Challenges and Solutions for Non-Timber Forest Product Businesses in Finland–An Application of the SODA Analysis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Finnish NTFP Sector
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. SODA and its Application
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Ultimate Aims
3.2. Strategic Options
3.3. The most Potential Constructs
3.4. Overview of the Key Findings
4. Discussion
4.1. What Kinds of Challenges and Solutions Perceive the Finnish NTFP Actors?
4.2. How Challenges and Solutions on These Are Interconnected in a Hierarchical, Causal, Means-Ends Network?
4.3. Methodological Considerations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wunder, S.; Angelsen, A.; Belcher, B. Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base. World Dev. 2014, 64, S1–S11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wiersum, K.F.; Wong, J.L.G.; Vacik, H. Perspectives on non-wood forest product development in Europe. Int. For. Rev. 2018, 20, 250–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huber, P.; Hujala, T.; Kurttila, M.; Wolfslehner, B.; Vacik, H. Application of multi criteria analysis methods for a participatory assessment of non-wood forest products in two European case studies. For. Policy Econ. 2019, 103, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission (EC). A New EU Forest Strategy: For Forests and the Forest-Based Sector. In Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions; COM2013 659; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of Employment and the Economy. Sustainable Growth from Bioeconomy: The Finnish Bioeconomy Strategy. 2014. Available online: https://www.tem.fi/files/39784/Suomen_biotalousstrategia.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2017).
- Forest Europe. State of Europe’s Forests 2015. 2015. Available online: http://www.foresteurope.org/docs/fullsoef2015.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2017).
- FAO-Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. State of the World’s Forests 2016—Forests and Agriculture: Land-Use Challenges and Opportunities. 2016. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5588e.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2017).
- Miina, J.; Pukkala, T.; Kurttila, M. Optimal multi-product management of stands producing timber and wild berries. Eur. J. For. Res. 2016, 135, 781–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peura, M.; Triviño, M.; Mazziotta, A.; Podkopaev, D.; Juutinen, A.; Mönkkönen, M. Managing boreal forests for the simultaneous production of collectable goods and timber revenues. Silva Fenn. 2016, 50, 1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kurttila, M.; Pukkala, T.; Miina, J. Synergies and Trade-Offs in the Production of NWFPs Predicted in Boreal Forests. Forests 2018, 9, 417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tahvanainen, V.; Miina, J.; Kurttila, M. Climatic and economic factors affecting the annual supply of wild edible mushrooms and berries in Finland. Forests 2019, 10, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Te Velde, D.W.; Rushton, J.; Schreckenberg, K.; Marshall, E.; Edouard, F.; Newton, A.; Arancibia, E. Entrepreneurship in value chains of non-timber forest products. Forest Policy Econo. 2006, 8, 725–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- EPI Centar International. Value Chain Analysis—Non-Wood Forest Products: Mitrovicë/a Region. 2015. Available online: http://www.ks.undp.org/content/dam/kosovo/docs/AFT/Value%20chain%20analysis_Non-Wood%20Forest%20Products.pdf?download (accessed on 1 May 2017).
- Ludvig, A.; Tahvanainen, V.; Dicksonc, A.; Evardd, C.; Kurttila, M.; Cosovica, M.; Chapmanc, E.; Wildinge, M.; Weissa, G. The practice of entrepreneurship in the non-wood forest products sector: Support for innovation on private forest land. For. Policy Econ. 2016, 66, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamunen, K.; Kurttila, M.; Miina, J.; Peltola, R.; Tikkanen, J. Sustainability of Nordic non-timber forest product-related businesses—A case study on bilberry. For. Policy Econ. 2019, 109, 102002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cesar, A.D.S.; Conejero, M.A.; Barros Ribeiro, E.C.; Batalha, M.O. Competitiveness analysis of “social soybeans” in biodiesel production in Brazil. Renew. Energy 2019, 133, 1147–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahonya, S.; Shackleton, C.M.; Schreckenberg, K. Non-timber Forest Product Use and Market Chains Along a Deforestation Gradient in Southwest Malawi. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2019, 2, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maso, D.; Matilainen, A.; Pettenella, D. The Role of Networks in Non-wood Forest Products and Services Market Development. In Innovation in Forestry—Territorial and Value Chain Relationships; Weiss, G., Pettenella, D., Ollonqvist, P., Slee, B., Eds.; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2011; pp. 154–168. [Google Scholar]
- Hewitt-Dundas, N. Resource and Capability Constraints to Innovation in Small and Large Plants. Small Bus. Econ. 2006, 26, 257–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunninge, O.; Nordqvist, M.; Wiklund, J. Corporate Governance and Strategic Change in SMEs: The Effects of Ownership, Board Composition and Top Management Teams. Small Bus. Econ. 2007, 29, 295–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hynes, B. International Small Business Growth: A Process Perspective. Ir. J. Manag. 2010, 29, 87–106. [Google Scholar]
- Meinhold, K.; Darr, D. The Processing of Non-Timber Forest Products through Small and Medium Enterprises-A Review of Enabling and Constraining Factors. Forests 2019, 10, 1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Belcher, B.; Schreckenberg, K. Commercialisation of Non-timber Forest Products: A Reality Check. Dev. Policy Rev. 2007, 25, 355–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vidale, E.; DA re, R.; Lovric, M.; Mavsar, R.; vanTomme, P.; Pettenella, D. NWFP in the International Market: Current Situation and Trends. StarTree—Multipurpose Trees and Non-Wood Forest Products: A Challenge and Opportunity, EU FP7 Project no. 311919, Deliverable 3.1. 2014. Available online: https://star-tree.eu/images/deliverables/WP3/D3%201-Int_trade_final.pdf (accessed on 9 July 2020).
- Ates, A.; Bitici, U. Change process: A key enabler for building resilient SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2011, 49, 5601–5618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gherhes, C.; Williams, N.; Vorley, T.; Vasconcelos, A.C. Distinguishing micro-businesses from SMEs: A systematic review of growth constraints. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2016, 23, 939–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niskanen, A.; Slee, B.; Ollonqvist, P.; Pettenella, D.; Bouriaud, L.; Rametsteiner, E. Entrepreneurship in the Forest Sector in Europe. Silva Carelica 52. 2007. Available online: http://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/15166961.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2017).
- Weiss, G.; Emery, M.R.; Corradini, G.; Zivojinovic, I. New Values of Non-Wood Forest Products. Forests 2020, 11, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gillet, P.; Vermeulen, C.; Doucet, J.; Codina, E.; Lehnebach, C.; Feintrenie, L. What Are the Impacts of Deforestation on the Harvest of Non-Timber Forest Products in Central Africa? Forests 2016, 7, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mather, A. The Forest Transition. Area 1992, 24, 367–379. [Google Scholar]
- Mather, A.; Needle, C. The forest transition: A theoretical basis. Area 1998, 30, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargo, S.; Lusch, R. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. J. Mark. 2004, 68, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zivojinovic, I.; Weiss, G.; Wilding, M.; Wong, J.L.G.; Ludvig, A. Experiencing forest products—An innovation trend by rural entrepreneurs. Land Use Policy 2020, 94, 104506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Honkanen, M. Luonnontuotealan Toimialaraportti 2019. Työ-ja Elinkeinoministeriön Julkaisuja. Toimialaraportti 2019:32. Available online: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-327-428-0 (accessed on 9 July 2020).
- Salo, K. Non-Timber Forest Products and Their Utilization. In Multiple-Use Forestry in the Nordic Countries; Hytönen, M., Ed.; The Finnish Forest Research Institute: Helsinki, Finland, 1995; pp. 117–155. [Google Scholar]
- Niemi, S.; Turtiainen, M. Luonnontuotteista Metsänomistajille. Lapin Ammattikorkeakoulun julkaisuja. Serie, D, Muut Julkaisut 3/2019. 2019. Available online: https://www.lapinamk.fi/loader.aspx?id=b0ea0f44-4cde-42b1-90d1-11dbf6356580 (accessed on 9 July 2020).
- Rohrbach, B. Kreativ nach Regeln-Methode 635, eine neue Technik zumLösen von Problemen. Creative by rules Method 635, a new technique forsolving problems. Absatzwirtschaft 1969, 12, 73–75. [Google Scholar]
- Honkakoski, P.; Fuchs, D. Methods manual. Selected methods forcollaborative planning. In Copack. Toolkit for Training Collaborative Planning; Online Toolbox; Oulu University of Applied Sciences: Oulu, Finland, 2012; Available online: http://copack.oamk.fi/docs/methods/methodsmanual.pdf (accessed on 9 July 2020).
- Kangas, A.; Laukkanen, S.; Kangas, J. Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest management—A review. For. Policy Econ. 2006, 9, 77–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martins, H.; Borges, J.G. Addressing collaborative planning methods and tools in forest management. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 248, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vacik, H.; Kurttila, M.; Hujala, T.; Khadka, C.; Haara, A.; Pykalainen, J.; Honkakoski, P.; Wolfslehner, B.; Tikkanen, J. Evaluating collaborative planning methods supporting programme-based planning in natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 144, 304–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marttunen, M.; Lienert, J.; Belton, V. Structuring problems for Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in practice: A literature review of method combinations. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 263, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eden, C.; Ackermann, F. Evaluating Strategy—Its Role within the Context of Strategic Control. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 1993, 44, 853–865. [Google Scholar]
- Eden, C.; Ackermann, F. Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Management; Sage Publications: London, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Eden, C.; Ackermann, F. SODA the Principles. In Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited (2e); Rosenhead, J., Mingers, J., Eds.; Wiley: Chirchester, UK, 2001; p. 386. [Google Scholar]
- Ferreira, F.A.F.; Marquesc, C.S.E.; Bentop, P.; Ferreiraj, J.M.; Jalalim, S. Operationalizing and measuring individual entrepreneurial orientation using cognitive mapping and MCDA techniques. J. Bus. Res. 2015, 68, 2691–2702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, L.D.; Schlindwein, S.L.; Fantini, A.C.; Belderrain MC, N.; Montibeller, G.; Franco, L.A. Structuring contrasting forest stakeholders’ views with the Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) approach. Int. For. Rev. 2019, 21, 501–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eden, C.; Ackermann, F.; Cropper, S. The Analysis of Cause Maps. J. Manag. Stud. 1992, 29, 309–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banxia. Decision Explorer® User’s Guide; Version 3.5.0©; Banxia Software Ltd.: Kendal, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Mingers, J.; Rosenhead, J. Problem structuring methods in action. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2004, 152, 530–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fran, A.; Colin, E.; Steve, C. Getting Started with Cognitive Mapping. Management Science, University of Strathclyde. Available online: https://banxia.com/dexplore/resources/how-to-make-maps/ (accessed on 9 July 2020).
- Borgatti, S.P. NetDraw: Graph Visualization Software; Analytic Technologies: Harvard, IL, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Georgiou, I. A graph-theoretic perspective on the links-to-concepts ratio expected in cognitive maps. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2009, 197, 834–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, M.; Pettenella, D.; Vidale, E. Income generation from wild mushrooms in marginal rural areas. For. Policy Econ. 2011, 13, 221–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manninen, O.; Peltola, R. Poiminnan vaikutus mustikan, puolukan ja variksenmarjan marjantuotantoon Pohjois-Suomessa. Metsätieteen Aikakauskirja 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nikolaou, I.; Tsalis, T. A framework to evaluate eco-and social-labels for designing a sustainability consumption label to measure strong sustainability impact of firms/products. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 182, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, L.; Han, L.; Yang, F.; Gao, L. The Evolution of Sustainable Development Theory: Types, Goals, and Research Prospects. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kuznets, S. Economic Growth and Income Inequality. Am. Econ. Rev. 1955, 45, 1–28. [Google Scholar]
ID and Label of the Construct | Out-Degree | In-Degree | Sum |
---|---|---|---|
80 To educate people | 14 | 8 | 22 |
58 To increase and sustain financing | 9 | 11 | 20 |
85 To enhance and apply networks | 13 | 5 | 18 |
10 To increase degree of productising | 9 | 9 | 18 |
6 To improve the marketing of products | 5 | 12 | 17 |
16 To increase the cooperation between producers | 10 | 6 | 16 |
81 To develop storages | 4 | 9 | 13 |
87 To enhance professionalism | 2 | 9 | 11 |
5 To develop semi-cultivation/agroforestry | 6 | 5 | 11 |
101 To create/find/cooperate with a leading company or group | 7 | 3 | 10 |
199 To apply external facilitators/experts | 7 | 3 | 10 |
40 To clarify “production chain thinking” in the sector | 6 | 4 | 10 |
89 To increase customer/marketing know-how (incl, Segments) | 6 | 4 | 10 |
130 To increase economical public support | 5 | 5 | 10 |
177 To develop new innovative products | 2 | 8 | 10 |
394 To improve efficiency of raw material acquisition | 2 | 8 | 10 |
175 To increase cooperation between NTFP-actors in different countries | 6 | 3 | 9 |
176 To increase cooperation between actors | 6 | 3 | 9 |
71 To organise projects | 4 | 5 | 9 |
198 To form company groups | 3 | 6 | 9 |
57 To apply study results (international, national) | 8 | 0 | 8 |
227 To organise attitude change campaigns | 5 | 3 | 8 |
168 To take into account restrictions of EU and domestic legislation (Novel Food legislation) | 4 | 4 | 8 |
124 To find risk investors or sponsors (international or domestic) | 3 | 5 | 8 |
384 To apply space available in prevailing companies | 3 | 5 | 8 |
267 To overcome seasonality of the work | 2 | 6 | 8 |
301 To develop information in packages | 2 | 6 | 8 |
385 To enhance export of NTFPs | 2 | 6 | 8 |
45 To improve entreprise size and image | 1 | 7 | 8 |
265 To increase specialisation of entrepreneurs | 5 | 2 | 7 |
11 To produce products that have demand (Market oriented solutions) | 4 | 3 | 7 |
212 To find growth-oriented entrepreneurs | 4 | 3 | 7 |
50 To increase knowledge on what can be utilised and demanded | 3 | 4 | 7 |
148 To pilot new technologies | 3 | 4 | 7 |
208 To establish a network where a product of a company scattered to several sub-providers (a network product) | 3 | 4 | 7 |
27 To lower the costs of collecting raw materials from the woods that is expensive | 2 | 5 | 7 |
156 To increase the attractivity of the sector | 2 | 5 | 7 |
225 To organise wide marketing campaigns | 2 | 5 | 7 |
378 To improve product quality | 2 | 5 | 7 |
1 To mitigate effects of crop variation due to weather conditions and years | 1 | 6 | 7 |
49 To increase the smooth availability of raw materials (year-round and year-to-year) | 1 | 6 | 7 |
327 To increase “industrial” orientation in the sector | 1 | 6 | 7 |
377 To increase forest owner’s interest to NTFPs | 1 | 6 | 7 |
425 To find right financing modes to products | 1 | 6 | 7 |
Construct With ID | Number of HIESETS |
---|---|
37 To realise that economical resources of NTFP businesses are fundamentally scattered, because it is not an “effective mass production economy” | 13 |
65 To increase communication | 13 |
373 To enhance cooperation between authorities | 13 |
387 To realise that physical investments, incl. IT solutions, are expensive | 12 |
66 To apply digital IT solutions fully | 11 |
263 To increase cooperation with universities/research | 11 |
321 To clarify R&D rules between actors (rights, responsibilities, legislation) | 11 |
322 To conduct R&D with experienced partners | 11 |
325 To write detailed project plans, including benefit sharing | 11 |
386 To hire creative IT specialists | 11 |
68 To organise “NTFP-SLUSH”: a start-up happening | 10 |
207 To create digital raw material and product marketplace (stock) | 10 |
210 To create clusters of companies from different positions in value chain | 10 |
67 To enhance cross-sectoral cooperation | 9 |
160 To develop C&I for quality | 8 |
84 To change attitudes to accept small companies | 7 |
126 To cooperate in investments and procurement | 7 |
291 To out-learn from scale-thinking | 7 |
296 To renew thinking | 7 |
297 Dig out of the “fox hole” | 7 |
343 To cooperate with bigger companies | 7 |
437 To start a national productising and export project | 7 |
438 To raise ambition of the R&D projects | 7 |
(Business) Business Planning | (Business) Product Development, Processing and Marketing | (Business) Enabling Institutional Framework |
Micro and small enterprises (Cent) ([11] [20]; [21], [22] | Small market size (Cent) [18] | Varying legislative frameworks (Cent) [54], [22] |
Lack of business and marketing skills (Cent) [18] | Segmentation of markets (Cent) [24] | Challenges and inconstancies of bureaucracy and legislation on innovation, export of nutrients and on other functions (Cent) |
Inability to business planning and management (Cent) ([11]; [20]; [21], [22]) | Low market transparency [18] | |
Strengthening expertise and business skills (Potent) | Low degree of processing (Cent) | |
Business cooperation within and beyond NTFP sector (Cent) [22] | Product differentiation [27] | |
Business and project planning (Cent) | Product development (incl. services) (Cent) | |
Outlearn from large scale-thinking (Potent) | Shift towards higher value-added products (Potent) [27] | |
Criteria and indicators (Potent) [15] | ||
Unpredictability by demand fluctuations [23] | ||
(Resources) Raw Material Acquisition | (Resources) Financial Investments | (Resources) Knowledge Acquisition and Cooperation |
Scarcity of raw materials (in terms of both quantity and seasonal availability) (Cent) [18] | Lack of financial investment (Cent) [23] | Information and knowledge on harvesting, production, products and raw materials (Cent and potent) |
Inconsistent, varying volumes and quality [18] | “NTFP-SLUSH happening” (Potent) | Research (Cent and potent) |
High production and transportation costs (Cent) [18] | Information on markets/customer/demand (Cent) | |
Underdeveloped collection networks and supply chains of raw-materials (Cent) | Education/Training on established actors (Cent) | |
Technological innovations in harvesting (Cent) [24] | Distribution of knowledge and information (Cent) | |
Semi-cultivation and cultivation (Cent) [24] | Cooperation to improve knowledge/information base (Cent) | |
Development of storages (Potent) | Enhancement of peoples’ awareness in the NTFP sector (Cent) |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tikkanen, J.; Takala, T.; Järvelä, M.-L.; Kurttila, M.; Vanhanen, H. Challenges and Solutions for Non-Timber Forest Product Businesses in Finland–An Application of the SODA Analysis. Forests 2020, 11, 753. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11070753
Tikkanen J, Takala T, Järvelä M-L, Kurttila M, Vanhanen H. Challenges and Solutions for Non-Timber Forest Product Businesses in Finland–An Application of the SODA Analysis. Forests. 2020; 11(7):753. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11070753
Chicago/Turabian StyleTikkanen, Jukka, Tuomo Takala, Marja-Liisa Järvelä, Mikko Kurttila, and Henri Vanhanen. 2020. "Challenges and Solutions for Non-Timber Forest Product Businesses in Finland–An Application of the SODA Analysis" Forests 11, no. 7: 753. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11070753
APA StyleTikkanen, J., Takala, T., Järvelä, M. -L., Kurttila, M., & Vanhanen, H. (2020). Challenges and Solutions for Non-Timber Forest Product Businesses in Finland–An Application of the SODA Analysis. Forests, 11(7), 753. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11070753