IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v59y2015icp27-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social participation into regional forest planning attending to multifunctional objectives

Author

Listed:
  • Rico, Margarita
  • González, Andrés

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to determine the adequate forest strategy to fulfil the multi-functional objectives that society demands. To this end, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been applied as a quantitative technique to prioritise various forestry planning measures in the Autonomous Region of Castilla y León, based on the opinion of a group of stakeholders representing the region's forestry sector. The need to promote this forest multi-functionality is a matter of priority for forest policies at international, national and regional levels. The final results indicate that society prefers clearly multi-functional forests, judging from the highly balanced weightings given to social, environmental and economic objectives and action measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Rico, Margarita & González, Andrés, 2015. "Social participation into regional forest planning attending to multifunctional objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 27-34.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:27-34
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411530006X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.007?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. Dwivedi, Puneet & Alavalapati, Janaki R.R., 2009. "Stakeholders' perceptions on forest biomass-based bioenergy development in the southern US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1999-2007, May.
    2. Fichtner, John, 1986. "On deriving priority vectors from matrices of pairwise comparisons," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 341-345.
    3. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    4. Otrachshenkoy, Vladimir, 2014. "The Passive Use Value of the Mediterranean Forest," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 187288, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Buttoud, Gerard, 2002. "Multipurpose management of mountain forests: which approaches?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 83-87, June.
    6. Weber, Martin & Borcherding, Katrin, 1993. "Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Laininen, Pertti & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2003. "Analyzing AHP-matrices by regression," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 514-524, August.
    10. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    11. Farcy, Christine & Devillez, Freddy, 2005. "New orientations of forest management planning from an historical perspective of the relations between man and nature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 85-95, January.
    12. Barrio, Melina & Loureiro, Maria L., 2010. "A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1023-1030, March.
    13. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    14. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Jesús Barreiro Hurlé, 2007. "Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality: Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 218-241, June.
    15. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    16. Mau-Crimmins, Theresa & de Steiguer, J. E. & Dennis, Donald, 2005. "AHP as a means for improving public participation: a pre-post experiment with university students," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 501-514, May.
    17. Easley, Robert F. & Valacich, Joseph S. & Venkataramanan, M. A., 2000. "Capturing group preferences in a multicriteria decision," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 73-83, August.
    18. Vladimir Otrachshenkoy, 2014. "The Passive Use Value of the Mediterranean Forest," Working Papers 2014.86, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    19. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2003. "The use of Analytic Hierarchy Process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 13-26, January.
    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. 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. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nghiem, Nhung, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation by farm income levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 185-194.
    3. Grilli, Gianluca & Jonkisz, Jaroslaw & Ciolli, Marco & Lesinski, Jerzy, 2016. "Mixed forests and ecosystem services: Investigating stakeholders' perceptions in a case study in the Polish Carpathians," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 11-17.
    4. Susete Marques & Marco Marto & Vladimir Bushenkov & Marc McDill & JoséG. Borges, 2017. "Addressing Wildfire Risk in Forest Management Planning with Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.

    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. Zein Kallas & Teresa Serra & José Maria Gil, 2010. "Farmers’ objectives as determinants of organic farming adoption: the case of Catalonian vineyard production," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 409-423, September.
    2. Gomez-Limon, J.A. & Atance, I., 2004. "Identification of public objectives related to agricultural sector support," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(8-9), pages 1045-1071, December.
    3. José A. Gómez-Limón & Ignacio Atance, 2004. "Identification of Public Objectives Related to Agricultural Sector Support," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/57, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    4. Fatima Lambarraa-Lehnhardt & Rico Ihle & Khadija Mhaouch, 2021. "Geographical indications for supporting rural development in the context of the Green Morocco Plan: Oasis dates," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(2), pages 70-79.
    5. Pérez-Mesa, Juan Carlos & Galdeano-Gómez, Emilio & Salinas Andújar, Jose A., 2012. "Logistics network and externalities for short sea transport: An analysis of horticultural exports from southeast Spain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 188-198.
    6. Haque, H.M. Enamul & Dhakal, Shobhakar & Mostafa, S.M.G., 2020. "An assessment of opportunities and challenges for cross-border electricity trade for Bangladesh using SWOT-AHP approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2008. "Multi-attribute preference modelling and regional land-use planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 325-335, April.
    8. S. Miškolci, 2008. "Multifunctional agriculture: evaluation of non-production benefits using the Analytical Hierarchy Process," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 54(7), pages 322-332.
    9. Kallas, Zein & Baba, Yasmina & Rabell, Maria Cristina, 2012. "How Important Are Cultural and Environmental Objectives for Rice farmers in South Senegal?," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125980, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    11. Gerda Ana Melnik-Leroy & Gintautas Dzemyda, 2021. "How to Influence the Results of MCDM?—Evidence of the Impact of Cognitive Biases," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-25, January.
    12. Fatima Lambarraa-Lehnhardt & Rico Ihle & Hajar Elyoubi, 2021. "How Successful Is Origin Labeling in a Developing Country Context? Moroccan Consumers’ Preferences toward Local Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Kangas, Annika & Laukkanen, Sanna & Kangas, Jyrki, 2006. "Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest management--a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 77-92, November.
    14. Brunnhofer, Magdalena & Gabriella, Natasha & Schöggl, Josef-Peter & Stern, Tobias & Posch, Alfred, 2020. "The biorefinery transition in the European pulp and paper industry – A three-phase Delphi study including a SWOT-AHP analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    15. Alfredo Altuzarra & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2010. "Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1755-1773, December.
    16. Collins Okello & Stefania Pindozzi & Salvatore Faugno & Lorenzo Boccia, 2014. "Appraising Bioenergy Alternatives in Uganda Using Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT)-Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and a Desirability Functions Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-22, February.
    17. Uddin, Mohammad Nizam & Hossain, Mohammad Mosharraf & Chen, Yong & Siriwong, Wapakorn & Boonyanuphap, Jaruntorn, 2019. "Stakeholders' perception on indigenous community-based management of village common forests in Chittagong hill tracts, Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 102-112.
    18. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    19. Sugimura, Ken & Howard, Theodore E., 2008. "Incorporating social factors to improve the Japanese forest zoning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 161-173, January.
    20. Altuzarra, Alfredo & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria & Salvador, Manuel, 2007. "A Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 367-382, 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:59:y:2015:i:c:p:27-34. 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.