1. Stakeholder Analysis for UNECE/FAO Forest Products Marketing Programme
Mr. Mikko Kiiskinen
Master Degree Student
Forest Products Marketing
Department of Forest Economics
University of Helsinki

2. Purpose and Implementation of Stakeholder Analysis
Find out differences between Stakeholder groups
- How they responded to different questions
- Clarify their role and link to Timber Branch
Analysis conducted by interpreting cross-tabs (made by Dr. Vlosky) and using policy analysis techniques

3. Example Question and How Results Were Presented
Rating content and quality of Forest Products Annual Market Review
Excellent
Satisfactory for my needs
Below satisfactory

4. Conclusion Analysis did not indicate significant differences between
stakeholder groups and their opinions of market- related outputs
- Data was small (119 responses)
- Too many stakeholder groups (7)
- One respondent might represent many stakeholder groups
- Defects in questionnaire

5. Recommendations Questions or statements should be formed clearer
(rating content and quality of FPAMR)
To use standardized statements
(Agree Disagree)
To use less stakeholder groups
One respondent can represent only one stakeholder group
Questionnaire should be also tested and if possible survey repeated regularly

6. Using Policy Analysis Techniques
Stakeholder analysis based on policy analysis techniques:
- Pressure analysis
- Links analysis
- Uncertainty analysis
Purpose of the following analysis is to describe the influence, role and link of different stakeholder groups to Timber Branch and its market outputs

7. Pressure Analysis by Stakeholder Groups
Partners
Family
“Outsiders”
UNECE/FAO
Market- Related
Outputs
Policy heads
Supervisors
Commentators
and
opinion makers
Beneficiaries and
contributors

8. Links Analysis of Timber Branch Stakeholders
Supervisors
Family
Directing
Policy heads
Sharing
Beneficiaries /
contributors
Market related
Outputs
Partners
Commentators
/opinion makers
“Outsiders”
Receiving

9. Uncertainty Analysis of Timber Branch Stakeholders
Critical to us
Family
Supervisors
Partners
Beneficiaries /
contributors
Commentators /
opinion makers
Policy heads
Confident
Non confident
“Outsiders”
Insignificant to us