Forest ownership is handled quite conveniently through a forest partnership (metsäyhtymä). Still, it’s worth making a joint management agreement where the party “taking care of things” is granted the authority to handle the partnership’s affairs. A joint management agreement provides a bit of extra security in case of disputes, and you won’t always need to obtain powers of attorney for every insurance contract and so on.
Why should shares be kept in joint ownership?
A forest partnership is just a tax-related accounting unit, so in my opinion, it doesn’t have any negative impact on the potential transfer of wealth.
You can also include restrictions on the transfer of shares in the joint management agreement if the aim is to keep the forest partnership within the family. So, if we imagine a scenario where a partner “loses it” as they get older and decides to sell their share of the forest partnership to a local pub regular for a pittance, the joint management agreement can stipulate a right of first refusal for the other partners.
I don’t know how legally binding such a clause is from a legal standpoint, but at the very least, it shouldn’t do any harm.