“From nude calendars to tractor calendars”: the perspectives of female executives on gender aspects in the North American and Nordic forest industries

Publication: Canadian Journal of Forest Research9 April 2019https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2018-0402

Abstract

Increasing gender diversity is no longer just the right thing to do, but also the smart thing to do. Although there is general literature about gender diversity and the perspectives of females in top management and leadership, there are, however, very few forest sector specific studies. This exploratory study utilizes interviews to better understand how female executives in North America and the Nordic countries of Finland and Sweden perceive the impact of the situation of gender diversity in the forest industry. Respondents also provide career advice for young females entering or considering entry into the industry. Female executives in both regions agree that although the forest sector is still seen as a male-oriented industry, there are signs of increasingly positive attitudes regarding industry and company culture towards the benefits of greater gender diversity; however, the described changes represent an evolution, not revolution. Interestingly, despite the status of Nordic countries as leaders in bridging the gender gap, respondents from this region believe that there is significant progress yet to be made in the forest industry, especially at the entry level. With respect to career development, North American respondents suggested that young females should consider sacrificing their social life and leisure time activities, whereas Nordic respondents instead emphasized personal supports or using exit strategy from an unsupportive company or boss.

Résumé

Accroître la diversité des sexes n’est plus seulement la bonne chose à faire, mais plutôt la chose intelligente à faire. Cependant, bien qu’on traite de la diversité des sexes et de la possibilité pour les femmes d’occuper des postes de cadre supérieur et de direction dans la littérature générale, il existe très peu d’études spécifiques au secteur forestier. Cette étude exploratoire utilise des entrevues pour mieux comprendre comment les femmes dans des postes de cadres en Amérique du Nord et dans les pays nordiques, tels que la Finlande et la Suède, perçoivent l’influence de l’égalité des sexes dans l’industrie forestière. Les répondantes prodiguent aussi des conseils de carrière aux jeunes femmes qui entrent ou envisagent d’entrer dans l’industrie. Les femmes cadres des deux régions conviennent que, même si le secteur forestier est toujours considéré comme une industrie à prédominance masculine, il y a des signes qui démontrent des attitudes de plus en plus positives en ce qui a trait à la culture des entreprises et du secteur envers les bénéfices d’une plus grande diversité des sexes. Cependant, les changements décrits représentent une évolution et non une révolution. Étonnamment, malgré le statut des pays nordiques en tant que chefs de file en matière de réduction de la disparité entre les sexes, les répondantes de cette région croient que des progrès significatifs restent à faire dans le secteur forestier, particulièrement au premier échelon d’emploi. En ce qui concerne le développement professionnel, les répondantes nord-américaines indiquent que les jeunes femmes devraient envisager de sacrifier leur vie sociale et leurs loisirs, tandis que les répondantes des pays nordiques ont plutôt mis l’accent sur le support personnel ou l’utilisation d’une stratégie de retrait face à une compagnie ou un patron qui offre peu de soutien. [Traduit par la Rédaction]

References

Andersson E. and Lidestav G. 2016. Creating alternative spaces and articulating needs: challenging gendered notions of forestry and forest ownership through women’s networks. For. Policy Econ. 67: 38–44.
Appelstrand M. and Lidestav G. 2015. Women entrepreneurship — a shortcut to a more competitive and equal forestry sector? Scand. J. For. Res. 30(3): 226–234.
Bart C. and McQueen G. 2013. Why women make better directors. Int. J. Business Governance and Ethics, 8(1): 93–99.
Baublyte, G. 2017. Gender diversity in Swedish and Finnish forest industry companies: challenges and dnablers. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Bear S., Rahman N., and Post C. 2010. The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. J. Bus. Ethics, 97(2): 207–221.
Bell S.T., Villado A.J., Lukasik M.A., Belau L., and Briggs A.L. 2011. Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: a meta-analysis. J. Manage. 37(3): 709–743.
Ben-Amar W., Chang M., and McIlkenny P. 2017. Board gender diversity and corporate response to sustainability initiatives: evidence from the Carbon Disclosure Project. J. Bus. Ethics, 142(2): 369–83.
Berry J.M. 2002. Validity and reliability issues in elite interviewing. Political Science & Politics, 35(4): 679–682.
Bhappu A.D., Griffith T.L., and Northcraft G.B. 1997. Media effects and communication bias in diverse groups. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 70(3): 199–205.
Brandth B., Follo G., and Haugen M.S. 2004. Women in forestry: Dilemmas of a separate women’s organization. Scand. J. For. Res. 19(5): 466–472.
Brandth B. and Haugen M.S. 1998. Breaking into a masculine discourse. Women and farm forestry. Sociologia Ruralis, 38(3): 427–442.
Brescoll V.L. and Uhlmann E.L. 2005. Attitudes toward traditional and nontraditional parents. Psychol. Women Q. 29(4): 436–445.
Bull, L., Hansen, E., and Jenkin, B. 2015. Maximising the potential of Australia’s forests — collaborating and innovating to realise the opportunity. Lynea Advisory, Melbourne, Australia.
Byrne A. and Barling J. 2017. When she brings home the job status: Wives’ job status, status leakage, and marital instability. Organization Science, 28(2): 177–192.
Campbell K. and Mínguez-Vera A. 2008. Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. J. Bus. Ethics, 83(3): 435–451.
Canadian Institute of Forestry. 2018. Canadian Institute of Forestry announces an initiative to promote gender equity in Canada’s forest sector [news release]. Available from https://www.cif-ifc.org/2018/11/canadian-institute-of-forestry-announces-an-initiative-to-promote-gender-equity-in-canadas-forest-sector/.
Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). 2018. Forests and gender. Available from https://www.cifor.org/gender/ [accessed 1 December 2018].
Chrobot-Mason D., Ruderman M.N., Weber T.J., and Ernst C. 2009. The challenge of leading on unstable ground: triggers that activate social identity faultlines. Human Relations, 62(11): 1763–1794.
Crespell P. and Hansen E. 2008a. Managing for innovation: insights into a successful company. For. Prod. J. 58(9): 6–17.
Crespell P. and Hansen E. 2008b. Work climate, innovativeness, and firm performance in the US forest sector: in search of a conceptual framework. Can. J. For. Res. 38(7): 1703–1715.
Crespell P., Knowles C., and Hansen E. 2006. Innovativeness in the North American softwood sawmilling industry. For. Sci. 52(5): 568–578.
Dahlin K.B., Weingart L.R., and Hinds P.J. 2005. Team diversity and information use. Acad. Manage. J. 48(6): 1107–1123.
Daily C.M. and Dalton D.R. 2003. Women in the boardroom: a business imperative. J. Bus. Strategy, 24(5).
Deloitte. 2016. Women in the boardroom. 5th edition. Available from https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/risk/articles/women-in-the-boardroom5th-edition.html [accessed 1 December 2018].
Derks B., Ellemers N., van Laar C., and de Groot K. 2011. Do sexist organizational cultures create the queen bee? Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 50(3): 519–535.
Derks B., Van Laar C., and Ellemers N. 2016. The queen bee phenomenon: why women leaders distance themselves from junior women. Leadersh. Q. 27(3): 456–469.
Dexter, L.A. 1970. Elite and specialized interviewing. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, Illinois.
Duchin, R., Simutin, M., and Sosyura, D. 2018. The origins and real effects of the gender gap: evidence from CEOs’ formative years.
Erhardt N.L., Werbel J.D., and Shrader C.B. 2003. Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance, 11(2): 102–111.
Faniko K., Ellemers N., and Derks B. 2016. Queen bees and alpha males: are successful women more competitive than successful men? Eur. J. Social Psychol. 46(7): 903–913.
Fawcett R. and Pringle J.K. 2000. Women CEOs in New Zealand: Where are you? Women in Management Review, 15(5/6): 253–260.
Follo G. 2002. A hero’s journey: young women among males in forestry education. J. Rural Stud. 18(3): 293–306.
Follo G., Lidestav G., Ludvig A., Vilkriste L., Hujala T., Karppinen H., Didolot F., and Mizaraite D. 2017. Gender in European forest ownership and management: reflections on women as ‘new forest owners.’ Scand. J. For. Res. 32(2): 174–184.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2006. Time for action: changing the gender situation in forestry. Available from http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/docs/publications-other/Time%20for%20Action_Gender%20and%20Forestry.pdf [accessed 1 December 2018].
Gigone D. and Hastie R. 1993. The common knowledge effect: information sharing and group judgment. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 65(5): 959–974.
Goldin C., Kerr S.P., Olivetti C., and Barth E. 2017. The expanding gender earnings gap: evidence from the LEHD-2000 Census. Am. Econ. Rev. 5: 110–114.
Gorman E.H. and Kmec J.A. 2009. Hierarchical rank and women’s organizational mobility: glass ceilings in corporate law firms. Am. J. Sociol. 114(5): 1428–1474.
Hambrick D.C. and Mason P.A. 1984. Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Manage. Rev. 9(2): 193–206.
Hansen E. 2010. The role of innovation in the forest products industry. J. For. 108(7): 348–353.
Hansen E., Conroy K., Toppinen A., Bull L., Kutnar A., and Panwar R. 2016. Does gender diversity in forest sector companies matter? Can. J. For. Res. 46(11): 1255–1263.
Hansen, E., and Juslin, H. 2011. Strategic marketing in the global forest industries. 2nd ed. Corvallis, Oregon.
Hansen E., Juslin H., and Knowles C. 2007. Innovativeness in the global forest products industry: exploring new insights. Can. J. For. Res. 37(8): 1324–1335.
Hansen E., Nybakk E., and Panwar R. 2014. Innovation insights from North American forest sector research: a literature review. Forests, 5(6): 1341–1355.
Hansen, E., Panwar, R., and Vlosky, R. 2013. Understanding and managing change in the global forest sector. In The Global Forest Sector: Changes, Practices, and Prospects. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, Florida. pp. 18–29.
Hewlett, S.A. 2002. Executive women and the myth of having it all. Harvard Business Review. Available from https://hbr.org/2002/04/executive-women-and-the-myth-of-having-it-all [accessed 1 December 2018].
Hewstone M., Rubin M., and Willis H. 2002. Intergroup bias. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53(1): 575–604.
Holgersson C. 2013. Recruiting managing directors: doing homosociality Gender Work Organ. 20(4): 454–466.
Hovgaard A. and Hansen E. 2004. Innovativeness in the forest products industry. For. Prod. J. 54(1): 26–33.
Isidro H. and Sobral M. 2015. The effects of women on corporate boards on firm value, financial performance, and ethical and social compliance. J. Bus. Ethics, 132(1): 1–19.
Johansson K., Andersson E., Johansson M., and Lidestav G. 2017. The discursive resistance of men to gender-equality interventions: negotiating “unjustness” and “unnecessity” in Swedish forestry. Men Masc. 22(2): 177–196.
Johansson M., Johansson K., and Andersson E. 2018. # Metoo in the Swedish forest sector: testimonies from harassed women on sexualised forms of male control. Scand. J. For. Res. 33(5): 419–425.
Johansson M. and Ringblom L. 2017. The business case of gender equality in Swedish forestry and mining — restricting or enabling organizational change. Gender, Work & Organization 24(6): 628–642.
Kaiser C.R. and Spalding K.E. 2015. Do women who succeed in male-dominated domains help other women? The moderating role of gender identification. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 45(5): 599–608.
Kakabadse N.K., Figueira C., Nicolopoulou K., Yang J.H., Kakabadse A.P., and Özbilgin M.F. 2015. Gender diversity and board performance: women’s experiences and perspectives. Hum. Resour. Manage. 54(2): 265–281.
Kanter R.M. 1977. Some effects of proportions on group life: skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. Am. J. Sociol. 82(5): 965–990.
Kärnä J., Hansen E., and Juslin H. 2003. Social responsibility in environmental marketing planning. Eur. J. Mark. 37(5/6): 848–871.
Koenig A.M., Eagly A.H., Mitchell A.A., and Ristikari T. 2011. Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychol. Bull. 137(4): 616–642.
Konrad A.M., Kramer V., and Sumru Erkut. 2008. Critical mass: the impact of three or more women on corporate boards. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2): 145–164.
Ladge J.J. and Little L.M. 2019. When expectations become reality: work–family image management and identity adaptation. Acad. Manage. Rev. 44(1): 126–149.
Lagerberg. 2016. Women in business: turning promise into practice. Available from https://www.grantthornton.global/en/insights/articles/women-in-business-2016/ [accessed 1 December 2018].
Larasatie P., Guerrero J.E., Conroy K., Hall T.E., Hansen E., and Needham M.D. 2018. What does the public believe about tall wood buildings? An exploratory study in the US Pacific Northwest. J. For. 116(5): 429–436.
Lau D.C. and Murnighan J.K. 1998. Demographic diversity and faultlines: the compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Acad. Manage. Rev. 23(2): 325–340.
Lawrence, A., Spinelli, R., Toppinen, A., and Salo, E. 2017. What are the implications of the bioeconomy for forest-related jobs? In Towards a sustainable bioeconomy: assessment and the way forward. Edited by G. Winkel. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland. pp. 108–117.
Leavengood, S., and Bull, L. 2014. Innovation in the global forest sector. In The Global Forest Sector: Changes, Practices, and Prospects. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, Florida. pp. 377–404.
Li J. and Hambrick D.C. 2005. Factional groups: a new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and disintegration in work teams. Acad. Manage. J. 48(5): 794–813.
Lidestav G. and Sjölander A.E. 2007. Gender and forestry: a critical discourse analysis of forestry professions in Sweden. Scand. J. For. Res. 22(4): 351–362.
Lindberg, M., Andersson, E., Andersson, L., and Johansson, M. 2016. Organizational innovation for gender equality in forestry and mining. In Research Handbook on Gender and Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, U.K. pp. 170–186.
Lipman-Blumen J. 1976. Toward a homosocial theory of sex roles: an explanation of the sex segregation of social institutions. Signs, 1(3): 15–31.
Meil J., Wilson J., O, Connor J., and Dangerfield J. 2007. An assessment of wood product processing technology advancements between the CORRIM I and II studies. For. Prod. J. 57(7/8): 83.
Metz I. and Tharenou P. 2001. Women’s career advancement: the relative contribution of human and social capital. Group Organ. Manag. 26(3): 312–342.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., and Saldana, J. 2013. Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
Moyser, M. 2017. Women and paid work. Available from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-503-x/2015001/article/14694-eng.htm [accessed 1 December 2018].
Näyhä, A. 2012. Towards bioeconomy: a three-phase Delphi study on forest biorefinery diffusion in Scandinavia and North America. In Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Economics, No. 117.
Panwar R., Vlosky R., and Hansen E. 2012. Gaining competitive advantage in the new normal. For. Prod. J. 62(6): 420–428.
Panwar R., Rinne T., Hansen E., and Juslin H. 2006. Corporate responsibility. For. Prod. J. 56(2): 4–12.
Pätäri S., Arminen H., Albareda L., Puumalainen K., and Toppinen A. 2017. Student values and perceptions of corporate social responsibility in the forest industry on the road to a bioeconomy. For. Policy Econ. 85: 201–215.
Perrault E. 2015. Why does board gender diversity matter and how do we get there? The role of shareholder activism in deinstitutionalizing old boys’ networks. J. Bus. Ethics, 128(1): 149–165.
Perryman A.A., Fernando G.D., and Tripathy A. 2016. Do gender differences persist? An examination of gender diversity on firm performance, risk, and executive compensation. J. Bus. Res. 69(2): 579–586.
Pletzer J.L., Nikolova R., Kedzior K.K., and Voelpel S.C. 2015. Does gender matter? Female representation on corporate boards and firm financial performance — a meta-analysis. Edited by Rodrigo Huerta-Quintanilla. PLoS One, 10(6): e0130005.
Post C. and Byron K. 2015. Women on boards and firm financial performance: a meta-analysis. Acad. Manage. J. 58(5): 1546–1571.
PwC. 2016. International Women’s Day: PwC women in index. Available from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/psrc/assets/pwc-women-in-work-2016.pdf [accessed 1 December 2018].
Randel A.E. 2002. Identity salience: a moderator of the relationship between group gender composition and work group conflict. J. Organ. Behav. 23(6): 749–766.
Russo N.F. 1976. The motherhood mandate. J. Social Issues, 32(3): 143–153.
Schwab A., Werbel J.D., Hofman H., and Henriques P. 2016. Managerial gender diversity and firm performance: an integration of different theoretical perspectives. Group. Organ. Manag. 41(1): 5–31.
Squires J. 2005. Is mainstreaming transformative? Theorizing mainstreaming in the context of diversity and deliberation. Social Politics, 12(3): 366–388.
Statistics Canada. 2018. 2016 Census Topic: Labour. Available from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/rt-td/lab-tra-eng.cfm [accessed 1 December 2018].
Statistics Finland. 2018. Gender equality. Available from http://www.tilastokeskus.fi/tup/tasaarvo/index_en.html [accessed 1 December 2018].
Statistics Sweden. 2016. Women have lower salaries, incomes and pensions than men. Statistiska Centralbyrån. Available from http://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/living-conditions/gender-statistics/gender-statistics/pong/statistical-news/women-and-men-in-sweden-2016/ [accessed 1 December 2018].
Stendahl M. and Roos A. 2008. Antecedents and barriers to product innovation — a comparison between innovating and non-innovating strategic business units in the wood industry. Silva Fenn. 42(4): 659–681.
Storch S. 2011. Forestry professionalism overrides gender: a case study of nature perception in Germany. For. Policy Econ. 13(3): 171–175.
Tajfel, H., and Turner, J.C. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Brooks/Cole Publisher, Monterey, California. pp. 33–47.
Talke K., Salomo S., and Rost K. 2010. How top management team diversity affects innovativeness and performance via the strategic choice to focus on innovation fields. Research Policy, 39(7): 907–918.
Tallberg, T. 2003. Networks, organisations and men: concepts and interrelations. Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki, Finland.
The United Nations. 2017. Goal 5: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. Available from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg5 [accessed 1 December 2018].
Toppinen, A., Lähtinen, K., and Holopainen, J. 2016. On corporate responsibility. In Forests, Business and Sustainability, Earthscan Forest Library. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London, New York. pp. 70–90.
Toppinen, A., Wan, M., and Lähtinen, K. 2013. Strategic orientations in the global forest sector. In Global Forest Sector: Changes, Practices and Prospects. Taylor & Francis, Boca, Florida. pp. 405–428.
Torchia M., Calabrò A., and Huse M. 2011. Women directors on corporate boards: from tokenism to critical mass. J. Bus. Ethics, 102(2): 299–317.
Umaerus P., Lidestav G., Eriksson L.O., and Nordin M.H. 2013. Gendered business activities in family farm forestry: from round wood delivery to health service. Scand. J. For. Res. 28(6): 596–607.
Umaerus P., Nordin M.H., and Lidestav G. 2019. Do female forest owners think and act ‘greener’? For. Policy Econ. 99: 52–58.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2016. 39 percent of managers in 2015 were women. The Economics Daily (TED). Available from https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/39-percent-of-managers-in-2015-were-women.htm [accessed 1 December 2018].
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2017. Women in the labor force: a databook. Available from https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-databook/archive/women-in-the-labor-force-a-databook-2015.pdf [accessed 1 December 2018].
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2018. Labor force statistics from the current population survey. Available from https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm [accessed 1 December 2018].
U.S. Department of Labor. 2018. Family and medical leave act — Wage and Hour Division (WHD). Available from https://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/ [accessed 1 December 2018].
vonHippel C.Wiryakusuma C.Bowden J.Shochet M. 2011. Stereotype threat and female communication styles. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 37(10): 1312–1324.
Wagner E.R. and Hansen E.N. 2005. Innovation in large versus small companies: insights from the US wood products industry. Management Decision, 43(6): 837–850.
Webber S.S. and Donahue L.M. 2001. Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: a meta-analysis. J. Manage. 27(2): 141–162.
World Bank. 2013. Gender at work. Available from http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/Event/Gender/GenderAtWork_web2.pdf [accessed 1 December 2018].
World Bank. 2018. World Bank open data. Available from https://data.worldbank.org/ [Accessed 1 December 2018].
World Economic Forum. 2018. Global Gender Gap Index 2017. In Global Gender Gap Report 2017. Available from http://wef.ch/2xzVWfF.
Wright T. 2016. Women’s experience of workplace interactions in male-dominated work: the intersections of gender, sexuality and occupational group. Gend. Work Organ. 23(3): 348–362.
Yang Y., Chawla N.V., and Uzzi B. 2019. A network’s gender composition and communication pattern predict women’s leadership success. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116(6): 2033–2038.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Canadian Journal of Forest Research cover image
Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Volume 49Number 8August 2019
Pages: 915 - 924

History

Received: 24 September 2018
Accepted: 19 March 2019
Published online: 9 April 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Key Words

  1. gender diversity
  2. leadership diversity
  3. workforce diversity
  4. female managers
  5. female executives

Mots-clés

  1. diversité des sexes
  2. diversité de leadership
  3. diversité de la main-d’œuvre
  4. femmes gestionnaires
  5. femmes cadres

Authors

Affiliations

Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Gintare Baublyte
Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Kendall Conroy
Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Eric Hansen
Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Anne Toppinen
Department of Forest Sciences and Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

Notes

*
LPDP Awardee.
The second and the third authors contributed equally to this paper.
Eric Hansen currently serves as an Associate Editor; peer review and editorial decisions regarding this manuscript were handled by Philip Burton and Bin Mei.
Copyright remains with the author(s) or their institution(s). Permission for reuse (free in most cases) can be obtained from RightsLink.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

View Options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Information & Authors
Metrics & Citations
Other Metrics
 
Cite As


 
Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.


 
Cited by
1. Leading with the heart and/or the head? Experiences of women student leaders in top world forestry universities
2. The “Catch-22” of Representation of Women in the Forest Sector: The Perspective of Student Leaders in Top Global Forestry Universities
Share Options
Share the article link
Share on social media
Get Access
Login options

Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Subscribe

Click on the button below to subscribe to Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Restore your content access

Enter your email address to restore your content access:

Note: This functionality works only for purchases done as a guest. If you already have an account, log in to access the content to which you are entitled.

View Options
Tables
References