100 The main challenge lies with the 40% of the surveyed organizations that should operate commercially but already fail to do so, or will fail to do so in the future due to the spending cuts. The big question, of course, is how to improve this situation. In many discussions the solution is said to lie in innovation and entrepreneurship. According to InnovationNetwork (2013) , the problem here is that “the innovative power of the nature sector currently appears to be insufficiently developed”. But is this assumption correct? Practical examples abound of nature managers who have successfully developed and marketed new products and services. Moreover, we must also not forget that there are many factors that may prevent nature managers from innovating. The second research question, therefore, was: How common is innovation and entrepreneurship among forest/nature management organizations and how could innovation and entrepreneurship be improved and/or reinforced in the sector? The research showed that innovation is by no means a new phenomenon for forest and nature management organizations. Of the 196 surveyed organizations, almost a quarter (22%) have launched new products onto the market in the past 10 years. A total of 24% of the surveyed organizations are planning innovations (some already have experience with innovation, others are first-time innovators). In addition, a further 23 organizations may start innovating in the coming years. Whether this is a lot or not is hard to say. The figures as gathered in this study are difficult to compare with innovation data for other sectors. However, it is clear that a large proportion of the organizations see no need for innovation. Improvements in the field of innovation may still be found in those areas where the most important obstacles lie: (1) government/laws and regulations, (2) the organization’s characteristics (not suitable for the organizations, its land holdings are too small and/or scattered, lack of knowledge and time), (3) the financial side (lack of funds for investment) and (4) product/market (no demand or unprofitable). It should be noted that these issues are not just relevant in the Netherlands. Calls for more market forces and less government can be heard in many countries, the reason being that the market is widely seen as an efficient mechanism for financing nature management, particularly in these times of economic decline. To find out whether we in the Netherlands can learn from other countries, the third (and last) research question was: What lessons can Dutch forest/nature organizations learn from successful examples of commercial forest/nature management abroad? This study showed that many of the products marketed by forest/nature management organizations abroad (Europe) are already marketed, or planned to be marketed, in the Netherlands. Of the small number of “new” foreign products that were mentioned, some are not applicable to the Dutch situation (e.g. sale of cork, May trees and May birches). Other “new” products call for cooperation between forest/nature management organizations and with organizations outside the sector which does not yet appear to exist. In addition, examples of regulatory and supporting services in Germany may provide a source of inspiration. Though rare (as in the Netherlands), there are also examples of organizations that have Pagina 111
Pagina 113Heeft u een lesmateriaal, issue of digitale onderwijscatalogi? Gebruik Online Touch: weekblad digitaal zetten.
558 Lees publicatie 222Home