Participative forest planning: How to obtain knowledge
Abstract
Aim of study: To develop a methodology to obtain knowledge in public participation processes.
Area of study: Fonsagrada-Os Ancares (Spain), region located in the northern Iberian Peninsula.
Material and methods: This study proposes a new method for generating questionnaire survey in participative forest plan with four stages. The validation of this method is performed in the context of a tactical sub-regional forest plan.
Main results: The questionnaires based on criteria and indicators proved to be effective in obtaining key information for planning. The method used offers tools to reach the consensus on natural resource management, through the knowledge gained by selecting relevant information (preferences, opinions, and expectations) from past, present, and future forest activity, focusing on solutions to conflicts.
Research highlights: The use of appropriate indicators and criteria in the planning phase allows for obtaining knowledge concerning the preferences and future challenges for forest management.
Downloads
References
Álvarez-López CJ, Riveiro-Valiño JA, Marey-Pérez MF, 2008. Typology, classification and characterization of farms for agricultural production planning. Span J Agric Res 6: 125-136. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2008061-299
Álvarez-Martínez JM, Suárez-Seoane S, De Luis Calabuig E, 2011. Modelling the risk of land cover change from environmental and socio-economic drivers in heterogeneous and changing landscapes: The role of uncertainty. Landscape Urban Plann 101: 108-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.01.009
Ananda J, Herath G, 2009. A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning. Ecol Econ 68: 2535-2548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.010
Apostolopoulou E, Drakoua E, Pediaditi K, 2012. Participation in the management of Greek Natura 2000 sites: Evidence from a cross-level analysis. J Environ Manage 113: 308-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.09.006
Arnstein SR, 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Instit Plann 35 (4): 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Atmiş E, Özden S, Lise W, 2007. Public participation in forestry in Turkey. Ecol Econ 62: 352-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.002
Booth A, Halseth G, 2011. Why the public thinks natural resources public participation processes fail: A case study of British Columbia communities. Land Use Policy 28: 898-906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.03.005
Borchers JG, 2005. Accepting uncertainty, assessing risk: Decision quality in managing wildfire, forest resource values, and new technology. Forest Ecol Manage 211: 36-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.01.025
Brenkert-Smith H, Champ PA, Flores N, 2012. Trying not to get burned: understanding homeowners' wildfire risk-mitigation behaviors. Environ Manage 50: 1139-1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-012-9949-8
Brouwer R, Van Ek R, 2004. Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands. Ecol Econ 50: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.01.020
Brown G, Weber D, 2011. Public Participation GIS: A new method for national park planning. Landscape Urban Plann 102: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.03.003
Bruña-García X, Marey-Pérez MF, 2014. A public participation: a need of forest planning. iForest 7: 216-226.
Buchy M, Hoverman S, 2000. Understanding public participation in forest planning: A review. Forest Policy Econ 1: 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-9341(00)00006-X
Cantiani MG, 2012. Forest planning and public participation: a possible methodological approach. iForest 5: 72-82.
Castañeda F, Palmberg-Lerche C, Vuorinen P, 2001. Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: A compendium. Forest Management Working Paper No 5. For Resour Devel Serv, For Resour Div, FAO, Rome.
Castro AJ, Martínez-López B, García-Llorente M, Aguilera PA, López E, Cabello J, 2011. Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region. J Arid Environ 75: 1201-1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2011.05.013
Collier MJ, Scott M, 2009. Conflicting rationalities, knowledge and values in scarred landscapes. J Rural Stud 25: 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.12.002
Coulibaly-Lingani P, Savadogo P, Tigabu M, Oden P, 2011. Factors influencing people's participation in the forest management program in Burkina Faso, West Africa. Forest Policy Econ 13: 292-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.02.005
Díaz-Balteiro L, Romero C, 2008. Review making forestry decisions with multiple criteria: A review and an assessment. Forest Ecol Manage 174: 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.038
Díaz-Varela ER, Marey-Pérez MF, Álvarez-Álvarez P, 2009. Use of simulated and real data to identify heterogeneity domains in scale-divergent forest landscapes. Forest Ecol Manage 258: 2490-2500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.005
Díez MA, Izquierdo B, Malagón E, 2016. Increasing the use of evaluation through participation: The experience of a rural sustainable development plan evaluation. Environ Policy Govern 26 (5): 366-376 https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1711
Doody DG, Kearney P, Barry J, Moles R, O'Regan B, 2009. Evaluation of the Q-method as a method of public participation in the selection of sustainable development indicators. Ecol Ind 9: 1129-1137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.12.011
Elsasser P, 2007. Do "stakeholders" represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany. Forest Policy Econ 9: 1018-1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2006.10.002
FAO, 2010. Elaboración de una política forestal eficaz - Una guía. (Development of an effective forest policy - A guide). Roma.
Fiorino D, 1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanism. Sci Technol Hum Values 15 (2): 226-243. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399001500204
Frøik Molin J, Konijnendijk CC, 2014. Between big ideas and daily realities – The roles and perspectives of Danish municipal green space managers on public involvement in green space maintenance. Urban For Urban Green 13(3): 553-561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2014.03.006
Fuentes-Santos I, Marey-Pérez MF, González-Manteiga W, 2013. Forest fire spatial pattern analysis in Galicia (NW Spain). J Environ Manage 128: 30-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.04.020
Galiana L, Aguilar S, Lázaro A, 2013. An assessment of the effects of forest-related policies upon wildland fires in the European Union: Applying the subsidiarity principle. Forest Policy Econ 29: 36-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.10.010
Gómez-Limón J, Lucio-Fernández JV, 1999. Changes in use and landscape preferences on the agricultural-livestock landscapes of the central Iberian Peninsula (Madrid, Spain). Landscape Urban Plann 44: 165-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00020-1
Gómez-Vázquez I, Álvarez-Álvarez P, Marey-Pérez M, 2009. Conflicts as enhancers or barriers to the management of privately owned common land: A method to analyze the role of conflicts on a regional basis. For Policy Econ 11: 617-627.
Gundersen V, Frivold LH, 2008. Public preferences for forest structures: A review of quantitative surveys from Finland, Norway and Sweden. Urban For Urban Green 7: 241-258 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2008.05.001
Herbert-Kijazi M, Kant S, 2011. Social acceptability of alternative forest regimes in Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, using stakeholder attitudes as metrics of uncertainty. For Policy Econ 13: 242-257.
Hickey GM, Innes JL, Kozak RA, 2007. Monitoring and information reporting for sustainable forest management: A regional comparison of forestry stakeholder perceptions. J Environ Manage 84: 572-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.07.004
Hirschnitz-Garbers M, Stoll-Kleemann S, 2011. Opportunities and barriers in the implementation of protected area management: a qualitative meta-analysis of case studies from European protected areas. Geograph J 177: 321-334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2010.00391.x
Hoyos D, Mariela P, Pascual U, Etxano I, 2012. Valuing a Natura 2000 network site to inform land use options using a discrete choice experiment: An illustration from the Basque Country. J Forest Econ 18: 329-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2012.05.002
Jalilova G, Khadka C, Vacik H, 2012. Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan. For Policy Econ 21: 32-43.
Jansson M, Gunnarsson A, Martensson F, Andersson S, 2014. Children's perspectives on vegetation establishment: Implications for school ground greening. Urban For Urban Green 13: 166-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.09.003
Jaraiz-Cabanillas FJ, Mora-Aliseda J, Gutiérrez-Gallego JA, Jeong JS, 2013. Comparison of regional planning strategies: Countywide general plans in USA and territorial plans in Spain. Land Use Policy 30: 758-773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.06.001
Jones N, Clark JRA, Panteli M, Proikaki M, Dimitrakopoulos PG, 2012. Local social capital and the acceptance of Protected Area policies: An empirical study of two Ramsar river delta ecosystems in northern Greece. J Environ Manage 96: 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.10.012
Kangas J, Kangas A, 2005. Multiple criteria decision support in forest management — The approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. For Ecol Manage 207: 133-143.
Kangas A, Saarinen N, Saarikoski H, Leskinen LA, Hujala T, Tikkanen J, 2010. Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for regional forest programmes in Finland. For Policy Econ 12: 213-222.
Lakicevic M, Srdjevic Z, Srdejevic B, Zlatic M, 2014. Decision making in urban forestry by using approval voting and multicriteria approval method (case study: Zvezdarska forest, Belgrade, Serbia). Urban For Urban Green 13: 114-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.11.001
Lee N, 2006. Briding the gap between theory and practice in integrated assessment. Environ Impact Assess 26: 57-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2005.01.001
Lockwood M, 2010. Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: A framework, principles and performance outcomes. J Environ Manage 91: 754-766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.10.005
Marey-Pérez MF, Rodríguez-Vicente V, 2008. Forest transition in Northern Spain: Local responses on large-scale programmes of field-afforestation. Land Use Policy 26: 139-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.02.004
Marey-Pérez MF, Bruña-García X, Franco-Vázquez L, 2009. Plan Forestal del Distrito Fonsagrada os Ancares. Technical Project. Consellería de Medio Rural, Xunta de Galicia.
Marey-Pérez MF, Gómez-Vázquez I, Díaz-Varela ER, 2010. Different approaches to the social vision of communal land management: the case of Galicia (Spain). Span J Agric Res 8: 848-863. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2010083-1287
Marey-Pérez MF, Rodríguez-Vicente V, Álvarez-López CJ, 2012. Practical application of multivariant analysis techniques to the forest management of active farmers in the northwest of Spain. Small Scale Forestry 11 (4): 453-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-012-9195-1
McCaffrey SM, Stidham M, Toman E, Shindler B, 2011. Outreach programs, peer pressure, and common sense: What motivates homeowners to mitigate wildfire risk? Environ Manage 48: 475-488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9704-6
MCPFE, 2007. Five Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe - Conference Proceedings, Warsaw, Poland. Viena, Austria.
Mendoza GA, Martins H, 2006. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. For Ecol Manage 230: 1-22.
Moreira F, Viedma O, Arianoutsou M, Curt T, Koutsias N, Rigolot E, Barbati A, Corona P, Vaz, P, Xanthopoulos G, Mouillot F, Bilgili E, 2011. Landscape wildfire interactions in southern Europe: implications for landscape management. J Environ Manage 92: 2389-2402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.06.028
Niedzialkowski K, Paavola J, Jedrzejewska B, 2012. Participation and protected areas governance: the impact of changing influence of local authorities on the conservation of the Bialowieza Primeval Forest, Poland. Ecol Soc 17 (1): 2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04461-170102
Nielsen AB, Olsen SB, Lundhede T, 2007. An economic valuation of the recreational benefits associated with nature-based forest management practices. Landscape Urban Plann 80: 63-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.06.003
Nordström EM, Eriksson Ljusk O, Öhman K, 2010. Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: experience from a case study in northern Sweden. For Policy Econ 12(8): 562-574.
Primmer E, Kyllönen S, 2006. Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme. For Policy Econ 8: 838-853.
Rauschmayer F, Van den Hove S, Koetz T, 2009. Participation in EU biodiversity governance: how far beyond rhetoric? Environ Plann C: Govern Policy 27 (1): 42-58. https://doi.org/10.1068/c0703j
Riveiro-Valiño JA, Álvarez-López CJ, Marey-Pérez MF, 2009. The use of discriminant analysis to validate a methodology for classifying farms based on a combinatorial algorithm. Comp Electron Agr 66: 113-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2008.12.001
Rodríguez-Darias A, Sanatana Talavera A, Díaz Rodríguez P, 2016. Landscape perceptions and social evaluation of heritage-building processes. Environ Policy Govern 26 (5): 394-408. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1709
Rodríguez-Vicente V, Marey-Pérez M, 2010. Analysis of individual private forestry in northern Spain according to economic factors related to management. J Forest Econ 16: 269-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2010.06.001
Sheppard SRJ, Meitner M, 2005. Using multi-criteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups. For Ecol Manage 207: 171-187.
Sipilä M, Tyrväinen L, 2005. Evaluation of collaborative urban forest planning in Helsinki, Finland. Urban For Urban Green 4: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2005.06.002
Stenseke M, 2009. Local participation in cultural landscape maintenance: Lessons from Sweden. Land Use Policy 26: 214-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.01.005
Stirling A, 2006. Analysis, participation and power: justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis. Land Use Policy 23: 95-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010
Tilt JH, Kearney AR, Bradley G, 2007. Understanding rural character: Cognitive and visual perceptions. Landscape Urban Plann 81: 14-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.09.007
Uhde B, Hahn WA, Griess VC, Knoke T, 2015. Hybrid MCDA methods to integrate multiple ecosystem services in forest management planning: A critical review. Environ Manage 56 (2): 373-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0503-3
Velázquez J, Tejera R, Hernando A, Núñez MV, 2010. Environmental diagnosis: Integrating biodiversity conservation in management of Natura 2000 forest spaces. J Nat Conserv 18: 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2010.01.004
Xunta de Galicia, 2001. O monte galego en cifras. Consellería de Medio Ambiente, Dirección Xeral de Montes e Medio Ambiente Natural. Spain.
Xunta de Galicia, 2016. PLADIGA, Plan de Defensa contra Incendios Forestais de Galicia. Consellería do Medio Rural. Spain.
Young JC, Jordan A, Searle KR, Butler A, Chapman DS, Simmons P, Watt AD, 2013. Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation? Biol Conserv 158: 359-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.018
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
