Master’s Thesis, 60 ECTS
Social-ecological Resilience for Sustainable Development Master’s programme 2013/15, 120 ECTS
Learning to Adapt: A Swedish case study on adaptation of biodiversity
management within Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (SCA)
Hannah Rose Griffiths Word count: 9995
Stockholm Resilience Centre
Research for Biosphere Stewardship and Innovation
Acknowledgements ... 3
Abstract ... 3
Acronyms ... 4
Introduction ... 4
Problem statement ... 5
Overarching research aim and research questions ... 6
Theoretical Framework ... 6
Organizational learning and adaptive management ... 7
Organizational learning and environmental risk ... 9
Building adaptive capacity and implementing adaptive decisions ... 10
Understanding the factors that affect adaptation ... 11
Case study ... 13
The Swedish Model ... 13
Description of Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (SCA) ... 14
Description of adaptation options ... 14
Methods ... 17
Data collection ... 17
Data analysis and presentation of results ... 19
Methodological limitations ... 19
Results ... 20
Signal awareness and interpretation ... 20
Search for and articulation of solutions ... 23
Articulation of adaptation measures ... 27
Feedback and iteration ... 29
Ambiguity in feedback ... 31
Factors shaping organisational learning ... 31
Discussion ... 35
Awareness and interpretation ... 35
Search for and articulation of adaptation options ... 36
Feedback and iteration ... 37
Factors that affect adaptation ... 38
Conclusion ... 40
References ... 42
Appendices ... 52
Appendix 1: Organisational learning model ... 52
Appendix 2: BAC and IAA activities list ... 52
Appendix 3: Timeline ... 55
Appendix 5: Maps ... 69
Appendix 6: Interview Questions ... 73
Appendix 7: Experimentation and search ... 75
Appendix 8: Factors ... 76
Acknowledgements
Writing this project has been certainly a difficult but ultimately a rewarding process, hopefully with many lessons still yet to reap. This thesis would not have been finished without my loved ones whose constant support helped me to stay balanced and
persistent when things seem the most difficult. I’m forever grateful for your love.
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Åsa Gerger-Swartling for the useful comments, remarks and engagement through the learning process of this master thesis. Furthermore I would like to thank Gregor Vulturius my co-supervisor as well for the support on the way. Also, I would like to thank Miriam Hurtric, my program director, for being the voice of reason and whose advice has been invaluable.
I have to thank my peers also. It made all the difference that we were in the same boat and I feel certainly blessed to have had you as inspiration and lucky to have the
friendships to show for our years together. Best of luck wherever your roads take you.
Abstract
Achieving adaptation within an organisation occurs largely through the process of organisational learning. The identification of organisational learning cycles and the factors that influence an organisation’s adaptation can improve understanding of how organisations adapt to complex sustainability issues. To date, efforts to analyse the factors that affect organisational adaptation have not been researched extensively within the Swedish forest industry. In order to address this gap, an operationalization of the organisational adaptation model in a case study of a Swedish forestry actor, Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (SCA), has been carried out. This study uses the model presented in Berkhout et al. (2006) on organisational adaptation to articulate the role of organisational learning in establishing and implementing adaptation measures for biodiversity management within SCA throughout the 1980s-1990s. It also identifies the factors that determined this process. There is evidence that two parallel organisational adaptation cycles occurred within SCA that shaped the emergence of two key adaptation options on biodiversity within the company, the
Ecological Landscape Plan (ELP) and re-invention of SCA operations. Subsequently several factors were identified that affected this process of adaptation overtime including, mind-sets and values, employee skills, organisational culture and the context surrounding the company. This has implications for which adaptive measures may (or may not) be selected and carried out. Further research should be done to clarify which kind of innovations may be most effective to reduce the factors that act as barriers to organisational adaptation.
Acronyms
SCA Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget
SLU Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences ELP Ecological Landscape Plan
BAC Building Adaptive Capacity
BCC Biodiversity conservation and consideration ENGO Environmental non-governmental organization IAA Implementing Adaptive Action
SFA Swedish Forest Agency FSC Forest Stewardship Council
PEFC Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification HCVF High Conservation Value Forests
SSNC Swedish Society for Nature Conservation
Introduction
Forest systems are important complex social-ecological systems, contributing several important ecosystem services, including biodiversity (Filotas et al. 2014, Gamfeldt et al. 2013). Swedish forests have a long history of interlinking with human populations who continue to use them for multiple purposes including recreation, provisioning, cultural and production services. Contemporary Swedish forests have been shaped by human action over time and are characteristic of largely monoculture, production forests and only 7.5% of productive forestland comprised of mixed forest stands (Gamfeldt et al. 2013, Skogsdata, 2011). Recent research suggests that mixed forests
compared to monocultures provide a higher level of multiple ecosystem services and that nature conservation and forest production could benefit from more diverse systems of management (Gamfeldt et al. 2013).
Various drivers of change in the past decades have resulted in a model of Swedish forest biodiversity management that suggests management through retention forestry and biodiversity conservation from a tree to a landscape scale (Angelstam 1997, 2003, Simonsson et al. 2014). The overall environmental objective of the Swedish model is to ensure the persistence of all species within the forest landscape. This includes “the variability among living organisms from all sources, including inter alia, terrestrial, marines, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are apart: This includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems”
as outlined by the Secretariat on the Convention of Biological Diversity (Skogsindustrierna 2011, article 2).
Industrial private forest owners play a critical role in managing their forests to ensure the persistence of all species within the Swedish forest landscape. A small number of industrial private forest owners dominated by SCA Skog, Stora Enso, Holmen Skog and Bergvik Skog own some 25% of all forestland (Loyd, 2000; SOU 2007:60).
These organisations are some of the primary socio-economic units within which processes of adaptation to biodiversity concerns has taken place, even if their capacity to do so is influenced by the contexts and drivers within which they operate (Næss et al. 2005; Berkhout et al. 2006, Chapin et al. 2007, Simonsson et al. 2014, Ulmanen et al. 2014).
Problem statement
To achieve biodiversity management goals detailed management are required to be outlined by forest organizations for both biodiversity conservation and biodiversity considerations throughout harvesting. There are continuous challenges for organizations to understand the particularities of adaptation to signals that are perceived as being ambiguous and to assess their vulnerability and their own capacity to adapt (Pittock and Jones 2000).
Organisational learning studies have shown that often the dynamics of change result from simple, but often non-linear processes where building capacity may not guarantee implementation of decisions, posing challenges to understanding what factors lead to successful adaptation or not (Carley 2000; Rudberg et al. 2010, 2012).
This thesis takes a local-regional scale perspective to clarify what factors are influencing the adaptation of industrial forest owners by studying a single organization’s adaption to improve biodiversity management. Using a learning framework to articulate the processes of adaptation, it is possible to explore how these factors have influenced an organisation’s adaptation that led to the actual implementation of adaptation measures that to prioritize biodiversity management and conservation.
Overarching research aim and research questions
From a historical perspective, this thesis examines organizational learning for integration of biodiversity concerns by the forest unit (Skog) Swedish private industrial forest owner SCA. The aims of this thesis are to provide an articulation of organisational learning process within SCA Skog for the adaptation to biodiversity concerns and identity the factors influencing adaptation. This analysis will be done be examining the learning model that led to the implementation of two main adaptation options, the Ecological Landscape Plan and changes in harvesting methods.
To achieve these aims the research questions of this thesis are as follows:
• How has organisational learning led SCA Skog to adaptation of their biodiversity management?
• What factors have been shaping organisational learning within SCA Skog for adaptation?
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework for this thesis can be split up into sections on organizational learning and adaptive management, organisational learning and risk, building adaptive capacity (BAC) and implementing adaptive action (IAA) and understanding factors that affect adaptation.
Organizational learning and adaptive management
Organisations are considered “collectives that have agency” (Pelling et al. 2008). This a particularly suitable definition given the current Swedish model of forestry where forest policy deregulated the Swedish forestry sector and entrusted the main responsibility of achieving the environmental goals to the forest owners with the state providing among other things guidelines, training and advice to build the capacity of forest owners in sustainable forest management (Swedish Forest Agency 2006).
Adaptation can and has been in past research conceptualised as a process of organisational learning (Berkhout et al. 2006; Nelson and Winter 1982; Cyert and March 1992). The organizational learning model created by Berkhout et al. (2006) describes the processes, which lead to changes in an organization’s ability to co- ordinate knowledge and routines, behaviours and organizational outcomes (Rosenberg 1976; Argyris and Schön 1978, 1996; Dodgeson 1993; Berkhout et al. 2006, Wilby and Vaughan, 2011). This kind of organisational adaptation for improved resource management also links to the concept of adaptive management. Adaptive management as an approach to resource management was developed from ecological theories of resilience and promotes the implementation of policy as experiments to test them (Holling, 1978; Walters, 1986). Organisations select adaptation options based on experiences and search for appropriate adaptation options to respond to information that they receive. Adaptive management promotes learning (Lee, 2001) and organisational learning can be used to understand adaptation (Rudberg et al.
2010, 2012; Boyd et al. 2011).
This thesis applies the model or organisational learning presented in Berkhout et al.
(2006) as a way to understand adaptation of SCA routines to include biodiversity conservation. The various steps of the learning model applied in this thesis and how they are operationalized are in figure 1 and table 1 respectively. Together they form the basis of the analysis. Taking this approach makes it possible to develop an understanding of the obstacles and factors that influence how SCA Skog adapts to novel situations and identifying what kind of adaptation that entails.
Figure 1. The five steps in the model of organizational adaptation. A full explanation of these steps by Berkhout et al. (2006)
Elaborated definitions for these five steps in the model of organisational learning can be found in appendix 1. Forthwith, the steps presented here will be reduced into three steps to make them more operational within this analysis: awareness and
interpretation, search and articulation for adaptation options and feedback and iteration (table 1)
1) Signal recognition and interpretation
2) Experimentation and search for appropraite
adaptation
3) Knowledge articulation 4) Replication and
enactment of new routines 5) Feedback and iteration
Table 1 Operationalized steps of the Berkhout et al. 2006 organisational learning model
Routines are rules, procedures, strategies, technologies, cultures, beliefs that make up an organisation and determine the activities surrounding their management (Berkhout et al. 2006). The implementation of adaptation measures occurs by changing routines after current procedures in place are considered insufficient or not appropriate for the changing situation surrounding the organisation (Berkhout et al. 2006). Other research supports the finding that routines form an organisations operation and knowledge base and changing them may lead to adaptation and learning (Rudberg et al. 2010, 2012;
Nelson and Winter 1982).
Organizational learning and environmental risk
This thesis applies Berkhout et al (2006) organizational learning framework to explore empirically adaptation to biodiversity conservation and consideration concerns in a Swedish forestry context. Previous research on organizational learning has applied the same framework to adaptation of organizations to climate change risks (Cyert and March 1992; Levitt and March 1988; Nelson and Winter 1982; Arnell and Delaney 2006; Berkhout et al. 2006; Berkhout 2004; Hertin et al. 2003).
Aspect Operationalization Awareness and
interpretation This deals with the signals being received about biodiversity conservation, what environments that they stem from (ecological, political, social) and how those signals are being interpreted by the organisation (Berkhout et al. 2006)
Search for and articulation of adaptation options
This part of the process looks into the evidence of search and appraisal of different adaptation options that lead to their articulation though changes in routines and codification (Berkhout et al. 2006). Experimentation and search for adaptation options are the two different mechanisms that initiate the adaptation of organizational routines (Berkhout et al. 2006) Experimentation, “includes tacit accumulation of experience that occurs incrementally though the enactment of operating routines” (Nonaka, 1994) and search, “involves the exploration for alternative ways to respond where relevant knowledge and experience can be recombined to generate new adaptation options” (Nonaka, 1994)
Feedback and
iteration! The feedback from the implementation of the adaptation option that has been selected in the search for and articulation process will continue to validate its own implementation, or not, leading to new cycles of experimentation and search (Berkhout et al. 2006)!
The case study of this thesis uses this model to examine the adaptation that led to implementing two adaptive measures identified as: the Ecological Landscape Plan and changed routines in forest operations by SCA Skog.
Building adaptive capacity and implementing adaptive decisions
Adaptive capacity is defined by Nabuurs et al. (2007, 17.3.1) as “the ability or potential of a system to respond successfully to variability and change, and includes adjustments in both behaviour and in resources and technologies.” The presence of adaptive capacity within a system is a necessary condition for the design and implementation of adaptation strategies to reduce risk of negative outcomes for a company resulting from changing situations (Brooks and Adger 2005). Building capacity to adapt can be split into activities that in turn can be divided into two categories: those that build adaptive capacity (BAC) and those that contribute to implementing adaptive action (IAA) (Adger et al. 2005; Füssel and Klein 2006).
Table 2 captures some examples of activities that have been carried out by SCA Skog based on BAC and IAA concepts that are evidence of efforts to build adaptive capacity and activities to implement adaptive decisions around biodiversity conservation and consideration. A full description of activities can be found in appendix 2.
Table 2 Examples of IAA and BAC around biodiversity within SCA.
Previous research has suggested that the relationship between building capacity and implementing decisions is non-linear and that actually implementing adaption depends also on the factors that influence the adaptive capacity and not the presence of adaptive capacity alone (Carley 2000; Wilby and Vaughan 2011; Rudberg et al.
Implementing adaptive decisions Building adaptive capacity
• Implementing new methods in forestry for better conservation (Retention forestry and selective logging)
• Employing ecology specialists
• New landscape scale of management (Ecological Landscape Plan (ELP))
• Retraining of employees and running of education campaigns
• New routines: strategy and instructions including (Forest Stewardship Council Standards
• Changing perspective and beliefs of employees though education and building company knowledge
2010, 2012). Therefore this analysis extends to the factors that influence an organization’s learning processes to change and adapt operational activities that lead to the implementation of decisions.
Understanding the factors that affect adaptation
In order to understand which factors affected the processes of organisational learning, a matrix was used to compliment the learning model explained in the sections above (Berkhout et al. 2006). This matrix was used to assess and categorise factors both individual and organisational that influence adaptive capacity of organisations (Tweed et al. 2013). Factors are categorised into four areas: mind-set, values and related personal factors; skills and personal barriers; cultural barriers that affect the organisation and contextual barriers that affect the organisation (table 3).
Table 3 Factors that affection adaptation Tweed et al. 2013
Case study
The Swedish Model
In-depth research has been conducted on the driving forces, debates and implementation of biodiversity considerations within the Swedish forestry sector (Bush 2010, Lidner et al. 2010; Moen and Keskitalo. 2010; Simonsson et al. 2014;
Ulmanen et al. 2015). Since the 1960s, the Swedish forestry sector has undergone many policy changes that have led to the development of contemporary forestry as it is today (Simonsson et al. 2014).
The current “Swedish Forest Model” is based on a policy that can be summarized generally as a combination of government regulation and market driven voluntary regulations implemented by the forest industry (Skogsindustrierna, 2011). This gives landowners considerable freedom to make their own decisions about the aims of their forestry and the operations they wish to undertake while still requiring them to achieve all forest policy objective set out by the policy framework of sector responsibility (this includes voluntary standards to which they are committed) (Departementsserie 2014; Chapin et al. 2007; Barklund 2009; Jönsson and Gerger- Swartling 2014). Voluntary standards fill in for the lack of detailed prescriptive regulation in the Swedish forestry act (Visseren-Hamakers and Glasbergen 2007).
They consist of industry-led forest certification schemes including PEFC, FSC and ISO which provide principles and criteria for environmentally and socially responsible forestry (Forest Stewardship Council 2010). They each generate standards against which a company could be audited and, if successful, attached sustainability claims to products along a supply chain (Cashore et al. 2004, Gulbrandsen 2004).
Almost all industrial, private forest owners are now certified by one or more forest certification schemes (Johansson 2013). A full list of policies and regulations that make up the framework that guides Swedish forestry can be found in appendix 4.
Some of the overall key national trends that relate to biodiversity management over the last decades have been (also see timeline in appendix 3):
• Spread of ecological ideas beyond long-established scientific and academic circles into broader social and political spheres (Bush 2010)
• Debate with Environmental Non Governmental Organisations (ENGOs) shifts focus from the early mechanization of forestry, clear-cutting aesthetics and chemical use for tree production to focusing on the preservation of habitats for endangered species (Bush 2010; Simonsson et al. 2014)
• Swedish forest policy shifts, with the elaborate system of state forestry regulation essentially dismantled by the 1993 revision of the Forestry Act (Bush 2010). The mainstreaming of adaptation measure on biodiversity as part of sector-driven responsibility rather than establishing national policies (Nilsson et al. 2012)
• New voluntary standards on sustainable forestry adopted in 1995 (Lidner et al.
2010; Moen and Keskitalo 2010; Simonsson et al. 2014; Ulmanen et al. 2015).
Description of Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (SCA)
The Swedish company, Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (SCA) is the largest industrial private forest owner in Europe with a forestland holding of about 2.6 million hectares of which 2 million is used for timber production and is managed in five distinct forest districts (Johansson 2012). Maps of SCA forest holdings and forest districts can be found in appendix 5. The SCA Group develops and produces sustainable personal care, tissue and forest products. In 2014, sales amounted to approximately 104 billion SEK (SCA, 2014). In 1975, SCA acquired Mölnlycke Health Care, a leading Swedish producer of hygiene products, starting the transformation from a forestry company to a leading global hygiene and forest products company, which continues to expand into emerging markets (Johansson 2012).
Description of adaptation options
This thesis focuses on the process resulting in the two adaptation options that have been implemented by SCA that are described below. A description of these adaptation options is necessary to put the adaptation into a greater organizational context and is based on the grey literature from SCA. Arnell and Delaney (2006) define adaptation options as the set of options that are potentially available to an organization to deal with possible climate and other changes in the context surrounding the organization.
They also specify that some adaptation options “will be more feasible than others, for technical, legal, economic or cultural reasons”
Biodiversity in operations
Within SCA, biodiversity considerations in operations are defined during the planning stages. Alternative methods normally refer to the alternatives that replace final felling through retention forestry (clear-cutting). It should be noted that most alternative methods used only became possible to implement after the 70s when huge felling machines were replaced with harvesters that were much smaller and manoeuvrable. A list of the various treatments and examples of considerations that have been outlined in SCA documents can be found in table 4.
Table 4 Biodiversity measures in operations (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget 2013)
Biodiversity considerations are also made through the “maintenance and preparation”
stages prior to final felling though specific examples were not found (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget, 2013)
As outlined by the SCA strategy on forest management (2013), selective logging is a broad concept that aims to achieve a more continuous forestry in the landscape by breaking up single-age stands. The remaining forest is harvested through retention
forestry, which is clear-cutting with retention of boarder zones and groups of trees (10trees/ha).
Ecological Landscape Plan (ELP)
The second aspect of SCA biodiversity conservation is the Ecological Landscape Plan (ELP) that is used to delineate management areas based on their particular biodiversity management requirements. The two adaptation options are linked through the ELP because the specific biodiversity management changes in operations are captured in the ELP (figure 2). Layers one to three contain GIS data and delineates the different forest types and layer 4 is the decision making layer to identify the management method. The GIS data and forest information is collected through inventories is managed in the ELP. The goals of the ELP are to define geo- referenced areas where alternative management methods will be used including protection from harvesting and re- creation of forest types that are in “short supply”
meaning that the re-creation of important biotopes if necessary. The current goals for areas of forests rich in broadleaves, stratified and pine forests and for annual area burned (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget 2010).
Figure 2 The SCA Ecological Landscape Plan (ELP) Layers.
Rather than focus on describing the adaptation options themselves, the focus of the analysis will be on the organisational learning process and the factors that influence this process and indirectly affect why these two options outlined here were selected and implemented.
Methods
Data collection
To answer both research questions (refer to research aims and questions section) a qualitative approach was chosen to capture aspects of organisational learning such as departmental interactions, understanding and experience, knowledge building specifically looking into individual roles in the learning process, overall process description and forecasting (Schneeberger et al. 2007).
The first research question addresses the articulation of organizational learning, which gives descriptive results since it is asking how learning on biodiversity is being carried out within the company. The second research question leads to more explanatory results since it aims to identify organizational learning factors that can account for the adaptation that has taken place. In-depth, semi-structured interviews provide the necessary flexibility to allow for a dialogue setting while still maintaining a level of reliability and consistency in the information gathered. An interview guide was used in all interviews and can be found in appendix 6.
Selection of informants
The selection of participants was based on snowball sampling (Conde and Lonsdale, 2005). This technique appeared to be a good option as the focus of the study is on a network of people within SCA Skog and their interactions. To avoid overlooking important stakeholders, an informal comparison was made between people recommended in the snowball sampling and those suggested by respondents that were also relevant individuals. The respondents were sorted into two groups based on either working outside or inside SCA and are referred to in text by allocated individual letters (A-O) as part of the ethical agreement adopted for this thesis to keep individual identities protected.
There were two separate sets of interview questions for the two different groups of respondents:
• Group 1: SCA employees that were involved in the prioritization and implementation of biodiversity conservation measures.
• Group 2: Researchers from SLU that are experts in biodiversity conservation and consideration or have worked with SCA on biodiversity management.
When selecting participants for Group 1, a decision was made to focus on interviewing operational staff that worked closely with biodiversity conservation and consideration during the 1980s and 1990s when SCA formally introduced biodiversity consideration measures. Earlier research suggests that search and assessment for adaptation options are predominant in anticipatory adaptation mainly takes place in management levels (Berkhout et al. 2006) but it was unclear if this would be similar for biodiversity adaptation. Furthermore after a preliminary scoping of individuals who worked with implementing biodiversity conservation and consideration methods it appeared that key individuals in this processes were operational staff within SCA Skog.
Theoretical extraction of questions
The interview questions for Group 1 were extracted from theoretical elements of the work on organizational learning and followed the steps of the learning model (see theory section). This type of extraction has been used in previous research, including research on climate change adaptation by the Stockholm water sector (Rudberg et al.
2010, 2012).
The interview questions for Group 2 were focused on gathering outside perspectives and information on signals and the greater context that may have impacted organisational learning within SCA. The same theoretical extraction used for Group 1 could not be made for Group 2 since the knowledge and insights of outside researchers on internal SCA processes would be highly limited.
After the collection of initial data it was deemed necessary to explore further the perception of SCA employees on the implementation of adaptation measures and therefore a second set of complementary interviews was conducted for participants in Group 1. To reduce the risk of posing leading questions, throughout the development of the extraction process and when follow up questions were posed to validate the answers, they were done in line with Kvale (1996: 158) qualitative research steps for forming neutral questions.
Semi-‐structured interviews and grey literature review
The questions were then used to guide the semi-structured interviews. In total 14 interviews were carried out throughout November and December 2014. Moreover two follow up interviews were carried out to clarify and validate information in March 2015. Each interview was approximately an hour and a half to two hours in length and was transcribed in full by the author shortly afterwards.
The interviews provided a rich source of information on biodiversity management in SCA and implications for future biodiversity management. The interview results were then compared, when possible, with SCA and externally written documents-such as forest harvesting strategies, conservation guidelines, research reports and articles, operational instructions, on biodiversity management to ensure validity of the results.
Data analysis and presentation of results
Extraction of emergent themes
The data analysis was a combination of descriptive themes from an inductive procedure to structure the data and a more deductive way to analyse the data by the theoretical factors from the framework by Berkhout et al. (2006).
Following the steps outlined by Schutt (2012), after the data collection process a computer assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) called MAXQDA was used to extract data from all interviews based on the organisational learning model and its various steps.
Methodological limitations
It is acknowledged that there is always a risk that selected actors within a single stakeholder group such as an organization which might result in a biased selection where only those who were interested, motivated or feel that they have a responsibility (i.e. those who identify themselves as stakeholders) participate, while those who are not convinced they are a stakeholder choose not to participate (André et al., 2012). However, the above comparison between individuals recommended participating and those identified through snowball sampling attempts to mitigate the bias in this selection process.
While external communication material on biodiversity conservation has been in English from as early as 1987, only more recently have SCA Skog started producing internal documents and materials in English such as the forest harvesting strategies and instructions for harvesting. This makes some of the terminology difficult to understand but when it was needed the documents were translated into English.
Results
The results section below follows the basic organizational learning model outlined by Berkhout et al. (2006) including signal recognition and interpretation, search and articulation for solutions and feedback and iteration.
In order to answer how organisational leaning has led SCA Skog to adapt to
biodiversity concerns, the first part of the results section focuses on the three steps of awareness and interpretation, search and articulation for adaptation options and feedback from and iteration of adaptation options as outlined in the theoretical framework.
Signal awareness and interpretation
Awareness
Results from the in-depth interviews suggest several key external signals that were relevant to SCA to prioritized biodiversity during the period of 1980-1990- the most active period of establishing activities on biodiversity management and where the most significant results were found. These signals came from a range of origins (i.e.
political, economic or social), which changed in importance over time as they increased or decreased in intensity (table 5).
Table 5 Key signals and their origins
Amongst all participants, widespread criticism by ENGOs was considered the most consistent and high-risk signal to SCA over time. This indicates generally that reputational risk was one of the most significant threats to the SCA organization that motivated implementation of adaptation options (C, D and N, interviews)
Respondents from Group 2, provided examples of how the impacts of some signals are not easily singled out and that some signals were most effective when occurring in combination with one another (C, D and N, interviews). For example, the intensification or research and establishment of the red-list species affected by Swedish forestry was mobilized by ENGOs in the biodiversity debate. One result of this was that SCA consumers began to demand sustainable and biodiversity friendly forestry and put pressure on SCA to establish better biodiversity management in their forests.
Interpretation
The signals that were identified by the company were only salient enough to establish action on in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This was a period where the most significant shift in interpretation occurred and this process can be split up into four stages (the key features of which are captured in the dark grey box) and the resulting response from SCA in the light grey box (figure 3). The first stage is a period where SCA interpreted the criticism from ENGOs as part of an information problem or poor communication by forest companies. The response was to increase and broaden
Signals Origin
Widespread criticism from environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOS)
Political
Intensification of research and the development of the red-list of threatened species
Ecological
Change in national legislations to favour biodiversity including new harvesting methods
Regulatory
Increasing demands from SCA customers for “sustainable” raw materials and ultimately the voluntary forestry certifications FSC and PEFC
Market
communication and collaboration. The second stage was a recognition that biodiversity was not a communication issue and searching for a response to why criticism intensified even after communication improved. The third stage indicated a shift away from communication as a solution to activities to Build Adaptive Capacity (BAC) and Implementing Adaptive Action (IAA) like educational campaigns and implementation of the ELP and FSC standards. The red-box in figure 3 highlights the period of shifts in interpretation of signals. The final stage is that FSC is achieved and is an acceptable and a suitable response to the biodiversity issue by SCA and NGOs, the key responses were to maintain this certification without exploring too many alternative options to improve performance.
Figure 3 SCA interpretation of signals overtime.
Some respondents linked interpretation and awareness by suggesting that it was the not just the presence but persistence of signals that eventually led SCA to interpret the biodiversity issue as something that should (be positively) and could be affected their forest management strategies (A, B, H, interviews).
Responses'
!
!!
!!
! SCA''
Interpreta/on' ''
'
1970s! 1980s!! 1990s! 2000s!
• Intensify!and!
broaden!
communica8on!
Beyond!informa8on!
issue!and!search!for!
response!
ENGO!focus! Clear!cuBng! Single!Species! Biodiversity! FSC!Standards!!
• Ecological!
Landscape!Plan!
(ELP)!
• New!methods!
implemented!
• Inventories!
• FSC!
!
!
Educa8on!and!
Implementa8on!
“Enough”!to!
focus!on!
maintaining!FSC!
• Unlearning!
• Building!
human!
capacity!
• Developing!
new!methods!
• New!Policy!
• Instruc8ons!
! Informa8on!
Problem!
1 2 3 4
A full timeline covering the period between 1920s-2000s can be found in the appendix 3.
Search for and articulation of solutions
Respondents had difficulty describing the specifics of the internal selection process between adaptation options based on their performance indicators, which may be a result of weak feedback processes (see result section on feedback and iteration). It was easiest for them to distinguish between resulting activities on building adaptive capacity and implementing adaptive action rather than the articulating the search mechanisms behind these activities (B, M, I, K, interviews). The following section reflects the delineation between BAC and IAA activities.
Building Adaptive Capacity (BAC)
The grey literature produced in this period supports the stages in figure 3 where early phases are characteristic of building knowledge and establishing policy (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget Skog, 1987a, 1987b).
Initial response was to build their human capacity by hiring a communications expert rather than an ecologist to deal with what they thought was mainly an “information problem” while continuing to abide by Swedish laws relating to retention forestry.
“The perspective was that SCA was already implementing retention of old trees in favour of biodiversity but that this fact was not being effectively communicated to the general public and NGOs” (G, interview)
Towards the end of the 1980s the management perspectives and internal SCA policies begin to shift towards formalizing explicit consideration of biodiversity in and beyond retention forestry by changing routines on conservation and final felling. Beyond this there is little evidence of formalized implementation of biodiversity management in SCA in grey literature produced by the company.
Implementing Adaptive Action (IAA)
This phase of building adaptive capacity is followed by a stage of shifting interpretations. This stage was characterised as actual implementation of the
adaptation measures: the ELP and changes in operations (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget, 1995). Several respondents suggested beginning implementation reflected that the key signals on biodiversity were actually no longer interpreted as just an information problem and there was need to move beyond BAC and begin IAA.
Some activities identified in grey literature as indicating the beginning of shifting interpretation towards IAA were:
• Development of new measures for their operations and began discussions on biodiversity conservation.
• Establishment of SCA regional scientific advisory boards on plants and forest systems.
• Internal negotiations on long-term investments for improving the forest resource and SCA forest management.
• Conceptualization of adaption measures: ELP and changes in operations (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget 2010a, 2010b, 2012).
In the early 1990s, Pressure from ENGOs became more intensified and targeted specific companies. Various actors were already discussing the process of establishing some kind of voluntary forestry standards to fill the gaps in Swedish legislation.
Some activities identified in grey literature as implementing IAA were:
• Involvement of SCA in discussions with ENGOs in the early FSC standard setting process.
• SCA FSC certified in 1995 and implements adaptation measures to meet their environmental goals (see case study section) that were subsequently re- enforced by the FSC.
• Production of new instructions to ensure adaption measures was implemented on the ground. These were then revised frequently.
• Widespread and formalized understanding of biodiversity needs and strategies on management throughout the company (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget 2010a, 2010b, 2012).
Respondents also described the selection process as being carried out through iterative dialogues between SCA Skog unit and SCA management that were driven by some
key individuals (B, M, I, K, interviews). The same key individuals were highlighted as a critical factor that impacted adaptation (see result section on factors that affect adaptation section).
Some respondents disagreed with the description that this process was iterative and discussion based. They stated that actually there is little experimentation when it comes to adaptation measures for biodiversity and that deciding what adaptation measures to take was actually a process of “knowledge guessing” or a more intuitive approach based on research (B, H interview).
Evidence of mechanisms
Trial and error and search were the two key mechanisms considered in this analysis.
The following section explores the examples of these mechanisms provided by respondents that SCA used to find suitable adaptation measures. For the clarity of this analysis, it is limited to examples that are internal to SCA and part of collaboration with outside researchers. However, it is acknowledged that much trial and error and search is conducted by outside researchers that may impact SCA and therefore are included in appendix 7.
Respondents were able to provide few examples, that relate to biodiversity management directly but those that are viewed as relevant are captured in tables 6 and 7. These tables outline the mechanism type, where this process was occurring (internally or in collaboration with outside researchers), the example itself and description of how this mechanism relates to activities on BAC or IAA.
Table 6 Examples of trial and error mechanisms within SCA and in collaboration
It is difficult to pin point clear example of trial and error experimentation and search for new adaption measures on biodiversity. Examples of trial and error relate mostly to changes in SCA operations. Apart from the experimentation in harvesting, other examples of trail and error were refining data collection in inventories on high conservation value forests (HCVF) and changing operations for HCVF areas that are captured in the ELP (table 6).
Examples of search for the new adaptation options were also vague. Those that were provided mainly related to searching for harvesting levels and search for the
appropriate level of set asides for biodiversity (table 7).
Mechanism Scale Examples Impact on activities Respondent
Trial and error
Inside SCA 1) Data collected on presence of
biodiversity of HCVF as part of a field planning process within SCA 2) Small studies on forest fires in the northern part of Sweden
• Informs discussion about how to go about conservation.
• Boarders and boundaries of the harvest areas and conservation areas.
• Experiments like the ones of fire to see if routines and instructions are working. Try to investigate if this makes SCA successful in managing conservation.
• Not to determine hard or fast rules that applies everywhere though.
H, C, A, K
Collaboration 2) Experimentation in thinning: pre- commercial thinning and thinning.
• Determine the intensity and best timing there will be close contact with universities. This new knowledge and possible new routines are then discussed in a group and with the director.
H, B
Table 7 Examples of search mechanisms within SCA and in collaboration
Articulation of adaptation measures
Adaptation measures are articulated through a process of codification. Codification refers to actual changes in organization routines and way of working (Berkhout et al.
2006). This is a necessary process to enable the implementation of adaptation measures and stimulation of “new behaviour” throughout the organization (ibid).
Codification of biodiversity into SCA occurs at several organisational levels.
Biodiversity and fibre sourcing is one of SCA’s three sustainability targets (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget 2013). The biodiversity preservation aspect of this is a company wide goal and its actual operationalization occurs within the SCA Skog unit.
Two strategies that relate to higher-level SCA biodiversity management goals identified by SCA are:
• Biodiversity preservation at a landscape level is the overriding environmental goal where all natural species should be present in viable populations
(Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget Skog, 2013)
Mechanism Scale Examples Impact on activities Respondent
Trial and error
Inside SCA 1) Data collected on presence of
biodiversity of HCVF as part of a field planning process within SCA 2) Small studies on forest fires in the northern part of Sweden
• Informs discussion about how to go about conservation.
• Boarders and boundaries of the harvest areas and conservation areas.
• Experiments like the ones of fire to see if routines and instructions are working. Try to investigate if this makes SCA successful in managing conservation.
• Not to determine hard or fast rules that applies everywhere though.
H, C, A, K
Collaboration 2) Experimentation in thinning: pre- commercial thinning and thinning.
• Determine the intensity and best timing there will be close contact with universities. This new knowledge and possible new routines are then discussed in a group and with the director.
H, B
• The conservation strategy where conservation is taken into account whenever a treatment is done in the forest (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget Skog, 2013)
At a lower scale the actual establishment of strategies, instructions and routines on biodiversity was and is still handled by the Silviculture department. There have been more than five sets of instructions for nature conservation in final felling between 1987 and today (B, interview). All instructions that relate to biodiversity management throughout this period were written by the SCA ecology specialist and the chief forester and subsequently put through a deliberation process with other individuals within the unit to discuss the implications of these routines (B, interview). The resulting re-writing of instructions and routine requirements are then managed digitally (E, G, interviews).
The two main adaptation measures selected and implemented by SCA are captured in following strategies to meet the management goals outlined above:
• The Ecological Landscape Planning (ELP) strategy to achieve the
preservation and creation of variation in biotopes, structure and substrates to ensure survival of the species found in SCA forests (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget Skog, 2013)
• The alternative forest management strategy that aim at enabling wood harvesting while preserving and or enhancing conservation values,
social/recreational values and to minimize disturbance on reindeer husbandry.
The alternative methods employed such as selective logging or shelter wood regeneration are articulated in the ELP (Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget Skog, 2013)
The ELP relates to the planning required to achieve the strategy on biodiversity preservation at a landscape level and changes in harvesting operations is related to the second conservation strategy on treatments (operations) in forests.
The strategies and instructions are made effective through planning and operations of SCA. The instructions apply at a landscape level and therefore site-specific
considerations will be clearly defined in the planning process by the planning and operation sub-units (E, interview). Therefore both the planning and operations sub-
units will go out into the forest sites to describe what is important for the operators to notice during harvesting (E, interview). Based on past research, this is evidence of organisational learning since the codification of adaptation measures into routines (in this case instructions and strategies) has led to their implementation in both operations and the ELP planning (Berkhout et al. 2006; Rudberg 2010)
Feedback and iteration
There is some evidence of feedback from the ecological and regulatory environment into SCA’s management system through inventories and auditing. It appeared difficult for some respondents to articulate the feedback processes and therefore focused on the effectiveness of setting explicit aims in using selective logging such as deciding which group of species you are doing an action for rather than the feedbacks from the resulting application of biodiversity management methods (I, A, interview). Below I have categorised examples of these feedback processes are outlined below:
Internal inventories: are carried out by SCA, which were initiated as part of building adaptive capacity though increasing knowledge of biodiversity the forest landscape.
The nature inventories identify HCVF patches and objects within harvesting sites to ensure they are retained through harvesting. The GPS units of these HCVF patches and objects that are found are fed into the ELP and new areas can be added or subtracted depending on what the needs of the site and area require and ensure that the requirements of the FSC standards (B, interview).
“When a key habitat is identified we always have to have a dialogue with the national forest agency (Skogsstyrelsen)… It should always be documented from this and then we include it in our Ecological Landscape Plan” (M, interview)
Harvesting inventories are also conducted every first or second year by the SCA Skog operational units to assess the total standing wood volume (m3) in each forestry district (H, G, B, interviews).
External inventories: carried out by SLU. Takes an inventory of the amount of structures through SCA forest districts such as the amount of old forest and broadleaf forest, the amount of deadwood etc. This information on key habitats and voluntary set asides are collected into an online database called Protected Forests hosted by
Skogs Industrierna (The Swedish Forest Industries Federation). Information from SCA Skog is collated with information from other large forest owners to create an accurate record of these HCVF areas. As a result a map is produced that can be used by any outside organization or individual to verify correct information and report changes within the forest landscape.
Internal auditing: of SCA routines requires production supervisors to follow up on harvesting teams four times per year using a checklist that reinforces the FSC standards. It looks specifically into the biodiversity considerations from planning to harvesting and post-harvesting on every site.
“It is important within a company to know what is actually going on and what the results of our various actions are. There are different reports, which are spread within the company to compare different forest districts” (A, interview)
External auditing: is part of certification processes carried out by a third party certification body to ensure that certification standards are being met. Corrective Action Request (CARs) detailing the violation and recommendations for action may be issued if a complaint is filed against SCA by other third parties that indicate a violation of FSC standards this requires additional auditing.
Inventories are a source of information intake on the state of biodiversity in the forest landscape and part of the set of activities that build adaptive capacity by building the ecological knowledge base. This is a key processes that feeds new information into the ELP so that operations can be changed and adapted when new HCVF are identified, re-enforcing the effectiveness of the ELP as an adaptation measure.
The feedback from the internal and external auditing processes mainly makes changes in instructions for operations. The observed auditing processes seem only to follow up if management processes are according to the instructions rather than their affects on biodiversity (H, G, B, I interviews)
Therefore, feedback processes indicate that there is new information coming into SCA upon which they are deciding to continuously iterate the ELP and changes in operations.
Ambiguity in feedback
There was some ambiguity relating to the goal of external auditing carried out through the FSC standards. Some respondents perceived that auditing provided information only on whether management standards are being met but not if their actions are having a positive effect on biodiversity conservation (A, interview) Respondents that were identified as central to setting up SCA biodiversity management stated that SCA is not following up if their management is successful for biodiversity or not overall (H, G, B, I, interviews).
One key respondents agreed that SCA deals with this my managing many different kinds of species and therefore have to use a mixture of management methods (G, Interview) but again, the feedback does not give more detailed insight into what management mixtures are most effective for managing biodiversity.
This ambiguity seems to stems from confusion between what this information from feedback is actually revealing may mean that other potential adaptation measures may effect which adaptation measures will be successful re-iterated in the future.
Factors shaping organisational learning
The second part of the results section focuses on the factors that affect the adaptation process articulated above. This is most easily done by taking the two adaptation measures identified, the Ecological Landscape Plan and biodiversity considerations in operations (see case study), and then exploring which factors were identified by respondents that influenced the organisational learning cycle and why these adaptation measures were selected.
Based on the definitions provided by Tweed et al (see theoretical framework) the following categorise can be applied empirically to factors affecting adaptation that have been identified by individuals to give insights into their potential impacts (table 8). The factors in red are those factors described as impeding adaptation and the
factors in green are those factors enabling adaptation. A more detailed description of these factors and corresponding respondent quotations can be found in appendix 8.
Table 8 Factors affecting adaptation
Mind-sets and values
As found in the interviews, the major factors that relate to individual mind-set, values and personal factors included some cognitive barriers in accepting the biodiversity issue as a relevant issue to the organization. Resistance to change was also associated with the perceptions of difficulties and costs involved in establishing new
implementation systems. These conative barriers were stated as a general issue for individuals throughout the company but several respondents suggested that this stems also from a lack of management conviction on the biodiversity issue, which is
significant as decisions about what adaptation options are selected and implemented occur mainly at a management level.
One factor that positively influenced the mid-sets and values of employees were attributed to the motivation of key individuals that made the case for biodiversity within SCA and pushed it onto the SCA management agenda.
“(Key individuals)…were crucial in driving for the implementation of landscape planning models and is instrumental in driving internal change by being a strong character and by finding pragmatic approaches to this whole area which was very controversial for SCA for economic reasons” (K, interview).
Skills
Lack of knowledge about the management impacts of current SCA biodiversity policies made it difficult to establish detailed routines and appropriate limits like boarder zones or retention forestry. One respondent suggested that the process of establishing this seemed like a process of “informed guessing” (A, interview). This ambiguity in the impacts of management on biodiversity relates to another factor, which is lack of people with biodiversity knowledge to link the management to impacts and perhaps the lack of research in this area by SCA.
Hiring specialist in ecology and enhancing the skills of employees through education was one factor that most respondents identified as positively impacting adaptation and the successful implementation of adaptation options (H interview)
Cultural factors
Economic factors are contextual and cultural factors that impact an organisation’s costs and budget allocated to biodiversity conservation and considerations. Economic incentives dominated the framework of SCA biodiversity management early in the establishment of early SCA work and thinking on biodiversity (H, O, interviews).
Biodiversity has risen in priority within the company as it action to implement the ELP and FSC were deemed as being profitable options and long-term economic investments (A, interview)
Other factors that relate to the organizational culture of SCA is unclear problem definition, which relates also to not having key individuals to define the problem and therefore appropriate action within the organization and conflicting internal objectives and misunderstanding between management and operations.
“Ultimately the decisions on what methods of responding to new information is done at a higher level in the organization. Sometimes it is a struggle because we are not understanding one another at these different levels” (M, interview)
Contextual factors
Financial ambiguity surrounding biodiversity management is one factor that was identified by respondents and negatively affecting this process. Since economic factors form a large part of the organizational culture it can be expected that financial ambiguity surrounding biodiversity management may feed resistance of implementing alternative adaptation options in the future if the current costs cannot be calculated.
Rules and regulations such as the FSC certification processes were identified as being a barrier to future adaptation on biodiversity conservation. More specifically, the complex processes, extensive requirements and high costs of maintaining FSC means that little resources (capital and labour) are left to explore alternative adaptation options that may prove to be more favourable to biodiversity. Respondents gave no suggestions to what these alternatives might be but they correlated current process orientated work as a barrier to SCA’s adaptation on climate change, which relates directly to biodiversity.
“(More efficient conservation)…cannot be done given SCA have to set-aside a certain amount of trees in each area. They have to follow this rule even if they this is it less efficient because otherwise they will fail the audit” (O, interview)
The uncertainty of research on biodiversity was also identified as being a factor affecting the process of formulating adaptation options. There was a lack of research on what the “best methods” are for biodiversity management since the requirements of species are very specific and therefore a broad landscape approach was selected (G, interview)
Discussion
Awareness and interpretation
According to the analysis the most significant adaptations on biodiversity in SCA occurred between 1980-1990s (figure 4). The awareness stemmed from heightened perceptions of reputational risks associated with non-adaptation on biodiversity (figure 3). A major shift in interpretation of the biodiversity issue also occurred after a long period of misinterpretation brought on by new awareness. This is consistent with sector-wide trends that show this misinterpretation of the biodiversity issue was common among the forest industry during this period (Simonsson et al. 2014). Some of the factors that shaped adaptation led SCA to misinterpret signals and information on biodiversity (figure 3) and therefore which adaptation measures will be most appropriate to implement (Boyd and Osbahr, 2010, Berkhout et al 2006, Westerhoff et al 2011.) These were factors that affected adaptation at an individual and
organisational level (table 7). This observation is supported by organisational learning theory suggesting that individual factors can influence an entire organisation in and conversely that individual learning does not necessarily result in organisational learning unless the organisation integrates individual learning into the organisation (Ikehara 1999, Wang and Ahmed 2003).
Conversely, this may also be described as evidence of two successive or perhaps over-lapping learning cycles. The first learning circle occurring prior to 1980, which led SCA employees to the conclusion, that biodiversity was an issue of information that could be solved by adapting their communication systems. After these
adaptations were implemented feedback from their implementation, indicated by heightened pressure from ENGOs and customers, showed that these were not appropriate options which triggered or supported the emergence of a new cycle of organisational learning though new interpretation of the issue. From these observed patterns it is not possible to fully distinguish if these learning cycles are causal or overlapping and not possible to draw further conclusions into the relationship between them. However, previous research has shown that the feedback and iteration process of some learning cycles can trigger the start of new learning cycles (Berkhout et al.
2006) although; this is not possible to conclude within the scope of this thesis.
