IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v19y2012icp12-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public preferences for structural attributes of forests: Towards a pan-European perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Edwards, David
  • Jay, Marion
  • Jensen, Frank S.
  • Lucas, Beatriz
  • Marzano, Mariella
  • Montagné, Claire
  • Peace, Andrew
  • Weiss, Gerhard

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a Delphi survey, conducted in four European regions (Great Britain, Nordic Region, Central Europe and Iberia) to assess public preferences for 12 key structural attributes of forests. The objectives were to explore the extent to which generalisations can be made about preferences of forests as sites for recreational use, and how regional variations in preferences may be explained in terms of cultural differences in local populations and bio-physical characteristics of the forests in each region. Survey participants were asked to classify the relationship, and quantify the relative importance, of each attribute to the recreational value of forests in their respective regions. While there was agreement across regions on the type of relationship and level of importance for many of the attributes, there were some notable outliers, for example ‘residue from felling and thinning’ scored lowest in Central Europe and highly in the other three regions. Indicative explanations for regional variations are proposed, focusing on combinations of cultural and biophysical factors, and drawing on the literature on forest preferences, place attachment and cultural landscapes.

Suggested Citation

  • Edwards, David & Jay, Marion & Jensen, Frank S. & Lucas, Beatriz & Marzano, Mariella & Montagné, Claire & Peace, Andrew & Weiss, Gerhard, 2012. "Public preferences for structural attributes of forests: Towards a pan-European perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 12-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:19:y:2012:i:c:p:12-19
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111001080
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.07.006?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. Zandersen, Marianne & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 109-130, January.
    2. Nick Novakowski & Barry Wellar, 2008. "Using the Delphi Technique in Normative Planning Research: Methodological Design Considerations," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(6), pages 1485-1500, June.
    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. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    2. Dastan Bamwesigye & Petra Hlavackova & Andrea Sujova & Jitka Fialova & Petr Kupec, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Forest Existence Value and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin & Phin, Sopheap, 2017. "Sustainable management of forest in view of media attention to REDD+ policy, opportunity and impact in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 10-21.
    4. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    5. Ghimire, Ramesh & Ferreira, Susana & Green, Gary T. & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Cordell, H. Ken & Thapa, Janani R., 2017. "Green Space and Adult Obesity in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 201-212.
    6. Verkerk, P.J. & Mavsar, R. & Giergiczny, M. & Lindner, M. & Edwards, D. & Schelhaas, M.J., 2014. "Assessing impacts of intensified biomass production and biodiversity protection on ecosystem services provided by European forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 155-165.
    7. Giergiczny, Marek & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Żylicz, Tomasz & Angelstam, Per, 2015. "Choice experiment assessment of public preferences for forest structural attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 8-23.
    8. Boncinelli, Fabio & Riccioli, Francesco & Marone, Enrico, 2015. "Do forests help to keep my body mass index low?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 11-17.
    9. Arnberger, Arne & Eder, Renate & Allex, Brigitte & Preisel, Hemma & Ebenberger, Martin & Husslein, Maria, 2018. "Trade-offs between wind energy, recreational, and bark-beetle impacts on visual preferences of national park visitors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 166-177.
    10. Sacher, Philipp & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Mayer, Marius, 2022. "Evidence of the association between deadwood and forest recreational site choices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    12. Ranacher, L. & Lähtinen, K. & Järvinen, E. & Toppinen, A., 2017. "Perceptions of the general public on forest sector responsibility: A survey related to ecosystem services and forest sector business impacts in four European countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 180-189.
    13. Luigi La Riccia & Vanessa Assumma & Marta Carla Bottero & Federico Dell’Anna & Angioletta Voghera, 2023. "A Contingent Valuation-Based Method to Valuate Ecosystem Services for a Proactive Planning and Management of Cork Oak Forests in Sardinia (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-28, May.
    14. Emilia Janeczko & Krzysztof Czyżyk & Małgorzata Woźnicka & Tomasz Dudek & Jitka Fialova & Natalia Korcz, 2024. "The Importance of Forest Management in Psychological Restoration: Exploring the Effects of Landscape Change in a Suburban Forest," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Fen Luo & Chen Wang & Haiqian Lei & Zhijun Xiao, 2023. "Young Adults’ Perception of Forests Using Landscape-Image-Sketching Technique: A Case Study of Changsha, Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-13, February.
    16. Richard Yao & David Palmer & Barbara Hock & Duncan Harrison & Tim Payn & Juan Monge, 2019. "Forest Investment Framework as a Support Tool for the Sustainable Management of Planted Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, June.
    17. Gianluca Grilli & Sandro Sacchelli, 2020. "Health Benefits Derived from Forest: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-11, August.
    18. Markéta Braun Kohlová & Petra Nepožitková & Jan Melichar, 2021. "How Do Observable Characteristics of Post-Mining Forests Affect Their Attractiveness for Recreation?," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, August.
    19. Filyushkina, Anna & Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Strange, Niels & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2017. "Preferences for variation in forest characteristics: Does diversity between stands matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 22-29.
    20. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
    21. Zygmunt, Robert & Gluszak, Michal, 2015. "Forest proximity impact on undeveloped land values: A spatial hedonic study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 82-89.
    22. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.
    23. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.

    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. Gerd Lupp & Bernhard Förster & Valerie Kantelberg & Tim Markmann & Johannes Naumann & Carolina Honert & Marc Koch & Stephan Pauleit, 2016. "Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Dhakal, Bhubaneswor & Yao, Richard T. & Turner, James A. & Barnard, Tim, 2012. "Recreational users' willingness to pay and preferences for changes in planted forest features," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 34-44.
    3. Pelletier, Marie-Chantale & Heagney, Elizabeth & Kovač, Mladen, 2021. "Valuing recreational services: A review of methods with application to New South Wales National Parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    4. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    5. de Loë, Rob C. & Melnychuk, Natalya & Murray, Dan & Plummer, Ryan, 2016. "Advancing the State of Policy Delphi Practice: A Systematic Review Evaluating Methodological Evolution, Innovation, and Opportunities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 78-88.
    6. Abbie A. Rogers & Fiona L. Dempster & Jacob I. Hawkins & Robert J. Johnston & Peter C. Boxall & John Rolfe & Marit E. Kragt & Michael P. Burton & David J. Pannell, 2019. "Valuing non-market economic impacts from natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 99(2), pages 1131-1161, November.
    7. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    8. Heagney, E.C. & Rose, J.M. & Ardeshiri, A. & Kovac, M., 2019. "The economic value of tourism and recreation across a large protected area network," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Diluiso, Francesca & Guastella, Gianni & Pareglio, Stefano, 2021. "Changes in urban green spaces’ value perception: A meta-analytic benefit transfer function for European cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    10. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    11. Stephen B. Stewart & Anthony P. O’Grady & Daniel S. Mendham & Greg S. Smith & Philip J. Smethurst, 2022. "Digital Tools for Quantifying the Natural Capital Benefits of Agroforestry: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-32, September.
    12. Pettinotti, Laetitia & de Ayala, Amaia & Ojea, Elena, 2018. "Benefits From Water Related Ecosystem Services in Africa and Climate Change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 294-305.
    13. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John & Hynes, Stephen & Landgraf, Gavin, 2017. "The value of tourist angling: a travel cost method estimation of demand for two destination salmon rivers in Ireland," Papers WP570, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    14. De Salvo, Maria & Signorello, Giovanni, 2015. "Non-market valuation of recreational services in Italy: A meta-analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 47-62.
    15. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Maes, Joachim & Hartje, Volkmar, 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 33-46.
    16. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    17. Belton, Ian & MacDonald, Alice & Wright, George & Hamlin, Iain, 2019. "Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: A six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 72-82.
    18. Upton, Vincent & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal, 2014. "A spatially explicit national demand model for forest recreation in Ireland," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    19. Riera, Pere & Signorello, Giovanni & Thiene, Mara & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Navrud, Ståle & Kaval, Pamela & Rulleau, Benedicte & Mavsar, Robert & Madureira, Lívia & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Elsasser, Pe, 2012. "Non-market valuation of forest goods and services: Good practice guidelines," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 259-270.
    20. Heagney, E.C. & Rose, J.M. & Ardeshiri, A. & Kovač, M., 2018. "Optimising recreation services from protected areas – Understanding the role of natural values, built infrastructure and contextual factors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 358-370.

    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:19:y:2012:i:c:p:12-19. 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.