Content uploaded by Andrew Carver
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Andrew Carver on Sep 30, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
ISSN 1392-1355
97
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
Introduction
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are commonly
known as the Baltic States. After the recent accession
of these countries to the European Union (EU), gov-
ernance of natural resources in the Baltic States has
gained an even greater international importance. In the
context of this change, additionally to the domestic
priorities, the governance of natural resources must
now follow the European Community development and
environmental conservation objectives and commit-
ments (European Commission 2002, Lisbon Strategy
2005). This is also largely applicable to the manage-
ment of forest resources.
In order to successfully integrate national forest
management objectives and principles of governance
with those of the EU, comprehensive knowledge of a
forest sector is necessary. However, this knowledge
is not readily available. During the last 10 to 15 years
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, along with the other
Eastern European nations, have undergone a number
of rapid changes in the national politics and econo-
Elite Concerns in Forest Sectors of Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania
IMANTAS LAZDINIS*1, MARIUS LAZDINIS2, ANDREW CARVER3, FRANZ SCHMITHÜSEN4, AND LELDE
VILKRISTE5
*1(corresponding author) Faculty of Public Management, Mykolas Romeris University, Ateities 20, Vilnius, LT-
0830, Lithuania, Tel.: +370 682 51696, E-mail: i.lazdinis@one.lt;
2Regional Development and Environmental Protection Group, A. Vivulskio 10a, LT-032221, Vilnius, Lithuania,
3 Department of Forestry, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-4411, USA
4Forest Policy and Forest Economics, Institute Human Environment Systems, Department of Environmental
Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland;
5Latvia Forest Research Institute Silava, Rigas iela 111, LV 2169, Latvia
Lazdinis, I., Lazdinis, M., Carver, A., Schmithüsen, F. and Vilkriste, L. 2005. Elite Concerns in Forest Sectors
of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Baltic Forestry, 11 (1): 97104.
Abstract
To understand the forest policy and decision making processes and enable successful implementation of development
and environmental conservation objectives, it is necessary to learn about the current issues and problems in the forest
sector. This study focuses on forest sectors of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (the Baltic States). Using the in-depth
interview technique, the study learns about the opinions of leading individuals (elite) in the forest sectors of the Baltic
States regarding the issues of concern in the forest management of their respective countries.
This study finds that the largest concentration of issues of concern in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania is in an area
of institutional failures. Therefore, in facilitating forest development of these countries attention should be focused on
the interface between policy failures and actual resource problems. The perceptions on issues of concern were found to
differ between the stakeholders in general and the elite representatives.
Key words: forestry, forest policy, Baltic States, elite, experts
mies, which also had major implications to the forest
sectors of the three countries (Naka et al. 2000, Ni-
jnik and van Kooten 2000, Schmithüsen 2000, Buttoud
and Yunusova 2002, Schmithüsen 2002). Ownership
rights to forestland were restored and many forest-
related assets were privatised, including some previ-
ously state-run activities in forest management. These
changes made it difficult to understand the present
challenges and problems in a dynamic policy and de-
cision-making environment (Carlsson and Lazdinis
2004, Lazdinis et al. 2005).
The total forested area of the Baltic States
amounts to roughly seven million hectares (FAO 2001).
The three countries also represent relatively unique
and well-preserved natural ecosystems with complex
interface between forest environment and cultural
heritage (Lõhmus et al. 2004, Kurlavièius et al. 2004).
However, the rapidly growing economies also depend
on the use of natural resources. In this context, it is
very important to ensure that intensive use of forest
resources will not undermine the goals of conserva-
tion of valuable forest ecosystems.
ISSN 1392-1355
98
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
In the framework of the European Community
measures, there are possibilities of supporting the
member states in establishing the balance between
forest conservation and utilization. Community meas-
ures, such as those under implementation of the rural
development policy, are well capable of supporting
some actions in individual countries to facilitate
achievement of rural development as well as nature
conservation goals. In order for these and other Com-
munity measures to be well targeted, the knowledge
about current issues to be addressed in the sector
becomes very important.
Considering the above context, the main objec-
tive of this study is to learn about the opinion of elite
(leaders/experts) on the main issues of concern in forest
sectors of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Forest sec-
tor here is understood as including the following fields:
forestry, timber harvesting and related activities, tim-
ber processing, forestry-related research and activities
of NGOs. In the context of an emerging practice of
participation of stakeholders in forest policy formation
and implementation, leaders from various segments of
the sector were interviewed. Despite considering the
entire forest sector, the focus throughout the study,
and especially presenting and discussing results, is
made on a forestry segment. The attempt is also made
to map the policy and institutional failures and re-
source problems identified in forest policy networks
of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
Materials and methods
Elite of policy networks
Various studies demonstrated that the character-
istics of policy networks can be helpful starting-points
for attempting to clarify the way in which policy instru-
ments function (de Bruijn and Hufen 1998). The term
policy networks generally assumes the existence of
two main features - links and actors - viewed from a
horizontal rather than a vertical perspective (Carlsson
2000). Policy analyses studying such networks should
concentrate on answering two crucial questions: (1)
what is (are) the problem(s) to be solved? and (2) who
is participating in the creation of institutional arrange-
ments in order to solve them? (Carlsson 1996).
The elite members (or leaders and experts) in the
research are typically addressed when there is little
or no written information or where quantitative infor-
mation is difficult to obtain (Patton and Sawicki 1993).
Due to the rapid changes in forest policy and deci-
sion making environment in the Baltic States, infor-
mation on current problems in the sector is difficult
to obtain. Therefore, the opinions of the elite are a
subject of this study in order to acquire the most re-
cent information on the state of forest sectors in in-
dividual countries. Since network approach is prob-
lem oriented it focuses on how individual actors or-
ganize in order to address particular issues (Carls-
son 2000). Most of the decisions in policy forma-
tion and implementation processes are based on com-
promises between the leaders of individual stakehold-
er groups. These leaders (elite), and their perceptions
of key issues, then largely determine the successful
functioning of forest policy networks. Learning about
the perceptions of the elite regarding the specific
issues viewed as problems in policy networks may
also provide an indication as to which course of ac-
tion ought to or may be taken in the forthcoming
policy decisions.
As elite in forest policy networks, leaders of the
following stakeholder groups were considered: private
forest owners, timber processing industry, top level
forest authorities, operational forestry staff, forest
scientists, environmental NGOs, and top level environ-
mental protection authorities (also see Lazdinis et al.
2005). Individuals were selected based on the best
available knowledge of the forest policy networks,
supported by the snowball strategy (Patton 1987) (for
information on the forest policy networks in the Bal-
tic States see Lazdinis et al. 2004). Sixteen individu-
als from Estonia and Latvia each and 14 from Lithua-
nia were interviewed, with, most commonly, two per-
sons from each stakeholder group. In total, 46 repre-
sentatives of forest sector elite were interviewed dur-
ing this study.
Research instrument
In the interviewing procedure, standardized open-
ended interview approach (Patton 1987) was combined
with the questionnaire. The leaders were presented
with the lists of issues of concern produced from a
previous study by the same authors (Lazdinis et al.
2005). This study used voluntary free-response sur-
vey technique to learn about the issues of concern in
the forest sectors of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
During the survey, from 70 to 80 individuals per coun-
try were contacted representing main stakeholders in
the sector. As a result, lists of approximately 300-400
specific problems per country were identified. After
grouping individual related issues of concern, lists of
current perceived problems in Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania were compiled. These lists consisted of
respectively 38, 42, and 31 items each.
Then interviewees were asked to indicate wheth-
er they agree or disagree that the listed problems ex-
ist in the forest sector of a particular country. If an
interviewee disagreed that a listed problem existed,
then he/she was asked to explain why the particular
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
99
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
issue is not a concern. To demonstrate their attitude
towards each individual issue of concern presented in
the list, respondents were asked to select one of the
choice options (YES agree; Y/N rather agree than
disagree; ? uncertain (not enough information to
answer); N/Y rather disagree than agree; and NO
disagree) (Likert 1970). Then interviews were carried
out. The in-depth interviewing involves asking open-
ended questions, listening to and recording the an-
swers, and then following up with additional relevant
questions (Patton 1987). First, the interview covered
experience/behaviour and background/demographic
questions and then continued with the discussions on
individual issues of concern.
Results
Due to the limited space, opinions of the elite on
each individual issue of concern could not be present-
ed in this paper. Still, to be able to demonstrate the
perceptions of elite, their attitudes towards the five,
highest-ranked issues of concern from the stakehold-
er survey, are presented for each of the three coun-
tries in Table 1. Age of individuals contacted during
the in-depth interviews ranged from 30 to 65 years.
Both in Estonia and Lithuania all of them were male;
some females were interviewed in Latvia. Experience
in the forest sector ranged from several to 45 years.
Estonia
In addition to the five issues of concern per-
ceived as the most important by the stakeholders (for
reference see results of the stakeholder survey in
Lazdinis et al. 2005), the presence of three of the
issues, not listed among the five, was confirmed by
14 of the 16 interviewed experts. These were:
Forest policy implementation is problematic and
does not correspond to objectives and goals set in the
policy documents. The above especially concerns
management of private forests;
Lack of management in young forests;
Lack of information on forest resources in gener-
al. Lack of centralized and reliable database covering
forest resources, ownership, management details and use.
As Table 1 shows, the elite confirmed not all of
the five most urgent issues of concern perceived by
the stakeholders in Estonia. Only eight individuals
agreed that there is a lack of funding and staff in
relevant state institutions to carry out supervision of
forest management and other administration activities
as charged by the legislation. Six of the interviewed
leaders negatively reacted to this statement. Some of
the respondents argued that institutions charged with
supervisory tasks have adequate means to complete
their duties. However, it was seen that the problem
lays in the approach currently the decision-makers
deal with consequences of violations rather than caus-
es. Therefore, more emphasis should be placed on a
preventive work. Another possible explanation of the
issue was that the root of the problem might be in a
low position in administrational hierarchy of those
responsible for supervision of forest management.
The statement that forest legislation is too lib-
eral, weak and inapplicable, which disables effective
supervision of forestry activities and law enforcement
was disagreed with by nine and supported only by six
individuals. Some argued that the law is not too liber-
al, claiming rather that the focus on implementation has
been too weak. Opinions were expressed that ineffec-
tive supervision and law enforcement exist not because
of the liberal legislation, but due to badly defined roles
and responsibilities in state forest sector.
Latvia
The presence of four additional issues of con-
cern, not listed among the five highest ranking prob-
lems, was confirmed by 14 of the 16 interviewed
experts. These were:
Fine system is ineffective - sometimes it pays
better to break the law and be penalized than to fol-
low certain regulations. The financial constraints, be-
sides above, also quite commonly result in lack of tech-
nical equipment to carry out control functions of for-
est management;
Need for subsidies for afforestation of margin-
al or abandoned agricultural land;
Lack of qualified staff in general and particu-
larly in forest research. Young individuals after grad-
uation of university are not ready to take on respon-
sibilities;
Forest research plays a minor role in forest sec-
tor decision-making process.
In Latvia, the presence of three issues of concern
(Table 1) was confirmed only by half or less than a
half of leaders in the sector. The statement that there
is a lack of clarity and transparency in existing leg-
islation allows for different interpretation of legal acts
was supported by eight participants of the study.
Three individuals objected to the presence of this is-
sue and three could not provide any certain answer.
Some respondents argued that it is not possible to
describe every detail in the law. It was seen that the
problem rests not in the documents itself, but in peo-
ple dealing with the law, who are not used to such
types of legal documents. There is still a need in so-
ciety for the soviet-type regulations, which reminded
handbooks or manuals rather than laws. Others argued
that misinterpretation of laws is common; however,
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
100
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
forest owners and managers still must be given some
flexibility to act due to the complex nature of forestry.
Therefore, the responsibility for activities should rest
upon the owner, but not in a detail legal document.
Only half of those interviewed agreed that the lack
of organizational structures to carry out forestry in pri-
vate forest holdings and lack of information on legal
requirements and recommended forestry activities pose
a problem in Latvia. Some leaders argued that there is
a sufficient consultation service available provided both
by the state and private companies. Also it was seen
that there are many institutional structures, which could
be used in managing private forests.
Only two individuals agreed that it is very diffi-
cult according to the currently valid legislation to plan
harvesting amounts, since cutting limits are being an-
nounced very late and there is a very short time period
for private harvesting companies to prepare for future
activities. The above may be an indication that there
could have been some misunderstanding in formulat-
ing the issue of concern, since half of the respond-
ents were uncertain on the definition of this issue.
Lithuania
The presence of three other issues of concern,
not listed among the five highest ranking problems
(Table 1) was confirmed by 11 and more of the 14
interviewed experts. These were:
Processing of small-sized timber and trading is-
sues are unsolved;
Poor local timber processing more and better
(value-added) processed timber would create addition-
al employment and income to the state;
Relations of foresters and representatives of
timber processing industry are problematic compa-
nies buying timber are not making timely payments.
In Lithuania, three of the five most-highly ranked
issues of concern were supported by half or less than
half of the leaders. Only four individuals considered
the issue of dual responsibilities at the top level of
Table 1. Issues of concern in
forest sectors of Estonia, Latvia
and Lithuania
Issue of concern
YES
Y/N
?
N/Y
NO
Estonia
Lack of forestry experience among private forest owners. Knowledge of
private forest owners on requirements and principles of forest management is
very poor
11
3
1
Lack of funding and staff in relevant state institutions to carry out supervision
of forest management and other administration activities as charged by the
legislation
8
2
6
Forest legislation is too liberal, weak and inapplicable, which disables
effective supervision of forestry activities and law enforcement
6
1
9
Illegal logging and excessive felling in private forests. Besides single
individuals, organised criminal activities are also sometimes focused on illegal
felling and theft of roundwood
11
4
1
Holdings of forest owners are scattered and private forest owners are not
sufficiently well organised in co-operative bodies
12
1
1
2
Latvia
The lack of clarity and transparency in existing legislation allows for different
interpretation of legal acts
8
1
3
1
3
Lack of compensation mechanism for environmental requirements
16
Frequent changes in the forest sector and overall dynamic situation on the
national scale. Changing rules and regulations negatively effect forest
management planning process, which makes long-term planning and
sustainable forest management close to impossible, both for the state and
private managers
9
2
1
4
Lack of organizational structures to carry out forestry in private forest
holdings and lack of information on legal requirements and recommended
forestry activities
8
1
7
It is very difficult according to the currently valid legislation to plan
harvesting amounts, since cutting limits are being announced very late and
there is a very short time period for private harvesting companies to prepare
for future activities
2
8
1
5
Lithuania
Dual responsibilities at the top level of forestry decision-making
4
2
8
Long-lasting and improperly carried out land reform process, which creates
many problems
12
1
1
In general, forest resource administrative system is poor large political
influence to the forest sector, big administrative apparatus, lack of common
strategy for timber trade
7
2
1
4
In general, inflexible and continually changing forest legislation does not
correspond to current changes in international forestry
6
3
5
Forests after final cutting are not always reforested. Private forest owners lack
information on afforestation
5
2
1
6
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
101
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
forestry decision-making as a concern in Lithuanian
forest sector, eight - objected the presence of this prob-
lem. This, most likely, could be explained by the chang-
es in Forest Law, which have supposedly eliminated
the problem. Department of Forests and Protected
Areas was divided into the Service of Protected Are-
as and Forestry Department. The latter has been moved
into the Ministry of Environment, leaving General
Forest Enterprise as a sole leading institution in state
forestry.
Only six individuals supported the statement that
inflexible and continually changing forest legislation
does not correspond to the current changes in inter-
national forestry. Five participants of the survey ob-
jected the presence of this problem in Lithuanian for-
est sector. Some argued that the fact that the legisla-
tion is continually changing already shows that it is
flexible; some stressed that Lithuanian forest legisla-
tion corresponds to the current trends in internation-
al legal and regulatory environment.
Only five leaders recognised that reforestation in
Lithuania poses a problem and that forests after fi-
nal cutting are not always reforested; private forest
owners lack information on afforestation. Six individ-
uals disagreed that this problem exists in the country.
Some argued that this issue only applies to private
sector. It was also pointed out that the information
available often does not reach private forest owners.
Discussion
Limitations of the study
In the interviewing the role of the interviewers
is very important. The interviewer guides the dialogue
and clarifies the respondents answers (Reviere et al.
1996). This potentially can cause errors of purposive
or unwilling actions by the interviewer, leading the
respondent to an expected answer. In this study, at-
tempting to present the questions to all respondents
in similar tone of voice, also reducing to a minimum
the number of additional questions minimized this risk
of error. Another potential limitation to the methodol-
ogy applied in this study is that respondents, and
especially leaders, may be reluctant and cautious to
provide information, which they perceive as confiden-
tial or politically sensitive. To minimize this risk, dur-
ing each interview respondents were assured of con-
fidentiality. The same individual, who had a good
knowledge of the forest sectors in three countries,
completed all interviews. This also minimized the er-
rors, which could have occurred due to misunderstand-
ing and misinterpretation of responses to the open-
ended questions. On the other hand, participation of
researchers from each of the three countries allowed
a better appreciation of the national sectors as well
as of the information provided by the leaders.
The sample selected for the study is critical to the
results. As the forest sectors of the three countries
are relatively small (Lazdinis et al. 2004), the number
of leaders potentially to be interviewed is also rather
limited. Therefore, based on the in-depth knowledge
of the sector by the authors as well as considering
the outcomes of the use of a snowball technique, it
may be considered that the number of individuals in-
terviewed sufficiently well covers all relevant interest
groups in the sectors of the three countries and the
results of this study are representative of the opin-
ions of elite.
Similarities with other studies
Not all the issues of concern identified in the
stakeholder survey (Lazdinis et al. 2005) were also
seen as important by the elite. There might be vari-
ous reasons for the differences in opinions. It is very
likely that it may be due to a better access to infor-
mation by the leaders and more active involvement in
policy and decision-making processes, as compared to
other representatives of stakeholders. This finding
only confirms that elite may be considered almost as
a separate segment of professional society, opinion of
which may be expected to be different of the remain-
ing group of stakeholders. Therefore, the results from
the in-depth interviews of elite cannot be used as a
representative sample of the sector stakeholders and
must be treated in comparison with results from stud-
ies on the sector in general.
Results of this study confirm the situation as found
by the other studies. Herbst (2002) showed that the
participants of two international meetings on Experi-
ences with new forest and environmental laws in Euro-
pean countries with economies in transition held in
1998 and 1999, addressed issues, which could be ranked
in the following order: (1) harmonization of forest and
environmental legislation (18.6%), (2) private forests
(17.8%), (3) financing (17.1%), (4) protected areas
(12.4%), (5) governance and participation (forest poli-
cy) (9.3%), (6) public forest administration and manage-
ment (8.5%), (7) forests functions (6.2%), (8) privatiza-
tion of forests (5.4%), (9) sustainable forest manage-
ment and planning (3.1%), (10) definition of forests
(1.6%). Pivoriûnas and Lazdinis (2004), investigating the
needs of private forest owners in Lithuania found that
the main problems faced by the private sector are: bu-
reaucracy (22%), illegal logging (16%), difficulties to
access information (15%), felling and timber trade (12%),
difficulties in getting harvesting permissions (11%),
difficulties in forest management (10%), no-one to
trust (9%), and the lack of time (5%).
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
102
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
Mapping policy and institutional failures, and
resource problems
Mayers and Bass (1998) suggested dividing is-
sues of concern into resource problems and policy
and institutional failures. Issues listed in Table 1 as
well as those additionally identified by a number of
leaders were attributed to one of the three groups.
Some issues, similar for all three countries, were
merged and placed under the common title.
Policy and institutional failures typically are at the
root of many forest problems (Mayers and Bass 1998).
In order to learn about the possible causality and in-
terlinkages of the problems and failures, issues of
concern in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were graph-
ically mapped (Figure 1). Distribution of the issues of
concern along the axis of policy failures - institutional
failures - resource problems indicates a likely causal-
ity. Issues in the group of policy and institutional
failures represent problems related to the mismanage-
ment and failures in governance, which may be seen
as causes to the resource problems.
Six clusters were distinguished encompassing the
issues relevant to: 1) resources; 2) private forestry; 3)
state forestry; 4) institutional failures directly related
to private forest sector; 5) knowledge and human ca-
pacities; and 6) policy failures. Some issues of concern
seen by the stakeholders were directly unrelated to any
of the above clusters. Issues of concern, marked in Bold
font are those considered as important both by the
stakeholders and the elite. The leaders, however, given
little importance by the sector stakeholders, almost
unanimously agreed upon problems in regular font. Is-
sues marked in Italic were seen as important by the
stakeholders, but given little importance by the leaders.
The figure visually demonstrates that the largest
concentration of issues of concern is in the area of
institutional failures. Only a small part of the issues
of concern reported by the stakeholders may be con-
sidered as problems directly related to the forest re-
sources. Policy failures in general are the least com-
mon. Therefore, applying European Community meas-
ures available to the forest sectors of these countries
as well as in national forest policy and decision mak-
ing, the most attention should be paid to the opera-
tional interface between policy related issues and ac-
tual resource problems. Among the institutional fail-
ures, the large amount of problems seen by the elite
was related to the private forest sector.
It is important to note that the leaders confirmed
the presence of only one of the three policy failures
rejecting the remaining two. Among the institutional
failures, several general issues, largely related to the
administrational matters, were rejected during the in-
depth interviews.
Conclusions
The ongoing changes in the forest sector are a
consequence of the border restructuring of fundamen-
tal concepts of state and governance, which has been
taking place in the Baltic States during the last fifteen
years. On the one hand, these changes have led to
the increasing complexity of the policy and decision
making process. On the other hand, society also in-
creasingly requires policy process to be transparent
and responsive to their needs. They demand more
information on economic and environmental issues and
active participation in transparent policy formulation
and implementation processes. With an increasing
number of stakeholders involved in forest policy and
decision-making, there is also a shift in expectations
from forest management. Joining the EU by the three
Baltic States, has added even more to the complexity
of these processes by increasing a significance of an
international dimension in forest governance.
In learning about the opinion of elite on the main
issues of concern and mapping the policy and insti-
tutional failures and resource problems, this study
attempted to introduce more clarity and transparency
in policy and decision-making processes of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania. It is anticipated that the results
would be used in facilitating the governance of the
forest sectors in the context of European integration
as well as establishing a balance between development
and environmental conservation objectives in the for-
est sector. However, it must also be considered that
in the face of rapidly changing societies, this study
represents only a snap-shop in the history, and new
issues to be addressed might have arisen by now.
References
Buttoud, G. and Yunusova, I. 2002. A mixed model for the formula-
tion of a multipurpose mountain forest policy: Theory vs. prac-
tice on the example of Kyrgyzstan. Forest Policy and Econom-
ics 4: 149-160.
Carlsson, L. 1996. Nonhierarchical implementation analysis:
An alternative to the methodological mismatch in policy
analysis. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 8 (4): 527-546.
Carlsson, L. 2000. Policy Networks as Collective Action.
Policy Studies Journal, 28 (3): 502-520.
Carlsson, L. and Lazdinis, M. 2004. Institutional frame-
works for sustainability? A comparative analysis of the
forest sectors of Russia and the Baltic States. Ambio, 33
(6): 366-370.
de Bruijn, H.A. and Hufen, H.A.M. 1998. The traditional approach
to policy instruments. In: B.G. Peters (Editor), Public policy
instruments: Evaluating the tools of public administration.
Edward Elgar, p. 11-32.
European Commission. 2002. A European Union strategy
for sustainable development. Office of Official Publications of
the European Commission, Luxembourg. Available at: http://
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
103
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
Forest legislation is too
liberal, weak and
inapplicable, which
disables effective
supervision of forestry
activities and law
enforcement
Lack of clarity and
transparency in existing
legislation allows for different
interpretation of legal acts
Frequent changes in
the forest sector and
overall dynamic
situation on the
national scale
P O L I C Y F A I L U R E S
R E S O U R C E P R O B L E M S
Forest regeneration is not
sufficiently carried out according
to the existing requirements and
those regulations are becoming
too liberal
Lack of management in
young forests
Illegal logging and excessive
felling in private forests,
accompanied with theft of forest
products
Need for subsidies for
afforestation of
marginal or
abandoned
agricultural land
Relations of foresters and
representatives of timber
processing industry are
problematic
Roles and
responsibilities in state
forest sector are not
properly defined
Processing of small-
sized timber and
trading issues are
unsolved
Lack of forest and
agricultural statistics
and informational
system
Lack of forestry experience among
private forest owners. Knowledge of
private forest owners on
requirements and principles of
forest management is very poor
Lack of organizational structures to
carry out forestry in private forest
holdings and lack of information on
legal requirements and
recommended forestry activities
In general, forest resource
administrative system is poor
large political influence to the
forest sector and big
administrative apparatus
Slow and complex
land reform process
Lack of compensation
mechanism for
environmental
requirements
Lack of funding and staff in
relevant state institutions to
carry out supervision of
forest management and
other administration
activities as charged by the
legislation
Functional mechanism
to make forest owners
to obey legal forestry
requirements is lacking
Forest research plays a
minor role in forest
sector decision-making
process
Lack of qualified
staff in forest sector
I N S T U T I O N A L F A I L U R E S
Forest policy implementation is
problematic and does not
correspond to objectives and goals
set in the policy documents.
Especially in private forestry
Figure 1. Mapped policy and institutional failures and resource problems in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
europa.eu.int/comm/sustainable/docs/strategy_en.pdf#search=
Gothenburg%20strategy
FAO. 2001. State of the Worlds Forests 2001. Rome: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Herbst, P. 2002. Forest and environmental law developments in
European countries with economies in transition. In: F.
Schmithüsen, G. Iselin and P. Herbst (Editors), Forest Law and
Environmental Legislation: Contributions of the IUFRO Re-
search Group 6.13. Proceedings VII. Zurich, Swiss Federal In-
stitute of Technology, p. 107-111.
Kurlavièius, P., Kuuba, R., Lukins, M., Mozgeris, G., Tolvanen, P.,
Karjalainen, H., Angelstam, P. and Walsh, M. 2004. Identify-
ing high conservation value forests in the Baltic States from
forest databases. Ecological Bulletins, 51: 351-366.
Lazdinis, M., Carver, A., Carlsson, L., Tõnisson, K. and Vilkriste,
L. 2004. Forest policy networks in changing political systems:
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA
ISSN 1392-1355
104
2005, Vol. 11, No. 1 (20)
Case study of the Baltic States. Journal of Baltic Studies, 35
(4): 402-419.
Lazdinis, M., Carver, A., Schmithüsen, F., Tõnisson, K.
and Vilkriste, L. 2005. Forest sector concerns in the
Baltic States: Implications for an Expanded European
Union. Society and Natural Resources, In Press.
Likert, R. 1970. A technique for the measurement of atti-
tudes. In: G.F. Summers (Editor), Attitude measurement.
Chicago, Rand McNally & Company, p. 149-158.
Lisbon Strategy. 2005. See at: http://europa.eu.int/
growthandjobs/index_en.htm.
Lõhmus, A., Kohv, K., Palo, A. and Viilma , K. 2004. Loss
of old-growth, and the minimum need for strictly pro-
tected forests in Estonia. Ecological Bulletins, 51: 401-
411.
Mayers, J. and Bass, S. 1998. The role of policy and insti-
tutions. In: F.B. Goldsmith (Editor), Tropical Rain For-
est: A Wider Perspective. Chapman&Hall.
Naka, K., Hammett, A.L. and Stuartal, W.B. 2000. Con-
straints and opportunities to forest policy implementation
in Albania. Forest Policy and Economics, 1: 153-163.
Nijnik, M. and van Kooten, G.C. 2000. Forestry in the Ukraine: the
road ahead? Forest Policy and Economics, 1: 139-151.
Patton, M.Q. 1987. How to use qualitative methods in evaluation.
SAGE Publications.
Patton, C.V. and Sawicki, D.S. 1993. Basic Methods of Policy Anal-
ysis and Planning. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Pivoriûnas, A. and Lazdinis, M. 2004. Needs of Private Forest Own-
ers in the Context of Changing Political Systems: Lithuania as
a Case Study. Journal of Small Scale Forest Economics, Man-
agement and Policy, 3 (2): 191-202.
Reviere, R., Berkowitz, S., Carter, C.C., and Ferguson,
C.G. 1996. Introduction: Setting the Stage. In: R. Revi-
ere, S. Berkowitz, Carter, C.C. and C.G. Ferguson (Edi-
tors), Needs Assessment: A Creative and Practical Guide
for Social Scientists. Taylor & Francis, p. 1-12.
Schmithüsen, F. 2000. The expanding framework of law and
public policies governing sustainable uses and management
in European forests. In: F. Schmithüsen, P. Herbst and D.
Le Master (Editors), Forging a New Framework for Sus-
tainable Forestry: Recent Developments in European
Forest Law. IUFRO World Series Volume 10. Zurich, IU-
FRO Secretariat Viena, p. 1-27.
Schmithüsen, F., Iselin, G. and Herbst, P. (Editors). 2002.
Forest Law and Environmental Legislation: Contributions
of the IUFRO Research Group 6.13. Volume 27, Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich.
Received 04 April 2005
ÏÐÎÁËÅÌÛ Â ËÅÑÍÎÌ ÑÅÊÒÎÐÅ ÝÑÒÎÍÈÈ, ËÀÒÂÈÈ È ËÈÒÂÛ
È. Ëàçäèíèñ, Ì. Ëàçäèíèñ, À. Êàðâåð, Ô. Øìèòõþñåí, Ë. Âèëêðèñòå
Ðåçþìå
Äëÿ ïîíÿòèÿ ïðàâèëüíîñòè ïðîâîäèìîé ëåñîõîçÿéñòâåííîé ïîëèòèêè è ïðèíèìàåìûõ ðåøåíèé, èõ îáîñíîâàííîñòü
è âëèÿíèå íà îêðóæàþùóþ ñðåäó, íåîáõîäèìî èçó÷èòü ïðîáëåìû è âîïðîñû, â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ñóùåñòâóþùèå â
ëåñíîì ñåêòîðå. Öåëüþ íàøåé ðàáîòû áûëî èçó÷åíèå ðàçâèòèÿ ëåñíûõ ñåêòîðîâ Áàëòèéñêèõ ñòðàí: Ýñòîíèè, Ëàòâèè è
Ëèòâû ïðîèñõîäèâøåå â òå÷åíèè ïåðèîäà ïîñëå âîññòàíîâëåíèÿ íåçàâèñèìîñòè.
Èñïîëüçóÿ ìåòîä äåòàëüíîãî îïðîñà è àíàëèç ìíåíèé âåäóùèõ ñïåöèàëèñòîâ (ýëèòû) â ëåñíûõ ñåêòîðàõ
Áàëòèéñêèõ ñòðàí, èçó÷àëñÿ âîïðîñ äèíàìèêè ðàçâèòèÿ óïðàâëåíèÿ ëåñíîãî õîçÿéñòâà â èìè ïðåäñòàâëÿåìûõ ñòðàíàõ.
Óñòàíîâëåíî, ÷òî îñíîâíûå ïðîáëåìû â ëåñíîì ñåêòîðå Áàëòèéñêèõ ñòðàí âîçíèêàþò èç-çà îøèáî÷íûõ ðåøåíèé,
ïðèíèìàåìûõ óïðàâëÿþùèìè èíñòèòóöèÿìè îòðàñëè. Ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, äëÿ óñïåøíîãî ðàçâèòèÿ ëåñíîãî õîçÿéñòâà â
äàííûõ ñòðàíàõ îñíîâíîå âíèìàíèå äîëæíî áûòü ñîñðåäîòî÷åíî íà óëó÷øåíèå ñîäåéñòâèÿ ìåæäó ïðèíèìàåìûìè
ïîëèòè÷åñêèìè ðåøåíèÿìè è ñóùåñòâóþùèìè ïðèðîäíûìè ðåñóðñàìè. Óñòàíîâëåíû ÿâíûå ðàçíîãëàñèÿ ìåæäó
ïîòðåáèòåëÿìè è âëàäåëüöàìè ðåñóðñîâ.
Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: ëåñíîå õîçÿéñòâî, ëåñîõîçÿéñòâåííàÿ ïîëèòèêà, Áàëòèéñêèå ñòðàíû, ýëèòa
I. LAZDINIS ET AL.
BALTIC FORESTRY
ELITE CONCERNS IN FOREST SECTORS OF ESTONIA, LATVIA AND LITHUANIA