In Finland active farms has rented two third and bought one third of their additional field area during the EU-membership. Currently one third (764?000 hectares) of the total field area is cultivated by tenant. Short them cash lease contracts are standard in Finland. Previous research has shown implications of land tenure insecurity which is confronted by farmers cultivating leased land. A decrease in long-term land improvements is alarming. In rented lands passive land owners hold a property of as high value as 3,9 billion Euros. Still, the objectives and values of these passive landowners to manage their land are unknown, unlike for example the objectives of the forest owners. In this study we provide a general picture of the Finnish field owners and their objectives related to the ownership of agricultural land. The results offer a base to evaluate and plan the policy that control field rentals and promote land sales, and to widen the general discussion of land owners' behaviour. The data of the study are combined from the tax registers and a mail survey. The register data was from 2004 and focused on land owners, their spouses and the representatives of undistributed estates. More detailed information was collected in 2006 with a mail survey that provided information of 2?684 landowners. The results show that even if agriculture is only 1% of Finland's GDP, farmland ownership ties approximately every tenth Finn still to agricultural production. The average size of owned field area was very small (5.5 ha). The agricultural land property was very concentrated, as one fifth of the land owners owned over 60% of the field area. These land owners were typically farmers. However the majority of the land owners did not get income from agriculture and about one fourth of the filed area was owned by such landowners that did not participate in commercial production or land leasing. Among these land owners the ageing owners were dominant but they owned relatively smaller field areas The farm landowners were very tightly related to their estate, as three fourth of the owners lived in the same municipality as the estate was located. Farmland owners were divided into five groups based on their objectives for landownership. Agricultural earners (18% of owners) emphasized objectives that related to income, but also to traditions and attachment to the place as well as to recreation and nature. In the objectives of Leisure farmers (21%) farming for subsistence and as a leisure activity got importance as well as objectives related to investments, economic security and income. Investors (23%) emphasized investments and economic security but also traditions and attachment to the place. Immaterialists (23%) valued objectives related to traditions, attachment, recreation and nature. None of the objectives was important for Indifferent owners (18%). The owners objectives related to owners behaviour like land rental and sale decisions. As the disadvantages of uncertainty of land tenancies are well known, the study explored the policy alternatives to reform the land ownership structure by encouraging land sales. The results show that it is not easy to invoke willingness to sell land. The land owners most willing to sell their farmlands were those that belonged to the groups of immaterialists and indifferent owners.