Willi Zimmermann

Extension for private forest owners: Insights from a representative opinion poll in Switzerland

This paper presents findings from a representative opinion poll among Swiss private forest owners regarding the actual and future role of outside professional advice, training and extension services. First, the Swiss private forest owners are a highly heterogeneous group insofar as they are difficult addressees for any form of public support and extension services. Second, the majority of Swiss private forest owners appreciate the presently offered training facilities as well as the advisory activities of the cantonal and communal public forest services. Third, Swiss private forest owners are open to new forms of extension provided that such services will be custom-tailored and initiated by the advisers. Custom-tailored in this context means that the individual demands of private forest owners need to be addressed in a differentiated manner and advice will not be limited to the economic aspects of timber production. Local advisers from cantonal and communal forest services are presently in a pole position for offering new forms of extension, however, there are also more opportunities for services offered by private firms and non-governmental organisations. The broader scope for advisory and supporting activities as well as an increasing variety of potential actors providing such services implies a change in formulating and implementing forest policy programs at federal and cantonal levels.

Influencing factors on the implementation of forest reserves in Switzerland

In 1999, an international expert team found the neglect of biodiversity issues in Swiss forest policy to be one of its biggest weaknesses. Influenced by this scientific assessment, the Federal Forest Agency developed forest reserve guidelines with measurable objectives in cooperation with the constituent states (cantons). To assess the outcomes of the Swiss forest reserve concept, we surveyed cantons’ implementation degree in 2011. In a previous paper, Kaeser et al. (For Policy Econ 3:6–13, 2013) discussed the survey’s results from the perspective of new forms of governance in Swiss biodiversity policy. However, the use of different governance approaches could only partly account for the differences between the cantons’ forest reserve areas. As a continuation of this study, the present paper contributes to the discussion about the influencing factors on the implementation of forest reserves in Swiss cantons. For this purpose, we examine the effect of institutional drivers, public policies, property rights and user conflicts in 22 Swiss cantons on their forest reserve areas by using a multiple regression. The effect of financial conditions and the share of protective forest of the cantons on forest reserves is statistically significant. The findings indicate that the potential for forest reserves in protective forests in the mountains has been neglected so far. A combination of forest reserves and protective forests could result in a win–win-situation of ‘less effort for the management of protective forest’ and ‘more biodiversity’.