Kirkkonummi bypassed residents in planning forest logging

On 10 September we proposed to Kirkkonummi’s Urban Development Committee that the forest management action programme be returned for further preparation. The proposal did not pass. Kirkkonummi has decided separately in 2025, and more broadly in its municipal strategy, that residents are to be involved in measures concerning forests. This time the opportunity was not even offered. Local forests matter to a large share of residents and are a central part of the municipality’s appeal. Residents should therefore be able to influence the logging done in these forests already at the planning stage.

What has Kirkkonummi promised residents about its forests?

The effects of a decision must be assessed and residents involved before the decision is taken, so that the information is available to support it. A decision proposal must rest on the documents and working methods the municipality has jointly agreed to guide local politics.

The municipality’s own forest programme states: “Residents’ opinions and comments are part of the process. These are collected and their effects considered before final approval.” The municipal strategy, the council-approved document that guides the municipality’s work more than any other, says: “Participation is a precondition for democracy.” The strategy also defines diverse nature as a central value for the municipality. The municipality’s decisions must always point in the same direction as the strategy, and following it is not optional.

Why is informing residents not the same as involving them?

Informing is not participation. Participation would be two-way. This time residents had no way to influence what measures are taken in their local forests before the action programme was approved.

What was missing from the decision material?

The municipal strategy also states that decisions are made “on the basis of high-quality preparation, high-quality information and advance assessment”. No advance assessment is attached to the action programme. Nor should decisions be taken before the statements requested on them are available. This decision was taken before the sports services and land-use planning statements had been given. The environmental protection statement was not available either. The committee therefore had no way to assess the decision’s effects on the environment.

How would genuine participation work?

The participation the municipal strategy defines as essential is achieved if the draft action programme is put on public display before it is put into effect. Residents would then also see the assessment the decision rests on.

Problems in the preparation are not limited to forests. We wrote together earlier about how public transport fare increases hit Kirkkonummi. The same pattern showed in the West Railway decision.