Forestry, as a large industry, has significant impacts on the quality of nature-based tourism landscapes in boreal forests. In Finland, the rapid growth of nature-based tourism has expanded outdoor recreation activities from protected areas into timber production forests; this is particularly so in northern Finland. This paper focuses on assessing balanced local net impacts of three alternative land-use scenarios, in which the level of integration between nature-based tourism (NBT) and traditional forestry is varied. The study is located in northern Finland in the area between two top-rated tourist resorts, Ylläs and Levi. The results of the case study support the idea of an eligible integration between NBT and forestry, which takes into account scenic qualities of forested landscapes by restricting traditional management practices. In our case, the increased number of tourists (due to a more attractive forest environment) offset the losses accrued in forestry (due to restricted forest management).

In Finland, most of the suitable peatland has now been ditched for forestry purposes, and ditch network maintenance (DNM) is carried out on 70,000–80,000 hectares of land each year. We examined the financial performance of DNM operations on 44 sample plots representing two medium-quality site types located within two different climatic regions in northern Finland. We applied a simulation approach in which actual measurements of trees growing on sample plots were fed into a stand simulator (MOTTI) which predicted stand development with and without DNM. The financial assessments involved calculating short-term and long-term effects of DNM by applying, respectively, ROI (return on investment) and NPV (net present value) analyses. The results indicated that the financial performance of DNM, particularly in the short term, was highly dependent on the availability of government subsidies. Without the DNM subsidy, the return on investment was between 1.6% and 3.7%; whereas with government subsidy it ranged from 3.8% to 8.4%. In the long run, the net present value was ca. 4–14% higher for stands with DNM than for those without.