Behind the succes story

Finnish example

It is hard to write a critical analysis of Finnish forestry without undermining the idealistic notion that Finns and their forests coexist in perfect harmony in a way that the whole world should look up to.

Forests are an integral part of the Finnish national identity. Deep down, we are a forest people, descendants of the northern tribes of the taiga. These roots are evident in Finland even today - the so called "everyman´s right" guarantees public access to forests, where everyone is free to move around, camp and harvest berries and mushrooms.

Because of the crucial role it played during the post-war decades in Finland, forest industry was elevated as part of the Finnish national mythology and identity. It became close to being synonymous with the fatherland for people engaged in agriculture and forestry as well as monetary, energy and trade policy. Finland lives off its forests, was the slogan. The forest industry was seen as an inexhaustible source of wealth, like "Sampo" - the magical artefact spewing an endless flow of goods in the legend of Kalevala, the Finnish national epic. But from Kalevala we learn what happened next. According to the legend, a fierce fight breaks out over the possession of the wonder machine and, in the heat of the battle, it is smashed into pieces and scattered all over the seas of the world.

That is what has happened to the Finnish forest-Sampo, as well. Along with the so-called liberalization of the capital market in the late 1980´s, the entire capital framework established in Finland by the forest industry suddenly became fair game. The concentration of capital that had been created in Finland by Finnish labour and off the Finnish
forests was scattered all over by the global gales of worldwide digital monetary transactions.

Today, there is no such thing as the Finnish forest industry anymore. The majority of shares, employees and factories are outside the Finnish borders. Companies are driven by the return requirements of investors, not the national interest of a country called Finland.

Pulpwood from colonial Finland

It should be noticed, however, that even before the opening up of the national capital market things were not handled in a way that would have best served the national interest of the country.

According to the analysis by doctor Lauri Vaara, the Finnish standing sale system is promoting destructive methods of forestry. This kind of trade in logging rights corresponds to the primitive practice of renting forests common in the developing world. The standing sale system gives forestry companies a monopoly on buying and harvesting timber. As a
result, there are no independent entrepreneurs and no free competition in timber trade, logging or silvicultural services.

With too few entrepreneurs and too little competition, the Finnish forestry is as stagnated as a socialist planned economy. The business of buying and harvesting timber is dominated by a cartel of three major
companies that keep feeding their massive harvesters by carrying on with destructive cutting practices. To keep the machinery busy, forest owners have been deprived of their right to decide what goes on in their forest.

The most serious repercussion of the above has been the breaking of the backbone of sources of livelyhood in rural areas. The big depression that hit the countryside in the late 1960´s, and the "Great Migration" that followed, were directly linked to the introduction of the forest tractor replacing the more economical agricultural tractor, much of the
rural labour force and the sale of timber at delivered price.

All this is concealed from national policy makers by the corporative structures governing the forest sector in Finland. The system is like a closed circle, with the corporative government - against the basic principles of a constitutionally governed state - having been entrusted with forest counselling and even looking after the interests of forest owners. Accurate information about the state of forestry does not come out because the system uses censorship and avoids public debate.

Finland as a model country of family forestry

In today´s world, Finland likes to be seen as one of the world leaders in forestry with no major problems to deal with. An important catchword is family forestry. Choosing families as the emblems of the fundamentally closed and corporative Finnish forestry is a brilliant propaganda move, but it does not stand closer scrutiny. As shown by several glaring and well-documented cases, the legal protections enjoyed by forest owners, struggling with companies, corporate bodies and arbitrary legal interpretations, are nonexistent. An obligatory forestry fee is sustaining the monopoly on forest counselling by forestry societies, and the counselling is sustaining the practice of final felling through clear cutting. Also included is the obligation of the forest owner to buy seedlings and regenerate the forest by planting, causing considerable costs. One of the edicts of "official" forest counselling is the establishment of tree fields by low thinning. The practice is an impediment to growing close-grained, high-quality wood and brings great financial losses for the forest owner.

Weighing up the outcomes of intensive forestry

Professor Erkki Lähde added up the costs for the Finnish society and forest owners caused by the current practices of forest management over the last fifty years and concluded that the figure amounted to milliards. But the saddest thing of all is the fact that, at the same time, these same expensive practices have resulted in heavy financial losses and great ecological damage. Perhaps the most damaging thing of all, however, is the very logic of this general approach to forest management in Finland: growing trees in even sized stands of pines or spruces, then removing the whole stand by clear cutting and, finally, ploughing and regenerating the stand either through sowing or planting. Contrary to popular belief, this model promoted as "intensive forestry" is, in fact, neither profitable nor efficient - even if the ecological
damage and the problems related to wood quality were ignored. The scientific findings by professor Lähde and his team show that by drawing on the natural dynamics of a forest by growing mixed stands with uneven sized trees, the yield would be substantially higher even in terms of annual volume growth. Another big benefit of this so-called continuous
cover forestry is that the great cost of regenerating the stand and taking care of the saplings is avoided.

Suppressing problems and opposition

One of the reasons behind the present crisis and the lack of national insight into the essentials of Finnish forestry is the totalitarian atmosphere that stifles debate. Critical voices have been suppressed throughout the field of forestry. Attempts have been made to muffle any opposition voiced not only by scientists and forest owners, but also in public debate.

In 1993 the German newspaper Der Spiegel published a comprehensive report on the state of the boreal zone titled "Plunderers in the North". The piece highlighted the scale of destruction going on in boreal forests. But Finns refused to take a look in the mirrow. Instead of examining the newspaper´s analysis, a harsh and unprecedented campaign was launched to defame the activists, scientists and officials who had made negative statements to international media branding them as traitors to their country. Scientists and officials stayed completely silent and space for critical journalism and discussion on forests in the news media went down. The Finnish media were taken over by a broad
sense of complacency and the general consensus that Finland had no problems with forestry whatsoever. Similarly, debate on the deteriorating health of the forests has been suppressed.

Finnish forest policy as a tool for industry

In the absence of public debate, parliamentary debate has ended as well. For example, the Finnish Parliament did not have a serious discussion on forests when reforming the forest legislation in 1997, and the same goes for the 1999 drafting of the National Forest Program. Another example of this general approach is the fact that in the spring of 2003 as the Parliament was considering industry´s application for the fifth nuclear reactor in Finland, there was no discussion on forestry or alternative approaches to its development - despite the fact that the whole project was initiated by the forest industry. The electricity generated by the fifth nuclear reactor will be used for refining Russian spruces to mechanical pulp.


Considering that the issue of forests is nowhere to be found on the agendas of either the media or the Parliament, it can be argued that there is no such thing as Finnish forest policy as a manifestation of the will of the state - a peculiar state of affairs in a country that likes to underline the economic and cultural importance of its forests at every opportunity. The responsibility for devising strategies for forestry has been surrendered to the forest industry, while the official machinery, including the Parliament, has been relegated to rubber stamping what has already been decided. We can only guess to what extent even the officials representing Finland in forest issues at the international level have internalized a similar sense of subservience.

Finland and the world´s forests

Running parallel with the international promotion of the Finnish approach to forestry, a number of Finnish companies have set out to conquer the world. These are leaders in not only manufacturing pulp and paper and appliences for pulp and paper manufacturing, but in the business of making forestry machinery and forest consulting, as well. The positive images conjured up by Finland and its forestry have naturally played a major part in, for example, making the Jaakko Pöyry Group the world leader in forest consulting.

High time for an open debate

The problems related to forests in Finland and worldwide are of such magnitude that we simply cannot afford to go on entertaining our illusions about them wherever we live.

We should not content ourselves with admiring the facade, no matter how beautiful and carefully crafted. There is no better way for tracing the truth than through open dialog.

We sincerely hope this will help us see the situation more clearly and find suitable ways to tackle the problems we are facing.

Hannu Hyvönen
Journalist, coordinator for The Union of Ecoforestry

Erkki Lähde
Professor of silviculture

Lauri Vaara
Doctor of forest economics

Mikko Vartiainen
Jurist, natural resources law