners make compromises on their values with regard to prevailing forest management methods. Their values differed from those of their older relatives and the Finnish forest industry. By compromising on their own values, they sought to avoid anticipated conflicts with authority figures, such as their own relatives or forestry professionals. Financial incentives that have emerged around the interests of the forest industry, as well as the limited availability of information on alternative forest management methods, also made it difficult for them to depart from prevailing norms.

Forest ownership in Finland is often associated with the idea of forest owners being free to manage their forests as they see fit. The study, however, found that in practical terms, this is only true with regard to commercial use of forests. Otherwise, forest owners are actively guided to manage their forests in a way that is aligned with forestry industry interests.

“When a forest owner’s values were different from those of the forest industry, it often meant that they ended up managing their forests in ways that were sometimes entirely contrary to their personal values. This affected how meaningful forest ownership was considered to be,” says Doctoral Researcher Panu Runko.

Sentimental value was most important to young forest owners

For young forest owners, sentimental value was the most important value attached to forests.

“Sentimental value can also be attached to forests that are not inherited within the family but are, for example, local forests, berry-picking sites or forests where one spent time as a child with older relatives. Intergenerational practices and knowledge therefore matter,” emphasises Professor Irmeli Mustalahti from the University of Eastern Finland.

Forests inherited as part of an estate often reminded the owners of a deceased loved one, and this significance outweighed both the economic and environmental value attached to the forest. In some cases, sentimental value was also found to originate from a forest-owner identity shared with older generations.

Sentimental value attached to forests proved to be the main obstacle to relinquishing forest property. The central role of sentimental value observed in the study may offer new perspectives for research into Finns’ relationship with forests.

“If the forest has no sentimental value for the owner, and if they do not find forest ownership meaningful due to difficulties in value-based decision-making, there is a risk that they will relinquish their forest property. For this reason, it is important that prevailing forest management methods could accommodate a broader range of values, so that future generations of forest owners can also find forest ownership meaningful. A broader recognition and acceptance of values may also prevent Finnish small-scale forest properties from being sold to companies or foreign investors,” Runko points out.

The study was conducted as part of the ALL-YOUTH project funded by the Strategic Research Council at the Research Council of Finland, the European Commission’s REPowerEU initiative and the Research Council of Finland’s VIZAZI research project.