Value positions based on forest policy stakeholders’ rhetoric in Finland

Abstract

Abstract We have investigated value arguments concerning forest policy in Finland and reflected on their prevalence in an international context. The arguments of the organised stakeholders of current forest policy are analysed using semi-structured interview data and secondary material. We have categorised these arguments, and based on them, constructed value positions. The explorative rhetoric analysis reveals shared as well as conflicting values and beliefs. We have identified two dominating value positions: forestry position and nature position. The recognised core values include utility, property rights and value of nature, the utility dominating the policy discussion scene. A principal feature of the polarised policy field is a lack of trust. In addition to the polarisation, there is also a broad common ground in positions towards traditional rights of ownership and access to forests as well as on citizens’ rights to influence forest policy. In order to gain more influence in forest policy, both positions make an effort to redefine the concepts in the argumentation of the others.