4 ms·
This seems a little misleading. 66,000 acres would be 270 sq km, 33% of the country is 22,000 sq km so IKEA owns just over 1% of the forested land. IKEA is the
by dmurray 6y ago
This seems a little misleading. 66,000 acres would be 270 sq km, 33% of the country is 22,000 sq km so IKEA owns just over 1% of the forested land.
IKEA is the largest private forester but most of Lithuania's forests are owned by the state [0] and overseen by various state bodies, some of whom operate them as commercial concerns including, almost certainly, selling timber to IKEA.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forests_in_Lithuania https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forests_in_Lithuania
- Darmody 6y agoI don't think he means IKEA owns 33% of the forest. 33% is the total percentage of forest and IKEA is the bigger single owner of forests. Two separate statements.
- dmurray 6y agoSure. But it really means IKEA is the biggest single owner of forests, apart from the owner who owns 40 times as much as IKEA does.
- Darmody 6y agoWho owns 40 times more?
- smileybarry 6y agoSure, but including state ownership skews the metrics. Is there any country where the government/state isn't the biggest owner of forests? Applying the same idea to the US puts the US government at the top with 31.1% of forests[1] even though 35.5% is collectively owned by families. [1] https://www.nwtf.org/conservation/article/who-owns-forests-woodlands https://www.nwtf.org/conservation/article/who-owns-forests-w...
- s1artibartfast 6y agoI think it is Relevant precisely because skew the metrics When we talk about land-use.If it is left out people can make all kinds of misinformed Conclusions.