Ando Lilleleht
Estonian University of Life Sciences
10 Papers
44 Citations
Ando Lilleleht is an academic researcher from Estonian University of Life Sciences. The author has contributed to research in topics: Forest management & Forest ecology. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 10 publications.
Chat about Author
Papers
Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the question why forest owners' cooperation is not a common practice and find that the formal institutions reflect mainly the economic aspects of cooperation and the informal institutions, however, are more diverse and often do not relate to the formal ones.
26
Estimation of above-ground biomass in forest stands from regression on their basal area and height
Mait Lang,Mait Lang,Ando Lilleleht,Mathias Neumann,Karol Bronisz,Samir Gonçalves Rolim,Meelis Seedre,Veiko Uri,Andres Kiviste +8 more
- 01 Jun 2016
TL;DR: In this article, a generic regression model for above-ground biomass of forest stands was constructed based on published data (R2 = 0.88, RSE = 32.8 t/ha).
Synchronous growth releases in peatland pine chronologies as an indicator for regional climate dynamics-a multi-site study including estonia, Belarus and Sweden
Aleksei Potapov,Sandra Toomik,Maxim Yermokhin,Johannes Edvardsson,Ando Lilleleht,Andres Kiviste,Tanel Kaart,Sandra Metslaid,Arvo Järvet,Maris Hordo +9 more
TL;DR: In this paper, 14 tree-ring chronologies developed from 788 peatland Scots pines sampled at sites in Estonia, Belarus and Sweden were compared for common growth trends and possible links to regional climate dynamics.
7
Measuring Forest Owners’ Environmental Responsibility: Quantifying a Theoretical Approach Based on a Case Study from South-Eastern Estonia
Priit Põllumäe,Ando Lilleleht +1 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used a theoretical typology of responsibility to quantify this otherwise vague concept in order to see how forest owners relate to the different biodiversity governance arrangements, and found four empirical factors that described different attitudes towards conservation.
2