This study intends to investigate how different demographic groups among individual forest owners in Sweden view issues related to sustainable forestry. The study also intends to investigate what different individual forest owners perceive as positive/negative aspects in terms of species protection and policy changes. It also investigates in what way individual forest owners' views and forestry relate to decided goals and what previous research defines as sustainable forestry. To investigate this, a survey has been conducted where the survey was distributed to individual forest owners around the country through various online communication channels such as social media and online forums. The survey resulted in a total of 226 respondents spread across most parts of the country. The results that emerged from the study shows demographic differences and similarities, where we for example can see that there is a greater proportion of women than men who believe that Swedish forestry is not sustainable today. At the same time, we can observe that the majority believe that it is sustainable within all demographic groups. Incidentally, we can see that there is a dividing line between authorities and the interests of individual forest owners. Views on sustainable forestry vary and many forest owners strive for less government intervention in their forestry and property rights are central. We see a willingness to compromise if the forest owner receive financial compensation, in terms of protected areas. We can also see goal conflicts between forest owners' views and uses and authorities' directives and goals.

För att möta kommande klimatförändringar behövs klimatanpassning vilket innebär att skydda samhället mot klimatförändringarna och ta tillvara eventuella möjligheter. Olika länder har tillämpat olika sätt att styra anpassning, vilka generellt kan delas in i top-down och bottom-up styrning. Dessa styrformer generar olika problem och möjligheter för implementering. Till exempel så brister ofta styrning genom top-down implementeringen på lokal nivå, medan bottom-up ofta försvåras av att lokala aktörer saknar resurser i implementering. I denna litteratur och dokumentsbaserade studie undersöker vi aktuell forskning och policydokument för att med stöd av Environmental Governance-teorin, klargöra styrningsformernas uppbyggnad, effektivitet, problem och möjligheter. Länderna Sverige, Finland och Holland är i fokus då de tillämpar olika styrformer och har kommit relativt långt i implementeringen av klimatanpassning. Resultaten visar bland annat att en kombinerad modell där båda styrformerna används är den bästa för att styra klimatanpassning. Det finns också skillnader, top-down tenderar att sakna tydliga riktlinjer från nationell nivå, medan bottom-up ofta är drabbat av brist på ekonomiska resurser, styrmedel och informationsmedel. Men styrformerna har även likheter som problem med att inkludera privata aktörer i implementering av anpassning. / In order to manage anticipated effects from future climate change, adaptation is needed. Which implies protecting society against risks and take advantage of possible new opportunities. Different countries, are using different methods to steer adaptation, which generally can be described the top-down and bottom-up approaches. However, there are different problems and opportunities with those arrangements. For example, control through top-down is often weak in implementation at local level, while on the other hand local actors in the bottom-up system often lacks resources to carry out implementation. In this literature- and document study, we examine current research and policy document with the support of the Environmental Governance theory, in order to clarify the structure, effectiveness, problems and opportunities of this steering approaches for the implementation of adaptation. The countries Sweden, Finland and Netherlands, were selected as case countries since they have chosen different approaches and have relatively developed climate adaptation systems. The results show, among other things, that a combined model in which both control methods are used is the best model to guide adaptation. There are also differences, top-down tend to lack clear guidelines from the national level, despite the national plans, while the bottom-up system often is affected by lack of financial resources, instruments and information resources. But those arrangements also have similarities, such as problems with the inclusion of private actors in the implementation of adaptation.