Three alternative scenarios to the much debated present organisation of the Lithuanian State forest sector are examined: (i) the integrated, where all functions are delegated to one central administrative authority – the Danish prototype, (ii) the commercialised, where State forests are managed by a commercial State company – the Irish prototype, and (iii) the minimalistic, where only negligible forest areas of special importance remain in State ownership – the Swedish prototype. The scenarios are assessed according to six imperatives: (i) sort out the ambiguity of the present structure, (ii) increase the profitability, (iii) reduce the level of public spending, (iv) accommodate changes in ownership structure, (v) rely on a holistic approach, and (vi) comply with the national forest policy. If adopted, any of the scenarios would most likely improve the various elements of State forestry, although in substantially different ways. Politicians will take the final decision that may be supported by the findings of this study
