Changing and competing land use, where we make use of a growing share of resources, potentially undermines the capacity of forests to provide multiple functions such as timber, biodiversity, recreation and pasture lands. The governance challenge is thus to manage trade-offs between human needs and, at the same time, maintain the capacities of forests to provide us with these needs. Sweden provides a clear example of this kind of challenge. Traditionally, timber has been the most apparent contribution of the forest to Swedish national interests. However, due to competing land use, the identification of the wider role of forests in terms of multifunctionality has been recognized. Today, a number of functions, such as water quality and biodiversity together with cultural and social activities related to forests, are increasingly included as potential demands on forests in competition with traditional functions such as timber production. The challenge is thus related to trade-offs between different functions. How to balance the relationship and guide trade-offs between different functions of forests is, to a large extent, a matter of policy choice and the design of appropriate governance institutions and pro-active management activities. Based on perceptions among stakeholders on future competing demands and a literature review, the paper explore the multifunctionality of the Swedish forests and how it is affected by competing demands for land use; how multifunctionality is currently governed; and concludes by suggesting promising decision support methods to manage trade-offs between different functions.
References
[1]
Watson, R.T.; Noble, I.R.; Bolin, B.; Verardo, D.J.; Dokken, D.J. Land use, land-use change and forestry. In Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000.
[2]
Young, O.R. The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change. Fit, Interplay, and Scale; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
[3]
Huppert, W.; Svendsen, M.; Vermillion, D. Maintenance in irrigation: Multiple actors, multiple contexts, multiple strategies. Irrig. Drain. Syst.？2003, 17, 5–22, doi:10.1023/A:1024940516158.
Swedish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry; Swedish Forest Agency: J？nk？ping, Sweden, 2010.
[9]
Land Use in Sweden; Statistics Sweden: Stockholm, Sweden, 2007. Available online: http://www.scb.se/statistik/_publikationer/MI0803_2005A01_BR_MI03BR0801.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2011).
[10]
Carlsson, S. Svensk Historia, 3rd ed. ed.; Scandinavian University Books, L？romedelsf？rlagen: Stockholm/G？teborg/Lund, Sweden, 1970; Volume 2.
[11]
Nilsson, N.-E.; Wastenson, L. National Atlas of Sweden. The Forests; Sveriges Nationalatlas (SNA): Stockholm, Sweden, 1990.
[12]
Alvstam, C.G.; Wastenson, L. National Atlas of Sweden. Manufacturing and Services; Sveriges Nationalatlas (SNA): Stockholm, Sweden, 1995.
[13]
Costanza, R.; D'Arge, R.; De Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O'Neill, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; Raskin, R.G.; Sutton, P.; Van den Belt, M. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature？1997, 387, 253–260, doi:10.1038/387253a0.
[14]
Boyd, J.W.; Banzhaf, H.S. Ecosystem services and government accountability. The need for a new way of judging nature's value. Resources？2005, 158, 16–19.
[15]
Schlyter, P.; Stjernquist, I. Regulatory challanges and forest governance in Sweden. In Environmental Politics and Deliberative Democracy. Examining the promis of New Modes of Governance, 1st ed.; B？ckstrand, K., Kahn, J., Kronsell, A., L？vbrand, E., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing Limited: Cheltenham, UK, 2010; pp. 180–196.
[16]
Merlo, M.; Sekot, W. Recreational and Environmental Markets for Forest Enterprises: A New Approach Towards Marketability of Public Goods; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2001.
[17]
Future Forests Organization: Ume？, Sweden, 2010. Available online: http://www.futureforests.se/program/futureforests/home/aboutfutureforests/organization.4.6b38234911d6cedb125800040523.html (accessed on 21 December 2010).
[18]
Webster, J.; Watson, R.T. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quar.？2002, 26, 13–23.
[19]
Sandstr？m, C.; Lindkvist, A. Competing land use associated with Sweden's forests. Future Forests: Ume？, Sweden, 2010. Available online: http://www.futureforests.se/download/18.29cb8e3612807587c4d80001545/Sandstr？m%2C+Camilla+and+Lindkvist%2C+Anna+%282009%29.+Competing+land+use+associated+with+Sweden's+forests.+External+drivers+affecting+Swedish+forests+and+forestry.+Future+Forest.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[20]
Ostrom, E.; Gardner, R.; Walker, J. Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resources; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1993.
[21]
Sikor, T. Public and Private in Natural Resource Governance. A False Dichotomy?, 1st. ed. ed.; Earthscan: London, UK; Sterling, VA, USA, 2008.
[22]
Ostrom, E. Understanding Institutional Diversity; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2005.
[23]
Widmark, C.; Sandstr？m, C. Collaborative Land Use in Northern Sweden: A Study of Incentives and Transaction Costs Between Forestry and Reindeer Husbandry; Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet: Ume？, Sweden, 2008.
[24]
Zachrisson, A. Commons Protected for or from the People? Co-Management in the Swedish Mountain Region?; Statsvetenskapliga institutionen, Ume？ universitet: Ume？, Sweden, 2009.
[25]
Jungcurt, S.A. Framework for analyzing interplay between international institutions. In Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis; Indiana University: Bloomington, IN, USA, 2006.
[26]
R？hring, A.; Gailing, L. Institutional problems and management aspects of shared cultural landscapes: Conflicts and possible solutions concerning a common good from a social science perspective. IRS: Erkner, Germany, 2005. Available online: http://www.irs-net.de/download/sharedlandscape.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[27]
Rittel, H.W.J.; Webber, M.M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Pol. Sci.？1973, 4, 155–169, doi:10.1007/BF01405730.
[28]
Lane, M. Public participation in planning: An intellectual history. Aust. Geog.？2005, 36, 283–299, doi:10.1080/00049180500325694.
[29]
Geist, H.; Lambin, E.F. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience？2002, 52, 143–150, doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;2.
[30]
Meyer, W.B.; Turner, B.L. Changes in Land Use and Land Cover: A Global Perspective; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1994.
[31]
Field, B.C. Natural Resource Economics: An Introduction; Irwin/McGraw-Hill: Boston, MA, USA, 2001.
[32]
Martinez-Alier, J.; Munda, G.; O'Neill, J. Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecol. Eco.？1998, 26, 277–286, doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00120-1.
[33]
Belton, V.; Pictet, J. A framework for group decision using a MCDA model: Sharing, aggregating or comparing individual information? Rev. Syst. Déc.？1997, 6, 283–303.
[34]
Malczewski, J. GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1999.
[35]
Keeney, R.L. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1992.
[36]
Starr, M.K.; Zeleny, M. MCDM. State and future of the arts. In Multiple Criteria Decision Making, 1st ed.; Starr, M.K., Zeleny, M., Eds.; North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1977; pp. 5–29.
[37]
Zeleny, M. Multiple Criteria Decision Making; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1982.
[38]
Guitouni, A.; Martel, J.-M. Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. Europ. J. Op. Research？1998, 109, 501–521, doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00073-3.
[39]
Skogsv？rdslagstiftningen. G？llande regler 1 september 2010; Skogsstyrelsen: J？nk？ping, Sweden, 2010.
[40]
Non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development; UN DocumentsA/CONF.151/26 (Vol. III); 1992; Available online: http://www.un-documents.net/for-prin.htm (accessed on 21 December 2010).
[41]
Kankaanp？？, S.; Carter, T.R. An overview of forest policies affecting land use in Europe. The Finnish Envirionment Institute: Helsinki, Finland, 2004. Available online: http://www.environment.fi/download.asp?contentid=25582&lan=en (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[42]
Bostr？m, M. Regulatory credibility and authority through inclusiveness: Standardization organizations in cases of eco-labelling. Organization？2006, 13, 345–367, doi:10.1177/1350508406063483.
[43]
Sundstr？m, G. M？lstyrningen drar ？t skogen. Om government och governance i svensk skogspolitik; Stockholm Centre for Organizational Research: Stockholm, Sweden, 2005. Available online: http://www.score.su.se/content/1/c6/06/77/10/20056.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[44]
Nylund, J.-E. Forestry Legislation in Sweden; Institutionen f？r skogens produkter, Sveriges lantbruks universitet (SLU): Uppsala, Sweden, 2009.
[45]
Stec, S.; Casey-Lefbowitz, S.; Jendroska, J. The Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide; Economic Commission for Europe, United Nations: Geneva, Swizerland, 2000. Available online: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/acig.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[46]
FSC Standard for Forest Certification Including SLIMF Indicators; FSC Swedish: Uppsala, Sweden, 2010. Available online: http://www.fsc-sverige.org/images/dokument/fsc_fm_en_v2-1.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[47]
PEFC. Tekniskt Dokument II med Till？mpningskrav; PEFC: Geneva, Swizerland, 2006. 1 April 2006–28 February 2011. Availble online: http://www.pefc.se/default.asp?oewCmd=10&pageid=17049&path=11099%2C12273&file=207%5Csvenskt%5Ftdtk%5F2008%2D12%2D04%2Epdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[48]
Johansson, J.; Lidestav, G. Can voluntary standards regulate forestry?—Assessing the environmental impacts of forest certification in Sweden. Forest Policy Econ.？2011. (in press), doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2011.03.009.
[49]
Keskitalo, E.C.H.; Sandstr？m, C.; Tysiachniouk, M.; Johansson, J. Local consequences of applying international norms: Differences in the application of forest certification in northern Sweden, northern Finland, and northwest Russia. Ecol. Soc.？2009, 14.
[50]
Eliasson, P. Skog, makt och m？nniskor: en milj？historia om svensk skog 1800–1875; Kungl. Skogs- och lantbruksakad: Stockholm, Sweden, 2002.
[51]
Statens Offentliga Utredningar. In Utvecklingen inom svenskt lantbruk, SOU 2003:105; Fritzes: Stockholm, Sweden, 2003.
[52]
Ekman, S.; Karlsson, A.; Karlsson, E. CAP efter 2013; J？nk？ping, Sweden, 2010; pp. 12-30–38-48.
[53]
Flygare, I.; Isacson, M. Det svenska jordbrukets historia. [Bd 5], Jordbruket i v？lf？rdssamh？llet: 1945-2000. In Natur och kultur/LT i samarbete med Nordiska museet och Stift; Lagersberg: Stockholm, Sweden, 2003.
[54]
Swedish Presidency Outlines Priorities for Agriculture; CAP2020: London, UK, 2009. Available online: http://www.cap2020.ieep.eu/2009/6/29/swedish-presidency-outlines-priorities-for-agriculture (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[55]
S？derberg, C. Much ado about nothing? Energy forest cultivation in Sweden: How intersectoral policy coordination affects outcomes from EPI in multisectoral issues. J. Env. Policy Pl.？2008, 10, 381–403, doi:10.1080/15239080802332042.
[56]
Piirainen, S.; Finér, L.; Mannerkoski, H.; Starr, M. Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus leaching after site preparation at a boreal forest clear-cut area. Forest Econ. Manag.？2007, 243, 10–18, doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.01.053.
[57]
Kreutzweiser, D.P.; Hazlett, P.W.; Gunn, J.M. Logging impacts on the biogeochemistry of boreal forest soils and nutrient export to aquatic systems: A review. Env. Rev.？2008, 16, 157–179, doi:10.1139/A08-006.
[58]
Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy; Official Journal of the European Communities: Brussels, Belgium, 2000.
[59]
Enander, K.-G. Skogsbruk p？ samh？llets villkor: skogssk？tsel och skogspolitik under 150 ？r; Department of Forest Ecology and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Ume？, Sweden, 2007.
[60]
Andrén, H. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: A review. Oikos？1994, 71, 355–366, doi:10.2307/3545823.
[61]
Fahrig, L. How much habitat is enough? Biol.Conserv.？2001, 100, 65–74, doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00208-1.
[62]
Fahrig, L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. An. Review Ecol. Evol. Syst.？2003, 34, 487–515, doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419.
[63]
Skogspolitiken hotar den biologiska m？ngfalden; Dagens Nyheter: Stockholm, Sweden, 2008.
[64]
Sustainable Forests; Environmental Objectives Portal: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009. Available online: http://www.miljomal.nu/Environmental-Objectives-Portal/12-Sustainable-Forests/ (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[65]
Lundh, G.; Ulfhielm, C. Skogsstyrelsen och skogens kulturarv: en strategi; Skogsstyrelsen: J？nk？ping, Sweden, 2008. Available online: http://www.miljomal.se/Global/12_levande_skogar/strategi-skogens-kulturarv.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[66]
Mattsson, L.; Boman, M.; Ericsson, G. Jakten i Sverige: ekonomiska v？rden och attityder jakt？ret 2005/06; Adaptiv f？rvaltning av vilt och fisk, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet: Ume？, Sweden, 2008.
[67]
Statens Offentliga Utredningar. In Uth？llig ？lgf？rvaltning i samverkan:SOU 2009:54; Fritzes: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009.
[68]
Gl？de, D.; Bergstr？m, R.; Pettersson, F. Int？ktsf？rluster p？ grund av ？lgbetning av tall i Sverige; Skogforsk: Uppsala, Sweden, 2004.
[69]
Belcher, B.M. What isn't an NTFP? Int. Forest. Rev.？2003, 5, 161–162, doi:10.1505/IFOR.5.2.161.17408.
[70]
Lindhagen, A.; H？rnsten, L. Forest recreation in 1977 and 1997 in Sweden: Changes in public preferences and behaviour. Forestry？2000, 73, 143–153, doi:10.1093/forestry/73.2.143.
[71]
LRF vill stoppa b？rplockare; V？sterbottens-Kuriren: Ume？, Sweden, 2009.
[72]
Fredman, P.; Bladh, G. Bes？ka naturen hemma eller borta? Delresultat fr？n en nationell enk？t om friluftsliv och naturturism i Sverige; Forskningsprogrammet Friluftsliv i F？r？ndring: ？stersund, Sweden, 2008.
[73]
H？rnsten, L. Outdoor Recreation in Swedish Forests: Implications for Society and Forestry; Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Uppsala, Sweden, 2000.
[74]
Kardell, L. Friluftsutnyttjandet av tre stadsn？ra skogar kring Uppsala 1988–2007: Stadsskogen, V？rds？traskogen, N？ntunaskogen; Institutionen f？r skoglig landskapsv？rd, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet: Uppsala, Sweden, 2008.
Jonsson, A. Minskning av ？verg？dningen. In Omstridd Natur; Sandstr？m, C., Hovik, S., Falleth, E.I., Eds.; Boréa: Ume？, Sweden, 2008.
[80]
Hahn, T. Property Rights, Ethics and Conflict Resolution: Foundations of the Sami Economy in Sweden; Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Uppsala, Sweden, 2000.
[81]
Wennberg DiGasper, S.; Sandstr？m, C. Konflikt eller samarbete i ？lgskogen; Future Forests: Ume？, Sweden, 2010. Available online: http://www.futureforests.se/download/18.5686ae2012c08a47fb5800010406/Wennberg+DiGasper,+Sofia+%26+Sandstr%C3%B6m+Camilla+(2010).+Konflikt+eller+samarbete+i+%C3%A4lgskogen_20101108.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2010).
[82]
Arnstein, S. A Ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Plann.？1969, 35, 216–224, doi:10.1080/01944366908977225.
[83]
Nordstr？m, E.-M.; Eriksson, L.O.; ？hman, K. Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden. Forest Policy Econ.？2010, 12, 562–574, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.07.006.
[84]
Mendoza, G.A.; Martins, H. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. Forest Ecol. Manag.？2006, 230, 1–22, doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2006.03.023.
[85]
Rauschmayer, F.; Wittmer, H. Evaluating deliberative and analytical methods for the resolution of environmental conflicts. Land Use Policy？2006, 23, 108–122, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.011.
[86]
Phillips, R.A. Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Bus. Ethics Q.？1997, 7, 51–66, doi:10.2307/3857232.
[87]
Banville, C.; Landry, M.; Martel, J.-M.; Boulaire, C. A stakeholder approach to MCDA. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci.？1998, 15, 15–32, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1743(199801/02)15:1<15::AID-SRES179>3.0.CO;2-B.
[88]
Grimble, R.; Wellard, K. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: A review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agri. Syst.？1997, 55, 173–193, doi:10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00006-1.
[89]
Higman, S.; Mayers, J.; Bass, S.; Judd, N.; Nussbaum, R. The Sustainable Forestry Handbook. A Practical Guide for Tropical Forest Managers on Implementing New Standards; Earthscan: London, UK, 2005.
[90]
Simon, H. The New Science of Management Decision; Prentice Hall PTR: Indianapolis, IN, USA, 1977.
[91]
Castelletti, A.; Soncini-Sessa, R. A procedural approach to strengthening integration and participation in water resource planning. Env. Mod. Software？2006, 21, 1455–1470, doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2005.07.013.
[92]
Wennberg DiGasper, S. Natural Resource Management in an Institutional Disorder: The Development of Adaptive Co-Management Systems of Moose in Sweden; Division of Political Science, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Lule？ University of Technology: Lule？, Sweden, 2008.
[93]
Hiltunen, V.; Kurttila, M.; Leskinen, P.; Pasanen, K.; Pyk？l？inen, J. Mesta: An internet-based decision-support application for participatory strategic-level natural resources planning. Forest Policy Econ.？2009, 11, 1–9, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2008.07.004.
[94]
Kangas, J.; Kangas, A. Multiple criteria decision support in forest management—The approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. Forest Ecol. Manag.？2005, 207, 133–143, doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.023.
[95]
Kangas, J.; Store, R. Internet and teledemocracy in participatory planning of natural resources management. Lands. Urban Plan.？2003, 62, 89–101, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00125-1.
[96]
Ananda, J. Implementing participatory decision making in forest planning. Env. Manag.？2007, 39, 534–544, doi:10.1007/s00267-006-0031-2.
[97]
Kangas, A.; Kangas, J.; Pyk？l？inen, J. Outranking methods as tools in strategic natural resources planning. Silv. Fenn.？2001, 35, 215–227.
[98]
Pyk？l？inen, J.; Hiltunen, V.; Leskinen, P. Complementary use of voting methods and interactive utility analysis in participatory strategic forest planning: Experiences gained from western Finland. Can. J. Forest Res.？2007, 37, 853–865, doi:10.1139/X06-241.
[99]
Kangas, J.; Loikkanen, T.; Pukkala, T.; Pyk？l？inen, J. A participatory approach to tactical forest planning. Acta Forest. Fenn.？1996, 251, 1–24.
[100]
Simon, H.A. From substantive to procedural rationality. In Method and Appraisal in Economics; Latsis, S.J., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1976; pp. 129–148.
[101]
Bogetoft, P.; Pruzan, P. Planning with Multiple Criteria, 2nd ed. ed.; Copenhagen Business School Press: Copenhagen, Denmark, 1997; Volume 13.
[102]
Kangas, J.; Kangas, A.; Leskinen, P.; Pyk？l？inen, J. MCDM methods in strategic planning of forestry on state-owned lands in Finland: Applications and experiences. J. Multi-Criteria Dec. Analysis？2001, 10, 257–271, doi:10.1002/mcda.306.
[103]
Proctor, W. MCDA and stakeholder participation: Valuing forest resources. In Alternatives for Environmental Evaluation; Getzner, M., Spash, C.L., Stagl, S., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2005.
[104]
Stirling, A. Analysis, participation and power: Justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis. Land Use Policy？2006, 23, 95–107, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010.
[105]
Kangas, J.; Store, R.; Kangas, A. Socioecological landscape planning approach and multicriteria acceptability analysis in multiple-purpose forest management. Forest Policy Econ.？2005, 7, 603–614, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2003.12.001.
[106]
Kangas, J. An approach to public participation in strategic forest management planning. Forest Ecol. Manag.？1994, 70, 75–88, doi:10.1016/0378-1127(94)90076-0.
[107]
Sheppard, S.R.J.; Meitner, M. Using multi-criteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups. Forest Ecol. Manag.？2005, 207, 171–187, doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.032.
[108]
Hiltunen, V.; Kangas, J.; Pyk？l？inen, J. Voting methods in strategic forest planning— Experiences from Mets？hallitus. Forest Policy Econ.？2008, 10, 117–127, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2007.06.002.
[109]
Hansen, S.H.; M？enp？？, M. An overview of the challanges for public particpation in river basin management and planning. Manag. Env. Quality. An. Int. J.？2008, 19, 67–84, doi:10.1108/14777830810840372.
