Marjanke A. Hoogstra-Klein

Mapping future changes in livelihood security and environmental sustainability based on perceptions of small farmers in the Brazilian Amazon.

Deforestation is a widely recognized problem in the Brazilian Amazon. Small farmers play a key role in this process in that they earn their livelihood by ranching and farming. Many studies have addressed the link between deforestation and livelihood strategies adopted by small farmers. Most have focused on advanced monitoring systems, simulation models, and GIS approaches to analyze the interaction of both dimensions, i.e., livelihoods and forest cover change. Although the current toolbox of methods has proved successful in increasing our understanding of these interactions, the models and approaches employed do not consider small farmers perspectives. On the assumption that local small farmers are agents of land-cover change, understanding how they perceive their own situation is essential to elucidate their actions. Our objective is to explore future changes in livelihood security and environmental sustainability as envisaged by local small farmers in the Brazilian Amazon. Previous livelihood cluster analysis of small farmers located in southeast Para was integrated with fuzzy cognitive mapping to determine present perceptions and to explore future changes, using global scenarios downscaled to the local situation. Overall, system description differs only on details; all results indicate a strong trade-off between livelihood security and environmental sustainability in all livelihood systems, as identified by the small farmers. However, fundamentally different outcomes are obtained from the future analysis, depending on the livelihood strategy cluster. Achieving win-win outcomes does not necessarily imply a positive scenario, especially if small farmers are dependent on income transfers from the government to provide their livelihood.

Rational versus adaptive forest management planning: exploratory research on the strategic planning practices of Dutch forest management organizations

The long-running debate between the rational and the adaptive school of strategic forest management planning has received considerable attention. There is, however, little empirical evidence of whether and how forest management organizations actually plan strategically. The goal of this paper is to fill this empirical gap by describing the strategic planning practices of 22 Dutch forest management organizations faced with uncertain and unpredictable environments. Two characteristics on which the two planning approaches fundamentally differ form the basis of the description of the planning practices. The first characteristic relates to the way the external world is perceived; certainty is essential in the rational model, whereas uncertainty is central in the adaptive model. The second characteristic relates to the way the internal decision process is organized. Rational planning is much more static and stable, whereas adaptive planning processes are much more continuous, dynamic and natural. Interviews with the organizations studied point to a whole range of planning practices. Rational and adaptive planning are merely two ends of a continuum, and planning practices vary along this continuum. The rational–adaptive planning debate can therefore be considered oversimplified as it focuses only on the two extremes and does not incorporate the whole range of possible practices in between these extremes.

Exploring the financial rationales of Dutch forest holdings and their relation with financial results

The financial situation of many forest holdings in the Netherlands is a major concern. For example, the yearly overview of Dutch private forest holdings larger than 5xa0ha shows that over the last 30xa0years, the average annual results were negative during most years. However, it should be taken into account that not all forest holdings focus primarily on the generation of financial benefits. Surprisingly, no studies relating financial rationales and financial results have yet been conducted. The aim of the present study was, therefore, to provide a better understanding of the financial situation of forest holdings, using Dutch forest holdings as a case study, by (1) determining their financial rationales and (2) relating these financial rationales to their financial results. A survey was conducted, in which the owners and managers of 205 forest holdings in the Netherlands participated. Based on a cluster analysis, these holdings could be classified into five rationales: ‘hobby owners’; ‘efficiency-based owners’; ‘budget producers’; ‘break even players’; and ‘economically oriented owners’. Different financial rationales led to differences in financial results: owner types that were more strongly oriented towards financial benefits generally produce better results on average. However, the findings also showed that not all forest owners financially orientated on benefits achieved positive results. The findings give a better understanding of forest holdings and the financial results of their holdings, and provide a basis for further research and policy development.