Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and use of a productive resource in Põlva County, Estonia JÖRGENSEN HANS AND OLOF STJERNSTRÖM Jörgensen, Hans & Olof Stjernström (2008). Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and use of a productive resource in Põlva County, Estonia. Fennia 186: 2, pp. 95–111. Helsinki. ISSN 0015-0010. Our survey among new land and forest owners in Põlva County in southeast Estonia focuses on the owners’ different motives for obtaining land and forest property through restitution and privatization from 1992 on. In the light of the historical context presented, two clear-cut motives for obtaining property ap- pear: emotional and economic. Based on the results from the survey we con- clude that the emotional non-economic factors have been most influential for a majority of the landowners, regardless of if the actual property was restituted or purchased. The emotional bonds to landed property are related to the aspiration to regain and repossess family property and thereby related to a certain place affiliation. Another interpretation concerns the restrictions with regards to the spread of modern commercial forestry among the – foremost small-scale – prop- erty holders for which the actual possession is around 12 ha each. Hans Jörgensen, Department of Economic History, Umeå University, SE-901 87 Umeå , Sweden, E-mail: hans.jorgensen@ekhist.umu.se Olof Stjernström, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Umeå Uni- versity, SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden. E-mail: olle.stjernstrom@geography.umu.se. MS received 10.02.2008. Introduction In spite of its limited size of around 45,000 km2 and a population of roughly 1.3 million, Estonia’s rela- tively large forest assets turn the country into an interesting case in point for studying post-socialist property changes. More than half the country’s land area or 2,284,600 ha, is denoted as forest. If we exclude unstocked areas and bush the produc- tive forests constitute 47.3 per cent of the country’s total land area (Aastaraamat Mets 2005). Estonia, together with Finland, Latvia, Sweden, Norway and Russia, belongs to the group of European coun- tries that have more than 1 ha of forest/wooded land per inhabitant. This is however a quite recent phenomenon in Estonia where most forests grow on previously agricultural lands, which were natu- rally reforested or planted beginning in the 1950s. The current state-owned forest area, which will re- main state property, basically corresponds to the 850,000 ha held by the state during the interwar statehood. After Soviet annexation in 1940 and the subsequent forced collectivization during the peri- od 1947–51, many chose to leave the countryside. Natural reforestation took place as an outcome of the large-scale Soviet agriculture, which left previ- ous pastures and remote fields uncultivated. While interwar Estonia’s forests were marked by their bal- anced stock and well developed forestry manage- ment, the post-war forests’ stock became extremely diversified (Dahlin 1999). The changes associated with the Agricultural Reform Act of 17 October 1991, in force from 1992, are essential for understanding the post-1991 redistribution of land and forest. Restitution of land and assets has presupposed claims from a legal person and approval from a governmental author- ity. When claims have been approved, land and forest have been returned to previous owners or their heirs free of charge. In cases in which priva- tization has been applied, property has been shift- ed by means of auction directed by the state. The same goes for land and assets for which no claims have been raised (Järvinen et al. 2003). An under- standing of individuals’ motives for obtaining land or forest must therefore take into account different 96 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström driving forces that are present in a transforming so- ciety like Estonia. For example, the size of the holding places restraints on the economic returns, and the non-economic or “intangible” values dif- fer between owners (Toivonen et al. 2005). It has been suggested that a great physical dis- tance between the property and the owner’s place of residence, or the lack of emotional and eco- nomic bonds to the place of the property, affect both management and maintenance. These ideas, relating to the importance of place for an individ- ual’s decisions, emanates e.g. from Tuan (1974); Allardt (1975); Relph (1976); Entrikin (1991) and Stjernström (1998). In more recent studies, Lind- gren et al. (2000) have discussed the important relationship between land use and the forest own- er’s place of residence. Pettersson (2002) also in- vestigated post-productive forestry, which includes the entrance of new entrepreneurs and alternative incomes from the forests (Pettersson et al. 2002). According to Allardt (1975), place attachment can be divided into four different categories: econom- ic, social, cultural, and material. Economic and material attachments relate to local job opportuni- ties, possession of land and real estate, while so- cial attachment relates to having close relatives and friends. Cultural attachments express identifi- cation with the local culture, for example dialect and local traditions. Allardts’ (1975) classification was an early attempt to conceptualize place at- tachment into different categories. This enabled to develop other parameters in mobility and migra- tion studies and in studies of regional develop- ment. In this regard, human capital as a regional resource can also be considered as a production resource which to various degrees, is connected to the actual place or region. A major outcome of the first ten years of restitu- tion in Estonia after 1991 was the return of the in- terwar property relations, implying a resurrection of many small farm holdings below 10 ha of land or forest. Hardly viable in a market economy but important as transitional solutions, these subsist- ence holdings provided both basic foodstuffs and firewood during the initial years of hardship (Jör- gensen 2004). In 2004 when Estonia joined the European Union, the property structure of forests had developed into the following ownership cate- gories: state forest, 36 per cent; private forest, 38 per cent; and forestland subject to further privati- zation, 26 per cent (Aastaraamat Mets 2005). When the land reform and privatization proc- esses draw to a close, the share of private forestry is expected to increase to around 60 per cent of the total forest area. However, both restitution and privatization have been circumvented by insecure legal arrangements such as a lack of documenta- tion, resulting in numerous issues of fraud and mismanagement. Well-defined and secure prop- erty relations were not established at the same pace as the new Estonian owners began exploiting their land and forests in the 1990s. It has been shown, for example, that: “It is evident that the high share of illegal logging is directly caused by individuals who are exploiting the weak legal and enforcement system with a desire to gain quick profits” (Hain and Ahas 2005). Like modern farming, modern forestry is multi- functional and the altered property relations have also affected management. In addition to logging, recreation and hunting offer additional income possibilities, which place a focus on issues like en- vironmental protection concerns, biodiversity and sustainable development (Järvinen et al. 2003). However, 60 to 70 per cent of the Estonian forest owners live far from their relatively small holdings, which in 2004 were around 12.4 ha per unit (Min- istry of Agriculture 2007). The liberal Estonian for- est policy, based on the Forestry Act of 1998, is an attempt to resemble the West-European legisla- tion, in which a large share of the decision-making power is handed over to the individual owners. However, since many new owners lack personal experience of forest management or necessary for- estry education, it is not uncommon to find wide- spread distrust of the government as well as weak law-abiding attitudes (Hain and Ahas 2005). The aims of this article are twofold. The first aim is to place the land restitution and forest privatiza- tion processes in Estonia after 1991 in a historical context, and the second is to provide empirical in- sight into these processes, derived from a survey in Põlva County in Southeast Estonia. At this stage of investigation, the analysis is devoted to explaining the actions and motives among the new private forest owners and their relationship to their landed property, or more specifically the different motives, objectives and apprehensions of land and forest ownership. With regard to the processes of restitu- tion and privatization, two motives are discernible. The first is based on economic rationality and is related to the expected future economic gains from property. The second is driven by non-economic issues. Here, specific emotional and historical val- ues are at the centre of the owner’s aspiration to own property. In the context of regained independ- FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 97Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … ence and the post-socialist transformation, the in- terlinked laws on property restitution and privati- zation have therefore been crucial. Hypothetically speaking, we assume that the present landowners in Estonia are motivated by two major rationales, either a) emotional bonds to land or b) the immediate or future economic re- turns from their landed property. The first part of this hypothesis relates to what we call the emo- tional filter hypothesis, implying that emotional relationships to property have different meanings. On the one hand, a certain size of property can be aspired based on what can actually be managed by a single owner or his/her family. On the other hand, the legal openings provided by restitution al- low for repossession of previously expropriated land for which the motives are embedded in his- torical and symbolic values. The emotional ration- ality is related to family history and the symbolic meaning of place (sense of place). For smallhold- ers without any previous experience of forestry, the motives for forest ownership or interest in forest management may be weak (Toivonen et al. 2005). We therefore assume, on the one hand, that among certain land and forest owners the emotional bonds to the specific property can have a restrictive im- pact on modern forestry, e.g. volumes of felling and forest management since the economic gains are subjugated to the emotional ones. On the other hand, in the context of the extreme liberalised Estonian post-socialist transformation process and its associated property reforms (land reform and privatisation) the economic rationality of the owner must also be seen in relation to the forest industry demand. Estimations made in 2000, e.g. concluded that the large volumes of timber cuts made in private forests, which at this point constituted around ¾ of the total cuttings, would increase further. This would not only imply a se- vere reduction of total forest stock, but also gener- ate severe alterations with regards to the diversity of forest. The cutting of old spruces could there- fore, as it was said, not be “compensated by the increment of middle-aged birch stands in drained swamps” (Kuuba. 2001). Therefore, the initial years of Estonia’s transformation, which were characterised by insecure property relations, insuf- ficient forest legislation, absent controls, auditing and suitable enforcement mechanisms, can pro- vide a different and more short-sighted interpreta- tion of the owner’ economic rationality. From the perspectives of the introduction of modern and ef- ficient forest technology, the demand for timber from Multi National Forest industry Corporations, and Estonia’s integration in the global market, it is likely to assume that the owner’s possible initial long-term ambitions of returns from forestry can have been overridden by short-term profits. Concerning the impacts from emotional bind- ings to property, which we denote the emotional filter hypothesis, it aims to reflect that land-use de- cisions taken by the property holders not only are related to market rationality but also to the prop- erty holder’s own values and experiences. The property holder may prefer an alternative land-use strategy to maintain family bonds, contribute to ecological preservation or emphasising other as- pects that are related to the affiliation of the place. In order to explore these relations we start by presenting the methodology and the survey, fol- lowed by a discussion on property reform and the historical context, which provides the framework for an overview of the key problems related to property changes. Thereafter we turn towards de- scribing the relevant forest macro-data. Finally, we discuss some tentative results from the question- naires that will constitute the basis for a conclud- ing analysis. Property relations in Estonia While most of the Estonian forests were state prop- erty during the interwar independence, the total forest area grew at the expense of agricultural land during the Soviet period (1940–1991). Owing to this fact, the restitution of interwar holdings since 1992 has provided the main entrance into forest ownership. If claims from individuals have been absent, privatization has been used instead. In comparison to the land restitution process for which the symbolic relationships between land and identity have been crucial, forest privatization has been a less sensitive political issue. According to the former Minister of Social affairs, Arvo Kud- do, a main factor behind the decision to carry out restitution after 1991 was the search for justice. Restitution was therefore a means to compensate previous owners for their suffering under Soviet rule (Kuddo 1996). When restitution was chosen as the first priority, it implied that claims at the lo- cal municipality level needed to be discussed and solved before privatization could proceed. The sluggishness of the land restitution process and its associated legal impediments has, however, also 98 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström affected the forest privatization process. Five years after independence, only 10 percent of the Esto- nian forests were managed privately (Roosmaa 1999). Property restitution and privatization are essen- tial features of the post-socialist transformation process, and have had far-reaching effects on the agrarian property relations and associated produc- tion activities. Property rights, however, do not presuppose a system based on private property. It is rather a case of a bundle of rights, stretching from access – or use rights – to ownership rights to a specific resource. Important, however, is that functioning property rights legitimize the relation- ship between the person/persons who dispose a resource and those affected by this. Property rights are therefore dependent on the specific context in which they are exercised, implying that both time and space matter (Widgren 1995). In the context of privatization, the role of both formal (codified) and informal (cultural) institu- tions are important. In contrast to the legal codi- fied rules, the informal institutions are sluggish by nature and often need a certain period of adjust- ment before they are broadly accepted among the public. Well functioning institutions can reduce transaction costs, for example that of carrying out and controlling an exchange of property (North 1990). However, the initial property changes in post-socialist states often took place in a kind of legal vacuum, which opened up for exploitation. Low transaction costs are therefore dependent on adequate and sufficient information, functioning institutions and efficient enforcement mechanisms. A general problem associated with restitution is destruction. Since the 1940s many properties have been destroyed or divided, or have simply van- ished. The general neglect of maintenance has also turned restitution into a lottery process or nu- merous compensation solutions (Rabinowicz and Swinnen 1997). The current property structure in Estonia can be understood from the different turns taken during the radical shifts during the 20th century. These shifts are related to the achievement of the first in- dependence in 1918, the dependence and subju- gation during the Soviet period 1940–91, and the build-up of market economic relations in the post-1991 period. Estonia reached its first independence in the af- termath of the Russian revolution and the dissolu- tion of the Tsarist Russian Empire in 1920. The radical land reform of 1919–1926 gave full prop- erty rights to 140,000 peasant proprietors. Only 4 percent of the land area was left intact after expro- priation and redistribution. The properties of the major landowners, the Baltic-German nobility, were henceforth fully redistributed. However, the interwar governments chose to keep most forests in the hands of the state, partly as a currency re- serve (Lipping 1980; Kõll 1994; Jörgensen 2006). The second major property shift came after So- viet annexation in 1940, which ended the short period of independence. Interrupted by a German occupation during 1941–44, the ad hoc Soviet command economy turned towards a full-scale planned economy after the war, followed by forced collectivization after 1947 (Kõll 2004). Within the Soviet Union division of labour, Estonia’s role was to specialize in agricultural production. Forestry was of secondary importance and parts of the stock therefore remained untouched during the Soviet period, during which Estonia’s forest areas more than doubled. Between 1958 and 1991 the annual increase was in fact 19,300 ha (Põlluma- jandus ministerium 2007b). These forests grew on land considered less significant for large-scale ag- riculture. In areas where post-war felling was sub- stantial, uneven stands, with regard to both age and species, developed. Because of the low eco- nomic priority of Estonian forests until 1991, large areas of forests were also transformed into national parks or recreation areas, which of course was gainful from the perspective of biodiversity. Forest Management was divided between different ad- ministrations: the state forestry administration 60 per cent; kolkhoz and sovkhoz 38 percent; and military units and other 2 per cent (Dahlin 1999). In the second half of the 1980s perestroika and glasnost nourished profound changes in the agrar- ian areas. Starting from the informal agrarian re- forms in 1987, based on the experiences from the relatively successful private plot production, some private farmers could apply to lease land from kolkhozes and sovkhozes on an eternal basis. This was legally sanctioned beginning in 1989; how- ever, due to Soviet Law, formal property rights could not be obtained until after independence in 1991, when the regained independence led to a process of profound economic-political and social restructuring along free market economy lines (Jör- gensen 2004). The major problems in the forestry sector around 1991 were related to the lack of appropriate man- agement and forestry infrastructure, together with the lack of market institutions. Another problem FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 99Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … was the dissolution of large-scale agricultural kolkhozes and sovkhozes, which in general had a negative impact on rural development during the first ten years of independence. The less important role of forestry in total employment meant that fewer problems appeared from the dissolution of forest-oriented kolkhozes and sovkhozes. Howev- er, since many kolkhozes were functioning as mu- nicipalities, they provided services far beyond ag- ricultural activities; the dissolution of large-scale farming thereby affected all kinds of rural activities (Unwin 1997). The transfer of management and supervision in Estonia of privately owned forests has therefore not been free from friction. Modern forestry in Estonia The first draft of a new Forestry Act was presented in 1993, which paved the way for a new perspec- tive on forestry. In 1997, when the share of pri- vately owned forests had increased substantially, the first Forestry Act was adopted by the Estonian Parliament. Since then forestry has faced increased problems of a juridical character, partly due to the step-wise adjustments to European legislation in which, e.g., conservation of biodiversity and sus- tainable development are emphasized. Forests, however, can generate different kinds of added values in other sectors. For the new holders, owing not least to the fact that reconstruction of the agri- cultural sector has meant the loss of markets and several legal impediments, the additional forest re- source has contributed to the average farming household’s investments and to regional develop- ment (Järvinen et al.). Besides the incomes from felling and recreation, tourism can create additional income for the new Estonian forest owners. Even though large shares of pine and spruce stands had been deforested by the early 1960s, which severely reduced the total forest volume and gave an unbalanced stock, the present rich biodiversity is one factor of impor- tance (Dahlin 1999). On the one hand, in the con- text of the Soviet planned economy, Estonia’s role was to be that of a major agricultural producer and several rare species were thus preserved in the less productive and peripheral areas. The forest devel- oped its richness as a biotope due to the lack of exposure to modern forestry cultivation. On the other hand, obvious to anyone travelling through Estonia, the rich biodiversity also means that many forests suffer from a lack of appropriate thinning. Tall and weak stands on a poor site cannot pro- duce internationally competitive timber or wood. The most common species in the Estonian for- ests are pine, birch and spruce, but the distribution between these species has altered greatly over the past 50 years. From 1958 to 2004, the percentage distribution changed drastically. The stock of Pine decreased from 42 to 35 percent, a decrease was also visible in the stock of Spruce from 33 to 19 percent, and the increase of Birch went from 19 to 26 percent (Aastaraamat Mets 2005). Natural re- forestation thereby mostly took place when agri- cultural land was left aside; this was the case not least for marshlands, which are common in Esto- nia (Table 1). Table 1. Land category areas in Estonia (ha) (Aastaraamat Mets 2005: 2). Total land area * State forests Other owners Land category 1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha % Forest land 2284.6 52.3 859.9 78.7 1425.7 43.5 of which stocked 2138.5 48.9 806.3 73.9 1332.2 40.6 of which unstocked 146.1 3.3 52.6 4.8 93.5 2.9 Bushes 70.9 1.6 2.3 0.2 68.6 2.1 Agricultural land 1314.3 30.1 8.4 0.8 1306.0 39.8 Bogs 250.8 5.7 163.1 14.9 87.7 2.7 Inland water bodies 100.6 2.3 13.9 1.3 86.7 2.6 Urban settlements 155.2 3.6 0.1 0.0 155.1 4.7 Roads 50.0 1.1 7.5 0.7 42.5 1.3 Tracks 58.3 1.3 21.2 1.9 37.1 1.1 Mineral extraction sites 34.2 0.8 14.2 1.3 20.0 0.6 Other land 50.9 1.2 2.1 0.2 48.8 1.5 Total 4369.8 100.0 1091.6 100 3278.2 100.0 * Total land area does not include Lake Peipsi 100 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström The Forestry Act of 1997, in force from 1998, generated a ten-year development plan beginning in 2001. Here the objectives were to maximize “the contribution of the forestry sector to national economic and social well-being on a sustainable basis”. The basic regulative and monitoring sys- tems that were implemented implied a separation between the state’s regulation/authority function and the ownership and administration of the state’s forests (FAO 2000). In 2004 the Estonian forests covered 2,284,600 hectares (more than 52 percent of the total land area) with a growing stock of around 456,075 m3 corresponding to 200 m3 per ha. Out of this 92.4 percent were considered as available for wood supply. Around 172,000 ha were classified as pro- tected forest with high natural values and these areas are therefore excluded from commercial for- estry (Aastaraamat Mets 2005). The changes in property and market structures after 1991 have in- duced further increases in the amount of forest- lands. Thus the re-forestation trend, initiated dur- ing the Soviet years, has continued. Private forestry is estimated to increase up to around 60–65 per- cent in the nearby future. Methods and data This article is based on forest statistical data, cur- rent academic research and compilations from our survey among forest owners in Põlva County. In May 2006, the Põlva County land register or ca- dastre contained 14,324 properties comprising one ha of land or more. Smaller properties and those in urban areas and villages are excluded from this study. The cadastre provided access to data such as size of property, date of registration, identification number, name of municipality and village, but neither names nor addresses to the le- gal owners. After making a random selection of 800 properties we contacted the Estonian Cadastre Registration Authority, from which we obtained name and social security number for the owners of the 800 landed properties. By matching the social security number with the population register in Põlva County we then found the owners’ address- es. The questionnaire focused mainly on the land- owners’ economical, social and emotional bind- ings or relations to the property. The respondents were asked to valuate different statements regard- ing the reasons for their ownership, the importance to regain or to maintain family property, the pros- pect for economic returns from the property and the future use of the actual property. The actual and possible future land-use is essential in this matter. The questionnaire also brought up issues like occurrence of illegal logging and the owners’ attitudes to forestry cooperation, which however will be presented in a forthcoming article. The mail survey was based on a total of 770 questionnaires sent out in August 2006. Five weeks later, after a reminder, a second questionnaire was mailed. At the end of December 2006 the survey had resulted in a response rate of 36 percent (n = 276). Considering the widespread public scepticism towards authority practices and ques- tionnaires of this kind, we find the response rate acceptable. Since it is common for many proper- ties to have several owners, often within the same family, a single household may also have received two or more questionnaires. The Chi2 test shows that the results from the questionnaire are repre- sentative in comparison to the total register data with regard to the respondents’ sex and age distri- bution. The results are, however, less representa- tive for the size-distribution of respondents’ hold- ings. It is possible that the propensity to respond to the questionnaire is related to the owner’s property size. Fewer respondents among larger land and forest owners and overrepresentation of small- scale owners can, for instance, indicate that small- holders, finding the non-economic incentives for property more important than the larger property holders and thus small-scale owners are more like- ly to respond. This will be discussed later in this article, which is limited to the compilation of re- sults from the first part of our survey. This first part of the survey provides the empirical data related to motives and driving forces for obtaining land and forests. Thereby, we scrutinize the new landown- ers’ relationships to their properties, looking at the emotional bonds to landed property on the one hand and the economic bonds on the other. The Põlva County survey 2006 Põlva County makes a suitable case for investigat- ing the role of land and forestry among new pri- vate proprietors. It is one of 15 Estonian counties based on 13 municipalities and one town area, which cover 2,164 square kilometres or 5 percent of Estonia’s total area (Fig. 1). Most of the 32,000 inhabitants, or 73 percent, are rurally based and 27 percent live in towns. The county borders on FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 101Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … Table 2. Distribution of forestland area in Estonia and Põlva County in 2005 (Aastaraamats Mets 2005: 4). Commercial forest: ha and % Protection forest: ha and % Protected forest: ha and % Total: ha Forest available for wood supply: ha and % 1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha ha % Põlva 95.8 84.9 13.9 12.3 3.1 2.8 112.8 109.7 97.2 Estonia 1578.9 69.1 533.2 23.3 172.5 7.6 2284.6 2112.1 92.4 Fig. 1. Counties and munici- palities in Estonia 2007. Põl- va County, the study area, is highlighted (Maa-Amet 2007). land and across the great Lake Peipsi to the Rus- sian Federation. More than half the county is for- ested. Its growing stock of 217 m3/ha places it among the top three Estonian counties, with a na- tional average of 200 m3/ha. In relative terms, Põl- va County has the highest amount of commercial forests and wood supply in Estonia. However, as can be seen in Table 2, much less of the county’s forested area is devoted to nature protection (Aas- taraamats Mets 2005). According to Table 3, almost half of the regis- tered properties in Põlva County possess less than 10 ha of land and forest. Fifty-seven percent of the holdings have forests and the other 43 percent only possess agricultural land. Six of eight forest properties are smaller than 10 ha, which means that a majority of holders possess rather small for- ests while 3.3 per cent of the forestland can be found among properties containing 30 ha or more. From the cadastre it is possible to analyse the progress in the ongoing land restitution and priva- tization process. The year of restitution mentioned in the cadastre marks the year when the property was legally re-established. Table 3. Size distribution of property among owners pos- sessing one ha or more of forestland in Põlva County in 2006. Size in ha Frequency Percent 1.00–9.99 6538 45.6 10.00–19.99 983 6.9 20.00–29.99 222 1.5 30.00–39.99 90 0.6 40.00–49.99 47 0.3 50.00– 341 2.4 Total 8221 57.4 (Põlva County cadastre registers 2006) 102 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström Figure 2 shows the annual development of es- tablishment for restituted and privatized landed properties in Põlva County from 1993 to 2005. The slow pace of restitution and privatization up to 1995 followed a national pattern due to several legal and administrative difficulties, e.g. too few land engineers in relation to the number of claims for restitution, which in many parts of the country exceeded the amount of land available. The in- crease of cases closed in 2001 and 2003 was due to the extra effort placed on the processes of resti- tution and privatization in the light of a forthcom- ing EU accession. When EU membership was con- sidered to be within reach after 2002, this spurred investments in land and property, driving land prices up and contributing to a better functioning land market (Jörgensen 2005). In 2001 the Euro- pean Commission stated in their report that due to the lack of administrative capacity at a local level, 1.6 million ha of land still remained to be regis- tered, of which around 1.1 million ha were to be subjected to restitution or privatization (Commis- sion of the European Communities 2001). Results In our survey, 47 percent of the respondents were female and 53 percent were male. As Table 4 indi- cates, the share of elderly above the age of 64 was 30 percent, which should be compared with the national share of 15 percent according to the 2000 census (Statistical Office Estonia). Sources of in- come seem to be distributed normally among the respondents, except for the share of elderly who have their main income from pension (Table 5). While the elderly constituted 30 percent of the re- spondents, the share of pensioners was almost 40 percent. This indicates that many landowners are either early retired or disabled. A clear minority of respondents stated that their main income was de- rived from agriculture or forestry. Thirty percent of the respondents stated that they had higher education (here, implying univer- sity) (Table 6). This corresponds well to the nation- al Estonian average of 29.6 percent for those be- Fig. 2. Numbers of restituted and privatized properties in Põlva County 1993–2005 (N = 14195) (Põlva County cadastre registers 2006). Table 4. Age distribution among respondents in Põlva Coun- ty, Estonia 2006. Age distribution in classes (n = 276) Frequency Percent 20–34 33 12.0 35–64 159 57.6 65– 83 30.0 No answers 1 0.4 Total 276 100.0 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 103Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … tween 20 and 64 years of age, but it is also much higher than the EU average of 20.9 percent for the same age group (Riigikogu 2007). In the survey, however, respondents above the age of 65 consti- tuted a much larger group than its share represent- ed on a national basis. The respondents and their land After the initial years marked by the restitution and privatization processes under the legal influence of the government, open market sales and inherit- ance have become more frequent. The 276 re- spondents in our survey, who possessed one ha or more in 2006, represents this entire spectrum of owners. Thirty-seven percent owned two proper- ties, another 13 percent had three properties and less than 6 percent had four registered properties or more. Almost one-third (30 percent) of the re- spondents stated that they shared ownership of the property with close relatives such as spouses, chil- dren or siblings. The others owned their property alone. The relationship between the owner’s place of property and place of residence is described in Ta- ble 7. Almost 30 percent of the respondents lived permanently on their property, 26 percent returned regularly for longer or shorter visits and more than 30 percent stated that they had family history link- ages to the specific property, as a former place of residence for either themselves or close relatives. Only 10 percent of the respondents lacked any family ties to the place of the property, which sup- ports the importance of emotional bonds to the property. Altogether the survey comprised 433 landed properties, of which close to 25 percent were res- tituted. In contrast to the property changes con- cerning agricultural land, which foremost has been subjected to restitution after 1991, a majority of forests in this survey have been privatized and sold at market price. With regard to property 1 – denot- ing the owner’s first piece of forest property – 30 percent obtained this property through restitution. First refusal and purchase of properties were ad- ditionally important factors in explaining the pos- session of property for around 33 percent of the respondents. However, more than 35 percent stat- ed that their main (or single) property had been obtained either as a gift or through inheritance. This can be somewhat questioned based on the Table 5. Respondents’ main sources of income in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Types of income/Incomes from (n = 276) Frequency Percent A Own property 19 6.9 B Own business 24 8.7 C Employment in agriculture or forestry 10 3.6 D Public sector 32 11.6 E Private sector 51 18.5 F Pension 108 39.1 G Study loans 2 0.7 H Unemployment benefit 1 0.4 I Other 26 9.4 J Total 273 98.9 Missing 3 1.1 Total 276 100.0 Table 6. Educational levels among respondents in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Level of highest education among respondents (n = 276) Frequency Percent University 83 30.1 Secondary school 134 48.6 Primary school 53 19.2 Total 270 97.8 No answer 6 2.2 Total 276 100.0 Table 7. Relationship to property and place of residence among respondents in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Owner’s residential connection to the property (n = 276) Frequency Percent A Permanent residence on property 81 29.3 B Returning for longer visits to property 25 9.1 C Returning for shorter visits to property 47 17.0 D Previous residence in the neighbourhood 40 14.5 E Family roots 45 16.3 F No bonds 28 10.1 G Total 266 96.4 H * No answer 10 3.6 Total 276 100.0 104 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström fact that we can assume that the landed property was initially restituted to elderly or deceased rela- tives. It is thus likely that the share of restitution cases is higher than the percentage distribution in Table 8 indicates. Motives for obtaining property In order to reflect the owners’ motives for obtain- ing landed property, the respondents were asked to evaluate a number of motives (Table 9). The re- sponses support the hypothesis that emotional fac- tors play an influential role but also one anomaly, which concerns the second most important factor in the survey: the importance of having access to wood for heating and construction. Considering the relatively high energy prices and the insecure incomes in rural areas, it makes sense to use fire- wood from one’s own forests. In fact, most old farmhouses in the countryside are heated purely by wood and the option to use wood for heating in many city apartments provides a further incentive. For most owners, the least important factor seemed to be the possible incomes to be derived from the forest. In other words, support for the emotional hypothesis can be found, when not taking into ac- count the possibility to substitute costs for heating. Thus it seems to have been less important to ac- quire land for additional income possibilities than to regain family property and reconnect to the place where, e.g., cultivation of the land provides a certain meaning. The results in Table 9 also support some of the findings from Table 10. Emotional factors, together Table 8. Respondents’ ways of obtaining land and forest in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Respondents’ ways of obtaining land and forest (n = 276) Property 1 Property 2 Property 3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent A Restitution 83 30.1 20 18.7 6 15.8 B First refusal 28 10.1 28 26.2 7 18.4 C Purchase 63 22.8 21 19.6 10 26.3 D Inheritance 67 24.3 3 2.8 5 13.2 E Gift 30 10.9 21 19.6 6 15.8 F Parcelling 1 0.4 12 11.2 4 10.5 G Other 1 0.4 2 1.9 0 0 Total 273 98.9 107 100.0 38 100 Missing 3 1.1 Total 276 100.0 276 100.0 276 100.0 * Owners can possess more than one property (Property 1, Property 2, etc.). Only a few respondents declared possession of more than three properties. Table 9. Respondents’ valuation of motives for obtaining property in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Most important motives for obtaining property. 1 = most important, 5 = not at all important. (n = 276) Numbers Mean Std. Deviation Regain family property 189 2.1376 1.56834 Access to wood for heating and construction 220 2.3136 1.43243 Access to second home 174 2.4770 1.52704 Re-establish contact with family home district 177 2.4859 1.57071 Access to arable land for own use 213 2.5634 1.52401 Income possibilities 191 2.7644 1.44440 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 105Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … with some of the economic factors related to the household’s economic status, are to be considered as the most important. The statement “preserva- tion of nature”, in Table 10, is held by the respond- ents as the most important while “regaining former family land” is valued lower in Table 10 than in Table 9. This can be seen not only as a problem of consistency in the respondents’ answers, but also as the result of how they judge the relative impor- tance in relation to other statements in the ques- tionnaire. The high ranking of “preservation of na- ture” can be interpreted as an indicator supporting the idea that emotional motives and reasons for land ownership are more important than econom- ic gains. However, it can also be interpreted as a mirror of common environmental consciousness. Notably, the statement regarding the possibilities of “economic benefits” from the forest is ranked relatively low. In this regard it would be interesting to take a closer look at the individual landowners who stated that they had some income from the forest. After the respondents ranked the list of state- ments, they were asked to pinpoint the primary, second and third most important statements. Around 44 percent of the respondents pinpointed “access to wood and timber” for heating and con- struction as the most important factor among the statements. This time only four percent of the re- spondents ranked “preservation of nature” as the highest ranked factor, which could reflect the dif- ference between the individual’s private interest and the general public interest. From the outset, many owners show an interest in environmental protection and nature conservation, but when it comes to the individual’s private interest or choic- es, other factors such as limits on household sup- port and income become more important. Forest incomes Even though the survey supports the assumption that emotional reasons play an important role for the new landowners in Põlva County, and are seemingly more important than economic reasons, the economic gains from property are not absent. In the questionnaire, respondents were asked whether or not they had forestland. Almost two- thirds (63 per cent or 172 respondents) stated that they owned forestland, which implies that the rest of the respondents could not have any such in- come. The size of forest properties was generally small, and almost half the respondents (45 per cent) had forest properties smaller than 10 ha. Not very surprisingly, 60 percent of the respondents stated that they did not have any income whatso- ever from forestry. A reasonable assumption from this is that the size of property matters and larger forest property holders need to have higher in- comes from forestry. However, the number of re- spondents in our survey is too low to confirm this assumption. Only ten respondents stated that they in the last three years had incomes from forestry correspond- ing to 25 percent or more of their total income (Table 11). Among those with less income, 40 per cent stated that they had had some income from their forests during the past three years. It is in fact Table 10. Respondents’ valuation of land and land ownership in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. 1 = most important, 5 = not important at all n = 276 No. Mean Std. Deviation Access to wood for heating and construction 210 1.8095 1.09015 Access to berries and mushrooms 181 2.1934 1.14560 Economic benefits from the forest 170 3.0941 1.35981 Land for recreation 166 2.3373 1.22378 Preservation of nature 164 1.7866 0.83457 Land for hunting and fishing 155 3.9226 1.30700 Possible future place of residence 154 3.3831 1.49596 Work possibilities 152 3.7829 1.30672 Investment possibilities 151 3.2185 1.35102 Land for pasture 150 4.6533 0.75072 Regaining former family land 147 3.0884 1.61722 106 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström possible that more forest owners had income from forestry, but this income was unevenly distributed between different years. Since the questionnaire was limited to incomes covering the past three years, it may have had an impact on the responses from smaller forest owners, which do not harvest on a regular basis. From a five-year perspective, 27 percent of the forest owners have sold timber, on average 419 m3, which seems to be a rather modest volume before the number of small forest properties is considered. Emotional versus economic bonds The differences between forest owners who have regained property through restitution and those who have purchased their property in open market sales can be explained in terms of emotional and economic motives. A majority of the so-called emotional-categorized owners have obtained most of their property through restitution, inheritance or gift, while the economic-categorized owners mainly bought their land on the market. The sig- nificant difference between the two groups is due mostly to the expectation of additional incomes from the property among those in the latter catego- ry. With regard to accessibility to wood (for heating purposes), accessibility to arable land, and land for the possible location of a second home, no sig- nificant difference can be found between the two owner categories. However, the possibilities of re- gaining former family property and re-establishing family ties have a significant importance for the emotional category. When it comes to incomes from forestry, it is reasonable to believe that forest owners who have bought their land or forest need to have incomes from the properties to a larger ex- tent. However, the survey shows that the share of forest owners with restituted property declaring in- comes from land or forest property is higher than that of those who have bought their property on the market (Table 12). The share of owners who reside on their restituted – regained – property is also higher than that of owners who bought their land. As indicated by Table 13, the relationship to a specific place – the place of property – seems to be more important for owners who have regained former family properties. Owners with restituted property consist of indi- viduals who are much older than the group that has purchased their land. The average age in the restituted group was 59 years (median value is 62 years), while the average age for the other group was 52 years (median value 49 years). Discussion The multifaceted property system developing in Estonia after 1991 shows the existence of different rationalities for obtaining landed property. This is due to the experiences from shifting property rela- tions during Estonia’s first independence 1920–1940 and its associated land reform, which ended with the Soviet nationalization and forced collectivization after 1940. Bearing this in mind, our overall hypothesis, discussed in relation to the survey results, is based on the emotional bonds to land versus the future economic gains from landed property. The “emotional filter hypothesis”, based on the different emotional relationships to proper- ty, implies that while a certain size of property can be aspired to, e.g. on the basis of calculations on Table 11. Respondents’ percentage incomes from forestry and size of property, Põlva County, Estonia 2006. (n = 172) Distribution of incomes from forestry in percentage classes Total Size class 0% 0.5–4,99% 5–9.99% 10–14.99% 15–19.99% 20–24.99% More than 25% 1–9.9 ha 78 7 5 5 2 0 2 99 10–19.9 ha 19 3 5 6 3 2 0 38 20–29.9 ha 6 1 4 4 1 2 3 21 30–39.9 ha 0 0 3 2 0 0 2 7 40–49.9 ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 ha– 1 0 1 2 0 0 3 7 Total 104 11 18 19 6 4 10 172 % 60% 6.4% 10.5% 11% 3.5% 2.3% 5.8% 100% FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 107Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … how much land can be managed by a single own- er or household, the legal opening provided by restitution also allows for repossession of previ- ously expropriated land. In this later sense, histori- cal and symbolic values nourish an emotional strategy related to family history and the symbolic meaning of place (sense of place). Hypothetically speaking, it is possible that if the owner’s economic incentives are weak at the ex- pense of emotional bonds this can have a negative impact on the volumes of felling when too many owners consider the non-economic factors to be more important. On the other hand, the initial in- secure property arrangements during transition also opened up for frauds and illegal logging How- ever, needless to say, both the emotional and the economic rationales are stylized and must be re- garded as two kinds of extremes. The economic motives, which comprise both financial gains from the property as well as certain costs for maintain- ing and preserving the same property, e.g. taxes, maintenance and investments need to be regarded as long-term motives too. Yet, in the re-established Baltic market economies there are reasons to dis- cuss both the emotional and economic motives for obtaining property since it is in the light of the his- torical circumstances and the strong symbolic val- ues circumventing landed property that we need to understand the property reforms. When the il- legal Soviet confiscation of property was ended by restitution, it thus gave legitimacy to the previous owners and/or their heirs. Hereby, the regained family property materialized the owner’s relation- ship between family and geographical origin which then expressed the recognition of the years of unfairness. One example is e.g. the destiny of the Estonian-Swedes, which left Estonia in great Table 12. Respondents’ estimation of incomes from property. Respondents representing those who have obtained land through restitution (emotional owners) or purchases (economic owners) Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Questionnaire study. Transfer of property Important Neither Not important Income from property (n = 166) Restitution 37% 29% 34% Purchase 45% 16% 29% Access to wood (n = 195) Restitution 71% 11% 18% Purchase 61% 10% 29% Access to arable land (n = 186) Restitution 53% 10% 37% Purchase 62% 12% 26% Access to second home (n = 149) Restitution 57% 8% 35% Purchase 62% 16% 22% Regain family property (n = 162) Restitution 88% 6% 6% Purchase 38% 6% 56% Re-establish family connections (n = 151) Restitution 77% 6% 17% Purchase 34% 14% 52% Table 13. Income, place of residence and place relation among restituted and non-restituted landowners in Põlva County, Estonia 2006. Questionnaire study. (n=234) Transfer of property Income from own forests Living on the Property Place- relation Restitution* 74% 50% 100% Buying** 61% 28% 71% Total (number) 241 234 234 * Restitution also includes inheritances and gifts ** Buying includes buying land on the market or at auction 108 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström numbers in 1944 and after 1991 applied to have their former property restituted (Grubbström 2003). Restitution in itself is – and has been – a rela- tively complicated process. If land cannot be re- turned because of destruction or city expansion, the claimed land must be compensated with land somewhere else. An additional problem is the rel- atively split ownership structure characterized by small lots. Most forest properties are relatively small and the number of forest owners is quite high, which requires cooperation among the small-scale owners in order to maintain rational forestry. It is also conceivable that restitution has created a group of involuntary forest owners, which increase the probability of a worsened silvi- culture through a lack of genuine interest and knowledge. Another consequence concerns the distance between the owner’s residence and the location of the forest property, which can have a negative impact on the actual property. The emotional motives or bonds to property are often stronger than the economic ones. In our sur- vey the owner considers the economic returns from the property as being subjugated to the im- portance of place and a vertical support through generations. The owner is familiar with the land and finds the routes and paths, attends to the cul- tural and nature heritage, etc. To compensate for a public requirement of private land by replacing it with land located somewhere else is not always free from complications. While the economic loss- es can be compensated for, the emotional values are harder to both define and evaluate; it is hard to replace the affiliation with a certain sense of place with property located somewhere else. The results from our survey go in two directions. On the one hand, we find significant emotional bonds among those who bought land in compari- son with landowners who received land through restitution. This does not imply that the emotional landowners are uninterested in monetary returns from their property. In fact, we cannot say how much of the restituted land that was sold or par- celled out for site leaseholds for second homes or for other purposes. However, it goes without say- ing that landowners starting with restituted prop- erty might have ambitions to expand their posses- sion from buying neighbouring land. Others claim to see additional incomes from tourism, hunting and fishing activities. An interesting aspect of emotional ownership is to what extent it can affect the supply of wood if the economic returns from modern rational for- estry are subjugated to emotional ownership. Thus, if large shares of forest owners are guided mainly by emotional bonds, it may affect Estonian forestry in a negative way. This implies, on the one hand, that we may have an “emotional filter” linked to the ownership, which can aggravate the imple- mentation of modern forestry methods. On the other hand, the emotional factor also enhances for the preservation of the rich forest biotope Estonia developed during the Soviet period when forestry was not a main economic activity. Thus in the long-run there may appear restrictions on the sup- ply of timber for the Estonian forestry-based indus- try. It is possible that many small-scale land and for- est owners, in order to meet the demands of the forest industry, either try to sell off their property or to establish efficient co-operation with other prop- erty holders. During the past ten years, huge efforts have been put into developing forest-based indus- try like modern sawmills furniture industries, wooden houses, etc. This rapid development with- in the forest industry sector has caused a growing demand for timber, which also has had an effect on imports, mainly from Russia. Thus, environ- mental concerns, efficiency in forestry and the possibility to meet demand can be regarded as signs of this development. In this context the emo- tional filter hypothesis functions as a supply barrier that can have both positive and negative effects. One of the positive effects is related to environ- mental pressures, especially when the demand is high and the forests are more likely to face envi- ronmental problems like over-logging and mono- cultivation. If the small-scale forest property struc- ture is dominated or at least affected by emotional property concerns, it can have a protective effect on the forest resource as a whole, on the one hand. On the other hand, a small-scale forestry sector is not unique to Estonia. Sweden and Finland are also closer to this property structure. However, in Sweden and Finland the context differs from the perspective of the market institutions. In both cas- es, producers’ cooperative associations are essen- tial to both maintaining high productivity and re- ducing transaction costs. It is sometimes more important to be a property owner than to have economic gains from a prop- erty. This is in line with the “emotional filter hy- pothesis”, supported by, e.g., Lidestav and Nord- fjell (2005) and Mizaraite and Mizaras (2005). However, Lidestav and Nordfjell (2005)also show FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 109Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … that owners of restituted forests have more income from forestry than those who bought their proper- ties on the open real-estate market. We would ex- pect to find stronger economic motives among those who bought land on the market than we ac- tually did, which makes some of this study’s find- ings a bit contradictory. But it is necessary to stress that the families’ ties to the place of property are much stronger among restituted landowners than among others. Conclusions This study explores attitudes to forest property among forest owners in Põlva County in South- East Estonia. Even though our survey only covers One County it is likely to expect the existence of similar attitudes to ownership in other counties due to the relative size of Estonia and its historical property relations. It is however necessary to men- tion that there are profound differences in the de- mand for land, e.g. when comparing Põlva County with the Tallinn area and the coastal region. The historical settings and distance to population cen- tres are some factors which affect land-use. In the coastal regions it is clear that there is a higher de- mand of land for second homes and recreation and in these regions the market demand affects both the price of land and job opportunities (Grubbström 2003). However it is reasonable to believe that one general feature is constituted by the emotional ties to regained family property. Thus the respondents in our survey provide spe- cific understanding of land-use in present Estonia, not least with regards to emotional bonds to prop- erty. The emotional filter hypothesis expressed by the owner’s ambition to maintain the regained family property and thereby recreating family history continuity – in which other land-uses than modern forestry, e.g. nature and nature preservation has a pronounced role – have formed the general idea of this study. The results of the study partly support the idea that the emotional bindings to the prop- erty are strong and may give a negative impact on felling volumes. While it is difficult from this study to foresee the importance of the price elastics among forest owners’ and their willingness to im- plement rational forest methods it is however clear that the restitution process has been important for forming symbolic meanings of the importance of individuals’ vertical place relation. Around 50 % of the forest owners who regained land through restitution also live on the actual property. Further- more, all restituted owners have family connec- tions to the actual area or property. This feeling of having regained land – to possess – is also more important than any other factor, such as getting more land for economic use. It is also clear that many of the regained owners of small forest prop- erties seem to value the preservation of land higher than having economic returns from the property. The property holder in general regards the land as “safe” and many of them show very restricted in- tentions to turn towards commercial logging. One explanation may be that the properties are too small in order to create any significant contribu- tion to the household economy. However, the market demand in the last years has also been somewhat exceptional. With regards to the con- struction boom, accompanied by significant ex- ports of wood, this came to a halt in Estonia in 2007. In a long-term context we need to consider that since the Post-Soviet property reforms began, a relatively short period has passed. Writing in the midst of the financial crisis of 2008 and the expec- tations of several years of negative economic growth in Estonia, parts of the emotional rationale seem to make more sense. Today the relationship between emotional and economic motives for for- est ownership is perhaps not only a matter of emo- tional links or possible earnings from wood, but in as much related to the short-term impact from a down-ward business cycle. At least with regards to illegal logging and general demand, the current market situation may provide us with different in- terpretations in the forthcoming years. This may imply that the emotional ownership not only will continue to remain important in the future but also perhaps enable for the Estonian forests and forest owners to be better prepared for changes in de- mand in the years ahead. Figure 3 is an attempt to summarize and present an overview of the factors affecting the emotional ties to forest property in our study. Emotional ties can also be expressed as different approaches to place attachment. In Nordic migration research, place attachment is used as one explanation for the obvious stability of residence among the Nor- dic populations. Most people do not move often. A majority of the Nordic population remains settled in the same region throughout their life and those who once moved away are often inclined to return to their region of origin (Stjernström 1998, Garvill et al. 2002). In the context of the past fifteen years 110 FENNIA 186: 2 (2008)Jörgensen Hans and Olof Stjernström of transition and property reform there are certain- ly more motives than simply economic ones to consider in Estonia. Emotional ties, which to some extent can express the attachments established by previous generations, remain important. For many people it is also a strong symbolic action to re- claim the regained land that used to belong to their family. If emotional factors are important in the owner- ship of land and forests, one might suspect that the present small-scale owner structure may be incon- sistent with rational forestry. The result in this study points in more than one direction. In other nation- al contexts (Finland and Sweden), small-scale for- estry has proven to be possible to combine with highly rational and productive forest industry de- velopment. In a forthcoming article, we will there- fore explore and discuss the role and function of the producers’ co-operative associations for this development. The case of Estonia will here be elu- cidated from the perspective of the relatively low impact of co-operative structures in the post-1991 development in relation to the important role held by the producers’ co-operative associations, fore- most in agriculture, during the interwar independ- ence. REFERENCES Aastaraamat Mets (= Yearbook forest) (2005). 175 p. Metsakaitse- ja Metsauuenduskeskus, Tallinn. Allardt E (1975). Att ha, att älska, att vara: om välfärd i Norden. 238 p. Argos Förlag, Lund. Commission of the European Communities (2001). 2001 Regular Report on Estonia’s Progress towards Accession. 108 p, Brussels. Dahlin C-G (1999). Skogsbruket. In André G (ed) Bal- tikum i förvandling – jordbruk, skogsbruk, fiske, miljö, 101–140. The royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture & Forestry, Hållsta Entrikin, JN (1991). The Betweeness of Place: To- wards a Geography of Modernity. 196 p. Macmil- lan Education, Basingstoke. FAO (= Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2000). State of Forestry in the Fig. 3. Conceptual model of factors influencing emotional ties to a forest property FENNIA 186: 2 (2008) 111Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and … Region: Synthesis of National Reports on Forest Policy and Institutions. United Nations, Rome. Garvill J, E Lundholm, G Malmberg & K Westin (2002). Nöjda så in i Norden? – motiv och kon- sekvenser för dem som flyttat och stannat i de nor- diska länderna. Nord 2002: 6. 60 p. Nordiska Ministerrådet. Copenhagen. Grubbström A (2003). Sillar och mullvadar, Jordä- gande och etnicitet i Estlands svenskbygder 1816–1939. Geografiska regionstudier nr 55. 226 p. Uppsala University. Hain H & R Ahas (2005). The Structure and Estimated Extent of Illegal Forestry in Estonia. International Forest Review 7: 2, 90–100. Järvinen E, R Toivonen, P Kaimre (2003). The Infor- mation and Training Needs of Private Forest Own- ers in Estonia. Pellervo Economic Research Insti- tute Working Papers 61. 65 p. Helsinki. Jörgensen H (2004). Continuity or Not? Family farm- ing and Agricultural Transformation in 20th Cen- tury Estonia. 179 p. Department of Economic His- tory, Umeå University. Jörgensen H (2006). The Inter-War Land reforms in Estonia, Finland and Bulgaria: A Comparative Study. Scandinavian Economic History Review 54: 1, 64–97. Jörgensen H (2005). Subsistence farming in re-inde- pendent Estonia: expanded private plots! Acta Historica Tallinnensia 9, 69–94. Kuddo A (1996). Aspects of the restitution1of prop- erty and land in Estonia. In Abrahams R (ed). After Socialism – Land Reform and social change in Eastern Europe, 157–168. Berghan, Oxford, Kuuba R (2001). Changes in forest landscape in Esto- nia. In Mander Ü, A Printsmann & H Palang (eds). Development of European Landscapes, 713–717. Conference Proceedings Vol II. IALE European Conference 2001. Institute of Geography, Tartu Kõll A-M (1994). Peasants on the World Market. Ag- ricultural Experience of Independent Estonia 1919–39. 150 p. SBS No. 14, Almquist & Wiksell International, Stockholm. Kõll A-M (2003) Tender Wolves. Identification and Persecution of Kulaks in Viljandimaa 1940-49. In Mertelsmann O (ed) The Sovietization of the Bal- tic States, 1940-1956, 127–149. Kleio, Tartu. Lidestav G & T Nordfjell (2005). A conceptual Model for Understanding Social Practices in Family For- estry. Small-scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy 4: 4, 391–408. Lindgren U, Ö Pettersson, B Jansson & H Nilsagård (2000). Skogsbruket i den lokala ekonomin. Rap- port 4. 119 p. Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping, Lipping I (1980). Land reform legislation in Estonia and the disestablishment of the Baltic-German ru- ral elite 1919–39. 366 p. University of Maryland, Ann Arbor Michigan. Maa-Amet (Estonian Land Board) (2007). . 10.04.2007. Mizaraite D & S Mizaras (2005). The formation of Small-scale Forestry in Countries with Economies in Transition: Observations from Lithuania. Small- scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy 4: 4, 437–450. North DC (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. 152 p. Cambridge University Press, New York. Petterson Ö, U Lindgren & B Jansson (2002). Forestry Restructuring in Northern Sweden. In Socio-Eco- nomic Dynamics in Sparse Regional Structures. 29 p. GERUM Department of Social and Econom- ic Geography, Umeå University. Põllumajandus ministerium (Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Estonia) (2007a). . 01.06.2007. Põllumajandus ministerium (Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Estonia) (2007b). . 11.06.2007. Rabinowicz E & JFM Swinnen (1997). Political econ- omy of privatization and decollectivization of Central and Eastern European agriculture: defini- tions, issues and methodology. In Swinnen JFM (ed) Political economy of agrarian reform in Cen- tral and Eastern Europe, 1–32. Ashgate, Alder- shot. Relph E (1976). Place and placelessness. 165 p. Pion, London. Riigikogu (The Parliament of Estonia). . 05.06.2007. Roosmaa Ü (1999). Country Report on the Present Environmental Situation in Agriculture – Estonia. . 14.06.2006. Stjernström, O (1998). Flytta nära, långt borta. De so- ciala nätverkens betydelse för val av bostadsort. 199 p. GERUM, Department of Social and Eco- nomic Geography, Umeå University. Toivonen R, E Järvinen, K Lindroos & A-K Rämö (2005). The challenges of information service de- velopment for private forest owners: The Estonian and Finnish cases. Small-scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy 4: 4, 451–470. Tuan Y-F (1974). Topophilia. 260 p. Columbia Uni- versity Press. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. Unwin T (1997). Agricultural restructuring and inte- grated rural development in Estonia. Journal of Rural Studies 13: 1, 93–112. Widgren M (ed) (1995). Äganderätten i lantbrukets historia. 174 p. Nordiska Muséets Förlag, Stock- holm.