IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v21y2012icp32-43.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan

Author

Listed:
  • Jalilova, Gulnaz
  • Khadka, Chiranjeewee
  • Vacik, Harald

Abstract

The management of the walnut-fruit forests is one of the key issues in the forestry sector of Kyrgyzstan as it has to address the challenges related to the conservation of forest resources, socio-economic efficiency and the livelihoods of people. The demand for an assessment of the current forest management, which generally involves criteria and indicators (C&I) at all levels, from local to national has increased in the last decade. Therefore a case study has been done, applying a combination of a top-down and bottom-up approach with multi-criteria analysis (MCA) to identify a set of C&I with different groups of stakeholders in selected sites at the forestry management unit level (leshoz). Six workshops and a series of discussion meetings were conducted to perform a sound analysis of the preferences of four different stakeholder groups. A final set of C&I that consists of seven criteria and 45 indicators has been identified for evaluating sustainable forest management (SFM) in the walnut-fruit forests. Forest health and vitality was found to be the most important criterion, while the maintenance of forest biodiversity was found to be the least prioritized among other criteria. Furthermore, four different management strategies were developed by foresters, research groups, ecologists and forest administrators in order to overcome the present challenges in forest management. By utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), one particular management strategy (MS II) was identified by all stakeholder groups as being the overall best alternative strategy. It was shown that the consideration of non-timber forest products and other options for income generation can improve the livelihood of the people, increase the productivity of resources as well as conserving the gene pool for maintaining forest biodiversity. The findings of this study highlight the importance of a C&I evaluation and its further policy implications. Moreover, it is discussed how the involvement of local stakeholders in the decision making process and their participation in forest management could be stimulated by the C&I development process in the walnut forests of Kyrgyzstan.

Suggested Citation

  • Jalilova, Gulnaz & Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Vacik, Harald, 2012. "Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 32-43.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:21:y:2012:i:c:p:32-43
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112000299
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.010?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. 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.
    2. Brang, Peter & Courbaud, Benoit & Fischer, Anton & Kissling-Naf, Ingrid & Pettenella, Davide & Schonenberger, Walter & Spork, Josef & Grimm, Volker, 2002. "Developing indicators for the sustainable management of mountain forests using a modelling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 113-123, June.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    4. Reed, Mark S. & Fraser, Evan D.G. & Dougill, Andrew J., 2006. "An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 406-418, October.
    5. Mrosek, Thorsten & Balsillie, David & Schleifenbaum, Peter, 2006. "Field testing of a criteria and indicators system for sustainable forest management at the local level. Case study results concerning the sustainability of the private forest Haliburton Forest and Wil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 593-609, August.
    6. Aczel, Janos & Roberts, Fred S., 1989. "On the possible merging functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 205-243, June.
    7. Vodouhê, Fifanou G. & Coulibaly, Ousmane & Adégbidi, Anselme & Sinsin, Brice, 2010. "Community perception of biodiversity conservation within protected areas in Benin," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(7), pages 505-512, September.
    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. Hussein Samh Al-Masroori & Shekar Bose, 2021. "Fisheries sustainability assessment and sensitivity analysis: an illustration," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16283-16303, November.
    2. Azamat Azarov & Zbynek Polesny & Dietrich Darr & Maksim Kulikov & Vladimir Verner & Roy C. Sidle, 2022. "Classification of Mountain Silvopastoral Farming Systems in Walnut Forests of Kyrgyzstan: Determining Opportunities for Sustainable Livelihoods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Anissa Frini & Sarah Benamor, 2018. "Making Decisions in a Sustainable Development Context: A State-of-the-Art Survey and Proposal of a Multi-period Single Synthesizing Criterion Approach," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(2), pages 341-385, August.
    4. Drupp, Moritz A. & Baumgärtner, Stefan & Meyer, Moritz & Quaas, Martin F. & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2020. "Between Ostrom and Nordhaus: The research landscape of sustainability economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    5. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin, 2019. "Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Yitagesu Tekle Tegegne & Mathias Cramm & Jo Van Brusselen, 2018. "Sustainable Forest Management, FLEGT, and REDD+: Exploring Interlinkages to Strengthen Forest Policy Coherence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    7. Pokharel, Ridish K. & Neupane, Prem Raj & Tiwari, Krishna Raj & Köhl, Michael, 2015. "Assessing the sustainability in community based forestry: A case from Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 75-84.
    8. Miguel Arato & Stijn Speelman & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2014. "The contribution of non‐timber forest products towards sustainable rural development: The case of Candelilla wax from the Chihuahuan Desert in Mexico," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(2), pages 141-153, May.
    9. Jafari, Ali & Sadeghi Kaji, Hamdollah & Azadi, Hossein & Gebrehiwot, Kindeya & Aghamir, Fateme & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Assessing the sustainability of community forest management: A case study from Iran," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 1-8.
    10. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    11. Valls Pablo & Jakešová Lenka & Vallés Maria & Galiana Francisco, 2012. "Sustainability of Mediterranean Spanish forest management through stakeholder views," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 4(4), pages 269-282, January.
    12. Vassiliki Kazana & Angelos Kazaklis & Dimitrios Raptis & Christos Stamatiou, 2020. "A combined multi-criteria approach to assess forest management sustainability: an application to the forests of Eastern Macedonia & Thrace Region in Greece," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 321-343, November.
    13. Shigaeva, Jyldyz & Darr, Dietrich, 2020. "On the socio-economic importance of natural and planted walnut (Juglans regia L.) forests in the Silk Road countries: A systematic review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    14. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Aryal, Keshava Prasad & Edwards-Jonášová, Magda & Upadhyaya, Anju & Dhungana, Nabin & Cudlin, Pavel & Vacik, Harald, 2018. "Evaluating participatory techniques for adaptation to climate change: Nepal case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 73-82.

    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. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    3. Lähtinen, Katja & Myllyviita, Tanja & Leskinen, Pekka & Pitkänen, Sari K., 2014. "A systematic literature review on indicators to assess local sustainability of forest energy production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1202-1216.
    4. Brandt, Patric & Kvakić, Marko & Butterbach-Bahl, Klaus & Rufino, Mariana C., 2017. "How to target climate-smart agriculture? Concept and application of the consensus-driven decision support framework “targetCSA”," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 234-245.
    5. Tanja Myllyviita & Katja Lähtinen & Teppo Hujala & Leena Leskinen & Lauri Sikanen & Pekka Leskinen, 2014. "Identifying and rating cultural sustainability indicators: a case study of wood-based bioenergy systems in eastern Finland," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 287-304, April.
    6. Çağlar Kıvanç Kaymaz & Salih Birinci & Yusuf Kızılkan, 2022. "Sustainable development goals assessment of Erzurum province with SWOT-AHP analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 2986-3012, March.
    7. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    8. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    9. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    10. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    12. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    13. Hallberg-Sramek, Isabella & Nordström, Eva-Maria & Priebe, Janina & Reimerson, Elsa & Mårald, Erland & Nordin, Annika, 2023. "Combining scientific and local knowledge improves evaluating future scenarios of forest ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    15. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    16. Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Srivastava, Praveen Ranjan & Eachempati, Prajwal & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2024. "Exploring the impact of key performance factors on energy markets: From energy risk management perspectives," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    17. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    18. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    19. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    20. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.

    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:21:y:2012:i:c:p:32-43. 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.