Skógræktarritið - 15.05.2001, Qupperneq 124

Mobilisation capability
Low knowledge and relational
capital leads to a situation where
mobilisation capability is low, or
rather that the energy needed for
mobilisation to a certain level is
high. Only 40% of forest owners
know that there are change agents
locally that work to increase forest
activity, public agents included
(all communes have employees
working to increase forest activi-
ties). On the other hand, our qual-
itative studies have shown that
activities can increase a lot if
active forest owners work proac-
tively to motivate other interested
but inactive forest owners and if
the public advice system can co-
ordinate and give support to for-
est activities like forest road build-
ing, stimulate co-operation in log-
ging between owners etc.
Our recommendations to
increase forest activities are to
give maximum support to active
forest owners and to proactive
public employees and give them
the role of change agents (Healey
1997, Stöhr 1990). But mobilisa-
tion activities must build on
these facts:
1. Mobilisation activities must
respect that most forest owners
on the west coast are "hobby for-
est owners”, forestry is not an
ÍSFUGL
important part of family income
and can be so for very few. On
the other hand there are still, in
most communities, forest owners
that are genuinely interested in
their forest, that it is cultivated
and/or who can be activated in
forestry as a leisure activity.
2. Mobilisation activities must be
accepted and respected as a nat-
ural and important part of activi-
ties in public and other forest
organisations, Change agents
must be respected and stimulat-
ed and forest organisations must
recruit persons that have the per-
sonal abilities and interests
needed to be change agents.
References
Amdam, i. (1992) Local Planning and
Mobilization: Experiences from
the Norwegian Fringe, in M.
Tykkyiainen (Ed) Development
Issues and Strategies in the New
Europe, pp. 21-40. Aldershot:
Avebury.
Amdam, ). (1995) Mobilization,
Participation and Partnership
Building in Local Development
Planning: Experience from Local
Planning on Women’s Conditions
in Six Norwegian Communes.
European Planning Studies, Vol,
3, No. 3, pp. 305-332.
Amdam,). (1999): Forestry
Resources and Local Sustainable
Development. In Byron, E. and J.
Hutson (eds.): Local Enterprise
on the North Atlantic. Margin. P.
295-316. Ashgate. Aldershot. ISBN
I 84014 932 9
Amdam.). (2000): Confidence
Building in Local Planning and
Development. Some experience
from Norway. European Planning
Studies, Vol. 8, No. 5.
Amdam, J. Barstad and G.
Matland Olsen (2000): Kviforskal
vi avverke skog? Om ársaker til
manglande skogavverking pá
Vestlandet. Forskingsrapport nr.
40. Hogskulen i Volda og
Mereforsking Volda.
Healey, P. (1997) Collaborative
Planning. Shaping Places in
Fragmented Societies. London:
Macmillan.
Healey, P., A. Madanapour and C.
Magalhaes (1999): Institutional
Capasity-building, Urban
Planningand Urban Regeneration
Projects. In M. Sotarauta (ed.)
Urban Futures: A Loss of Shadows
in the Flowing Spaces? Futura
vol. 18. No. 3/1999. p. 117- 137.
Storper, M. (1997): The Regional
World. Territorial Development in
a Global Economy. The Guilford
Press. NewYork. London.
Stöhr, W. (Ed) (1990) Global
Challange and Local Response.
Initiatives for Economic Regener-
ation in Contemporary Europe.
London/New York: The United
Nations University. Mansell.
HÉRADSSKÓGAR