Jussi Leppänen

Effects of Public Financed Aid on Private Forest Investments: Some Evidence from Finland, 1963–2000

The relationship between private forest investments and public cost sharing (government financial aid to private investment projects) was first analysed with an economic optimization model. In the general case the model predicted that cost-sharing causes substitution between private funding of investments and public aid. However, in some special cases complementarities were not ruled out. Next, the model predictions were tested with a translog cost function specification of forest investment fund shares. Aggregate data from Finland in years 1963–2000 were used. The substitution and own price elasticities of purely private, subsidized individual and subsidized collective investments are derived from maximum likelihood estimates of translog system model, allowing for investment scale effects. Investments supported by public funding behave in a strongly complementary fashion to each other. Some substitution of subsidized private funding for non-subsidized private funding was found. Strong scale effects and forest investment incentives were found among forest owners in response to public investment aid.

The impact of government investment assistance on forest investment and timber supply

A theoretical model is derived in the utility maximum framework where the representative forest owner maximises his consumption utility. The owner optimises his forest investments and cuttings to obtain this target. It is shown that government cost sharing (loans and grants) has positive private investment effects. These results are not rejected in an econometric analysis of a Finnish regional panel data from Forestry Board Districts in years 1983 to 2000. Significant negative cost sharing effects on timber supply are not found in the data. Unit costs of investments increase wood supply. A strong complementary is found between forest investments and sawlog and pulpwood supplies.

Public cost-sharing in private forest investments in Finland 1983–2000

A model of public cost-sharing in private forest investment is proposed to describe the substitution between the private financing of investments and public investment assistance. The substitution depends on the curvature conditions of the forest investment function on forest stock. When the second-order investment effects are close to zero or when they do not exist, the funding substitution will not take place. A simultaneous econometric model for private and public funding employing forest incomes, forest income taxes, interest rates, investment scale and market wood price expectations as exogenous variables is estimated. The model estimation based on Finnish regional data in 1983–2000 rejects the substitution alternative. A 10% increase in private investment funding increases the demand for public funding at the same rate, but a 10% increase in public funds will increase the private funds supply by 2.5%. Significant income effects are found only in the case of private funding. In northern Finland, the scale effects are large for public financial assistance. The effects of the income tax reform on the private supply of funds are positive, especially for the new wood-sales profit taxation, whereas the interest rate and price expectation effects are negative.

Metsänomistajien käsitykset metsätalouden kannattavuudesta ja sen mittaamisesta

Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan kvalitatiivisen tutkimuksen menetelmin yksityismetsänomistajien käsityksiä metsätalouden kannattavuudesta ja erityisesti heidän käyttämiään tapoja oman tilansa kannattavuuden arvioimiseksi. Tutkimusaineisto kerättiin haastattelemalla 19 metsänomistajaa metsänhoitoyhdistys Päijät-Hämeen alueelta teemahaastattelumenetelmällä. Haastatellut metsänomistajat mainitsivat runsaasti erilaisia kannattavuuden mittareiksi tulkittavia arviointitapoja, joiden perusteella kannattavuuteen suhtautumisessa voitiin erottaa kuusi perustyyppiä: absoluuttiset, suhteuttajat, tulojen turvaajat, riskin tiedostajat, arvon mittaajat ja markkinattomat. Haastateltujen mielestä kannattavuuteen vaikuttivat erityisesti metsänhoitotöiden tekeminen, kustannukset sekä raakapuun hinta. Myös metsän kasvu ja rakenne, hakkuun ajoitus, metsän arvon kehitys, toiminnan systemaattisuus sekä aktiivinen puunmyynti ja omatoimisuus mainittiin usein. Yritystoiminnassa yleisesti käytettyjä liiketaloudellisia kannattavuusmittoja (esim. kassavirta, liiketulos, sijoitetun pääoman tuottoprosentti) mainittiin harvoin. Käytetyt kannattavuuden arviointitavat ja käsitykset siihen vaikuttavista tekijöistä olivat silti paljolti perusteltavissa olevia ja oikeansuuntaisia. Haastatellut metsänomistajat myös ymmärtävät kannattavuuteen vaikuttavat tekijät pitkälti samalla tavoin kuin metsäpolitiikan laatijat, vaikka kannattavuustavoitteet vaihtelevat. Kaikkiaan lähtökohta tilatason kannattavuuden parantamiselle markkinaehtoisten palvelujen, julkisrahoitteisen neuvonnan ja politiikan muun keinovalikoiman avulla on varsin hyvä.