European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use
The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Ficko, Andrej [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2019transfer abstract |
|---|
| Umfang: |
11 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions - Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER, 2021, a companion journal to Forest ecology and management, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:99 ; year:2019 ; pages:21-31 ; extent:11 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV045462658 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV045462658 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230626011512.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 190205s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBV00000000000490.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV045462658 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 15,3 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a PHARM |q DE-84 |2 fid | ||
| 084 | |a 58.28 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 44.40 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Ficko, Andrej |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2019transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 11 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. | ||
| 520 | |a The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Lidestav, Gun |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ní Dhubháin, Áine |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Karppinen, Heimo |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zivojinovic, Ivana |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Westin, Kerstin |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier |a Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER |t Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |d 2021 |d a companion journal to Forest ecology and management |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV006104916 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:99 |g year:2019 |g pages:21-31 |g extent:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a FID-PHARM | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OPC-PHA | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 58.28 |j Pharmazeutische Technologie |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.40 |j Pharmazie |j Pharmazeutika |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 99 |j 2019 |h 21-31 |g 11 | ||
| author_variant |
a f af |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
fickoandrejlidestavgunndhubhininekarppin:2019----:uoenrvtfrsonryooisrve |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2019transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
58.28 44.40 |
| publishDate |
2019 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 doi GBV00000000000490.pica (DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl Ficko, Andrej verfasserin aut European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use 2019transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. Lidestav, Gun oth Ní Dhubháin, Áine oth Karppinen, Heimo oth Zivojinovic, Ivana oth Westin, Kerstin oth Enthalten in Elsevier Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions 2021 a companion journal to Forest ecology and management Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV006104916 volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 58.28 Pharmazeutische Technologie VZ 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 99 2019 21-31 11 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 doi GBV00000000000490.pica (DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl Ficko, Andrej verfasserin aut European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use 2019transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. Lidestav, Gun oth Ní Dhubháin, Áine oth Karppinen, Heimo oth Zivojinovic, Ivana oth Westin, Kerstin oth Enthalten in Elsevier Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions 2021 a companion journal to Forest ecology and management Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV006104916 volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 58.28 Pharmazeutische Technologie VZ 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 99 2019 21-31 11 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 doi GBV00000000000490.pica (DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl Ficko, Andrej verfasserin aut European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use 2019transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. Lidestav, Gun oth Ní Dhubháin, Áine oth Karppinen, Heimo oth Zivojinovic, Ivana oth Westin, Kerstin oth Enthalten in Elsevier Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions 2021 a companion journal to Forest ecology and management Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV006104916 volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 58.28 Pharmazeutische Technologie VZ 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 99 2019 21-31 11 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 doi GBV00000000000490.pica (DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl Ficko, Andrej verfasserin aut European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use 2019transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. Lidestav, Gun oth Ní Dhubháin, Áine oth Karppinen, Heimo oth Zivojinovic, Ivana oth Westin, Kerstin oth Enthalten in Elsevier Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions 2021 a companion journal to Forest ecology and management Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV006104916 volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 58.28 Pharmazeutische Technologie VZ 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 99 2019 21-31 11 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 doi GBV00000000000490.pica (DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl Ficko, Andrej verfasserin aut European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use 2019transfer abstract 11 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. Lidestav, Gun oth Ní Dhubháin, Áine oth Karppinen, Heimo oth Zivojinovic, Ivana oth Westin, Kerstin oth Enthalten in Elsevier Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions 2021 a companion journal to Forest ecology and management Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV006104916 volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 58.28 Pharmazeutische Technologie VZ 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 99 2019 21-31 11 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:99 year:2019 pages:21-31 extent:11 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Pharmazeutische Technologie Pharmazie Pharmazeutika |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Ficko, Andrej @@aut@@ Lidestav, Gun @@oth@@ Ní Dhubháin, Áine @@oth@@ Karppinen, Heimo @@oth@@ Zivojinovic, Ivana @@oth@@ Westin, Kerstin @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2019-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV006104916 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
ELV045462658 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV045462658</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626011512.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">190205s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBV00000000000490.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV045462658</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">15,3</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHARM</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-84</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">58.28</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ficko, Andrej</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lidestav, Gun</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ní Dhubháin, Áine</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Karppinen, Heimo</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zivojinovic, Ivana</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Westin, Kerstin</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier</subfield><subfield code="a">Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions</subfield><subfield code="d">2021</subfield><subfield code="d">a companion journal to Forest ecology and management</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV006104916</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:99</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:21-31</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHARM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">58.28</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutische Technologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazie</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutika</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">99</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="h">21-31</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Ficko, Andrej |
| spellingShingle |
Ficko, Andrej ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 58.28 bkl 44.40 European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| authorStr |
Ficko, Andrej |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV006104916 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| topic |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 58.28 bkl 44.40 |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 58.28 bkl 44.40 |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 58.28 bkl 44.40 |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
g l gl d á n dá dán h k hk i z iz k w kw |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV006104916 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV006104916 |
| title |
European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV045462658 (ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1 |
| title_full |
European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| author_sort |
Ficko, Andrej |
| journal |
Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |
| journalStr |
Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2019 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
21 |
| author_browse |
Ficko, Andrej |
| container_volume |
99 |
| physical |
11 |
| class |
610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 58.28 bkl 44.40 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Ficko, Andrej |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| title_sort |
european private forest owner typologies: a review of methods and use |
| title_auth |
European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| abstract |
The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. |
| abstractGer |
The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA |
| title_short |
European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Lidestav, Gun Ní Dhubháin, Áine Karppinen, Heimo Zivojinovic, Ivana Westin, Kerstin |
| author2Str |
Lidestav, Gun Ní Dhubháin, Áine Karppinen, Heimo Zivojinovic, Ivana Westin, Kerstin |
| ppnlink |
ELV006104916 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T17:36:35.455Z |
| _version_ |
1803852075977670656 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV045462658</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626011512.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">190205s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBV00000000000490.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV045462658</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1389-9341(17)30135-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">15,3</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHARM</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-84</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">58.28</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ficko, Andrej</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The increasing diversity of non-industrial private forest owners (PFOs) in Europe has been recognized by policy makers and the forestry sector at large. Typologies of these owners have been developed to provide an understanding of the diversity of owners' attitudes, values, beliefs, management objectives and behaviour. We analyzed PFO typologies from 28 European countries published from 1985 to 2015 in peer-reviewed journals and grey literature with respect to 1) research approaches and methods used; 2) typology objectives and problems addressed; 3) policy and management recommendations given. Using an on-line questionnaire we asked the first authors of the most relevant publications to retrospectively assess 4) the use of their typologies in education, science and forest policy. Most of the 66 publications reviewed share the common objective of providing a better understanding of forest ownership. Typologies were also developed to address roundwood mobilization, delivery of public goods, forest management approaches, involvement in PFO associations and entrepreneurship. The most common methodological approach was quantitative where owners were grouped by k-means clustering into 2 to 6 types and labelled with various names. Most frequently used labels were Multiobjective owners, Recreationists, Investors, Farmers, Indifferent owners, Conservationists, Multifunctional owners and Self-employed owners. Policy implications remain vague. The typologies had mostly been used in teaching and occasionally by politicians, civil servants or stakeholders. Only a half of the typologies had a follow-up study or was updated over time by the authors. After decades of classifying PFOs, it seems necessary to explore the link between typologies and forest owners' overt behaviour.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lidestav, Gun</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ní Dhubháin, Áine</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Karppinen, Heimo</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zivojinovic, Ivana</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Westin, Kerstin</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier</subfield><subfield code="a">Thompson, Stephen A. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Specific mechanical energy – An essential parameter in the processing of amorphous solid dispersions</subfield><subfield code="d">2021</subfield><subfield code="d">a companion journal to Forest ecology and management</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV006104916</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:99</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:21-31</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHARM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">58.28</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutische Technologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazie</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutika</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">99</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="h">21-31</subfield><subfield code="g">11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4004345 |