IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v142y2022ics1389934122001149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying interests and values in forest areas through collaborative processes and landscape resource analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Grundel, Ida
  • Christenson, Nina
  • Dahlström, Margareta

Abstract

Today's societies face significant ecological and societal challenges, including climate change and economic crises. In this context, forests can be a useful resource for new innovations and products. However, increased out-take of forest resources can raise the pressure on common forest resources and increase already existing conflicts between e.g. forestry and production versus conservation. Herein, the objective of this paper was to explore a collaborative process, namely landscape resource analysis (LRA), as a tool to identify a variety of values and sometimes conflicting interests and to improve communication about these among different stakeholders by using maps and GIS. The method was applied to a small forest area, Norra Klarälvsdalen, in Värmland County, Sweden. The area hosts a variety of forest owners, firms and companies in different sectors and several voluntary organisations with interest in the local forest. The study showed that LRA in combination with GIS has the potential to add value to collaborative processes in local planning and forest decision making processes. Even though it is difficult to guarantee broad representation in collaborative processes, the LRA served to identify a wide range of values and conflicting interests among the local participants including as well immaterial, e.g. cultural ecosystem services, as material and monetary values in the forest area. It also served as a tool for social learning and put focus on local citizens perspectives and experiences in addition to ‘experts’ of forest landscapes.

Suggested Citation

  • Grundel, Ida & Christenson, Nina & Dahlström, Margareta, 2022. "Identifying interests and values in forest areas through collaborative processes and landscape resource analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:142:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122001149
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102801
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934122001149
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102801?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    2. Buchy, M. & Hoverman, S., 2000. "Understanding public participation in forest planning: a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 15-25, May.
    3. Gritten, David & Mola-Yudego, Blas & Delgado-Matas, Cristóbal & Kortelainen, Jarmo, 2013. "A quantitative review of the representation of forest conflicts across the world: Resource periphery and emerging patterns," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 11-20.
    4. Johansson, Johanna, 2016. "Participation and deliberation in Swedish forest governance: The process of initiating a National Forest Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 137-146.
    5. Valkeapää, Annukka & Karppinen, Heimo, 2013. "Citizens' view of legitimacy in the context of Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 52-59.
    6. Wallin, Ida & Carlsson, Julia & Hansen, Hans Peter, 2016. "Envisioning future forested landscapes in Sweden – Revealing local-national discrepancies through participatory action research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 25-40.
    7. Angelstam, Per & Elbakidze, Marine & Axelsson, Robert & Khoroshev, Alexander & Pedroli, Bas & Tysiachniouk, Maria & Zabubenin, Evgeny, 2019. "Model forests in Russia as landscape approach: Demonstration projects or initiatives for learning towards sustainable forest management?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 96-110.
    8. Mola-Yudego, Blas & Gritten, David, 2010. "Determining forest conflict hotspots according to academic and environmental groups," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 575-580, October.
    9. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    10. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hung-Jung Siao & Sue-Huai Gau & Jen-Hwa Kuo & Ming-Guo Li & Chang-Jung Sun, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Environmental, Social, and Governance Management Research from 2002 to 2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Hugo Castro Noblejas & Pierfrancesco De Paola & Jesús Vías Martínez, 2023. "Landscape Value in the Spanish Costa del Sol’s Real Estate Market: The Case of Marbella," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Cristina Dalla Torre & Rocco Scolozzi & Elisa Ravazzoli & Paola Gatto, 2024. "Endangered Commons? Modeling the Effects of Demographic Trends Coupled with Admission Rules to Common Property Institutions," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Kumeh, Eric Mensah, 2023. "Contestations, counteractions and equitable conservation – a case study of Ghana's Krokosua Hills Forest Reserve," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Per Angelstam & Terrence Bush & Michael Manton, 2023. "Challenges and Solutions for Forest Biodiversity Conservation in Sweden: Assessment of Policy, Implementation Outputs, and Consequences," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-58, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    2. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    3. Bethmann, Stephanie & Simminger, Eva & Baldy, Jana & Schraml, Ulrich, 2018. "Forestry in interaction. Shedding light on dynamics of public opinion with a praxeological methodology," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 93-101.
    4. Kangas, Annika & Heikkilä, Juuso & Malmivaara-Lämsä, Minna & Löfström, Irja, 2014. "Case Puijo—Evaluation of a participatory urban forest planning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 13-23.
    5. Weber, Norbert, 2018. "Participation or involvement? Development of forest strategies on national and sub-national level in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 98-106.
    6. Kozová, Mária & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Pauditšová, Eva & Tomčíková, Ivana & Rakytová, Iveta, 2018. "Network and participatory governance in urban forestry: An assessment of examples from selected Slovakian cities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 31-41.
    7. Jose Eugenio Martínez-Falero & Esperanza Ayuga-Tellez & Concepcion Gonzalez-Garcia & M. Angeles Grande-Ortiz & Alvaro Sánchez De Medina Garrido, 2017. "Experts’ Analysis of the Quality and Usability of SILVANET Software for Informing Sustainable Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    8. Nordström, Eva-Maria & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola & Öhman, Karin, 2010. "Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 562-574, October.
    9. Dhiaulhaq, Ahmad & Gritten, David & De Bruyn, Toon & Yasmi, Yurdi & Zazali, Ahmad & Silalahi, Mangarah, 2014. "Transforming conflict in plantations through mediation: Lessons and experiences from Sumatera, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 22-30.
    10. Winkel, Georg & Lovrić, Marko & Muys, Bart & Katila, Pia & Lundhede, Thomas & Pecurul, Mireia & Pettenella, Davide & Pipart, Nathalie & Plieninger, Tobias & Prokofieva, Irina & Parra, Constanza & Pülz, 2022. "Governing Europe's forests for multiple ecosystem services: Opportunities, challenges, and policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Erbaugh, James & Bierbaum, Rosina & Castilleja, Guillermo & da Fonseca, Gustavo A.B. & Hansen, Steffen Cole Brandstrup, 2019. "Toward sustainable agriculture in the tropics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 158-162.
    12. Teder, Meelis & Kaimre, Paavo, 2018. "The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-62.
    13. Mi Sun Park & Hyowon Lee, 2016. "Legal Opportunities for Public Participation in Forest Management in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-13, April.
    14. Stjernström Olof & Pettersson Örjan & Karlsson Svante, 2018. "How Can Sweden Deal with Forest Management and Municipal Planning in the System of Ongoing Land-Use and Multilevel Planning?," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 23-37, March.
    15. Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    17. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Shkaruba, Anton, 2018. "Governance and legitimacy of the Forest Stewardship Council certification in the national contexts – A comparative study of Belarus and Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 180-188.
    19. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Gustavsson, Roland & Konijnendijk, Cecil & Ode, Asa, 2006. "Visualization and landscape laboratories in planning, design and management of urban woodlands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 811-823, November.
    20. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:142:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122001149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.