IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v20y2012icp66-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflict management and community support for conservation in the Northern Forest: Case studies from Maine

Author

Listed:
  • Cottle, Morgan A.
  • Howard, Theodore E.

Abstract

Rapid land ownership changes in the Northern Forest of the eastern United States have spurred development as well as conservation. Local people have experienced differing degrees of participation in land use decisions. We examine two conservation projects from the Northern Forest state of Maine. This paper presents the policy processes from these projects and an assessment of their impact on conflict and support for the project. One project was a top-down approach, and the second was a grassroots, private effort by local citizens to conserve forestland. We gathered data via person interviews, mail surveys, and analysis of legislative testimony.

Suggested Citation

  • Cottle, Morgan A. & Howard, Theodore E., 2012. "Conflict management and community support for conservation in the Northern Forest: Case studies from Maine," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 66-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:20:y:2012:i:c:p:66-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112000366
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.015?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. Germain, Rene H. & Floyd, Donald W. & Stehman, Stephen V., 2001. "Public perceptions of the USDA Forest Service public participation process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 113-124, November.
    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. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    2. Nousiainen, Daniela & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2022. "Characteristics and emerging patterns of forest conflicts in Europe - What can they tell us?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Foster, Michaela & Peterson, M. Nils & Cubbage, Frederick & McMahon, Gerard, 2019. "Evaluating natural resource planning for longleaf pine ecosystems in the Southeast United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 142-153.
    3. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2003. "Incorporating stakeholder values into regional forest planning: a value function approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 75-90, April.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Scardina, Anthony V. & Mortimer, Michael J. & Dudley, Larkin, 2007. "Getting past the who and how many to the how and why in USDA Forest Service public involvement processes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 883-902, May.
    7. Hendee, Jacob T. & Flint, Courtney G., 2013. "Managing private forestlands along the public–private interface of Southern Illinois: Landowner forestry decisions in a multi-jurisdictional landscape," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 47-55.
    8. Joyce, Linda A., 2003. "Improving the flow of scientific information across the interface of forest science and policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 339-347, December.

    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:20:y:2012:i:c:p:66-71. 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.