IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v61y2015icp122-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combining scientific and stakeholder knowledge in future scenario development — A forest landscape case study in northern Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Carlsson, Julia
  • Eriksson, Ljusk Ola
  • Öhman, Karin
  • Nordström, Eva-Maria

Abstract

Northern Swedish forests provide multiple ecosystem services. Integrating these values into the forest planning process frequently requires that not only forest owners but also other stakeholders be involved. The objective of this study is to assess the potential of future scenario development as a tool in forest planning. In a case study of the Vilhelmina municipality in northern Sweden, forest owners and stakeholders were interviewed, and a workshop was held to discuss important factors for the future development of the local landscape regarding ecological, socioeconomic and political issues. Combined with a researcher-conducted process, this resulted in three alternative scenarios. We conclude that the scenario development process has produced information that can be used in forest planning. The participatory element of the scenario development process could be extended further to enhance communication, learning and knowledge exchange. The participants' contribution to the scenario construction could also be elaborated, e.g., by further involving stakeholders in the formulation of alternative future manifestations and in the elaboration of scenarios. To achieve this, it is necessary to adapt the quantitative methods to the participatory situation, to foster discussion qualities, to secure representation and increase motivation for participation in different ways.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlsson, Julia & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola & Öhman, Karin & Nordström, Eva-Maria, 2015. "Combining scientific and stakeholder knowledge in future scenario development — A forest landscape case study in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 122-134.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:122-134
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.08.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934115300393
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.08.008?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. Tietje, Olaf, 2005. "Identification of a small reliable and efficient set of consistent scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(2), pages 418-432, April.
    2. Kasper Kok & Hedwig van Delden, 2009. "Combining Two Approaches of Integrated Scenario Development to Combat Desertification in the Guadalentín Watershed, Spain," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(1), pages 49-66, February.
    3. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2012. "Forest owners and power: A Foucauldian study on Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 118-125.
    4. O'Brien, F. A., 2004. "Scenario planning--lessons for practice from teaching and learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 709-722, February.
    5. Kosow, Hannah & Gaßner, Robert, 2008. "Methods of future and scenario analysis: overview, assessment, and selection criteria," IDOS Studies, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), volume 39, number 39, July.
    6. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, April.
    7. Zachrisson, Anna & Beland Lindahl, Karin, 2013. "Conflict resolution through collaboration: Preconditions and limitations in forest and nature conservation controversies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 39-46.
    8. Thomas C. Beierle, 1999. "Using Social Goals To Evaluate Public Participation In Environmental Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 16(3‐4), pages 75-103, 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. Andersen, Per Dannemand & Hansen, Meiken & Selin, Cynthia, 2021. "Stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning—A review of European projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Ernst, Anna & Biß, Klaus H. & Shamon, Hawal & Schumann, Diana & Heinrichs, Heidi U., 2018. "Benefits and challenges of participatory methods in qualitative energy scenario development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 245-257.
    3. Christophe Orazio & Rebeca Cordero Montoya & Margot Régolini & José G. Borges & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & Susana Barreiro & Brigite Botequim & Susete Marques & Róbert Sedmák & Róbert Smreček & Yvonne Bro, 2017. "Decision Support Tools and Strategies to Simulate Forest Landscape Evolutions Integrating Forest Owner Behaviour: A Review from the Case Studies of the European Project, INTEGRAL," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-31, April.
    4. Santé, Inés & Tubío, José María & Miranda, David, 2020. "Public participation in defining landscape planning scenarios and landscape quality objectives (LQO): Landscape Guidelines for Galicia (NW Spain) case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    5. Heiskanen, Aleksi & Hurmekoski, Elias & Toppinen, Anne & Näyhä, Annukka, 2022. "Exploring the unknowns – State of the art in qualitative forest-based sector foresight research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Trubins, Renats & Jonsson, Ragnar & Wallin, Ida & Sallnäs, Ola, 2019. "Explicating behavioral assumptions in forest scenario modelling – the behavioral matrix approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 70-78.
    7. Mavhura, Emmanuel & Mushure, Sharon, 2019. "Forest and wildlife resource-conservation efforts based on indigenous knowledge: The case of Nharira community in Chikomba district, Zimbabwe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 83-90.
    8. Xiaoshu Li & G. Andrew Stainback, 2020. "On-Site Experience Effect on Stakeholders’ Preferences of Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-16, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke A. & Hengeveld, Geerten M. & de Jong, Rutger, 2017. "Analysing scenario approaches for forest management — One decade of experiences in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 222-234.
    11. Zigmārs Rendenieks & Līga Liepa, . "Three scenarios for tree species composition and stand age in new and permanent forest areas: A case study of Latvia," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 0.
    12. Hengeveld, Geerten M. & Schüll, Elmar & Trubins, Renats & Sallnäs, Ola, 2017. "Forest Landscape Development Scenarios (FoLDS)–A framework for integrating forest models, owners' behaviour and socio-economic developments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 245-255.
    13. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    14. Sandhu, Harpinder & Clarke, Beverley & Baring, Ryan & Anderson, Sharolyn & Fisk, Claire & Dittmann, Sabine & Walker, Stewart & Sutton, Paul & Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert, 2018. "Scenario planning including ecosystem services for a coastal region in South Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 194-207.
    15. Salomaa, Anna & Paloniemi, Riikka & Hujala, Teppo & Rantala, Salla & Arponen, Anni & Niemelä, Jari, 2016. "The use of knowledge in evidence-informed voluntary conservation of Finnish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 90-98.
    16. Yusuke Kishita & Takuma Masuda & Hidenori Nakamura & Kazumasu Aoki, 2023. "Computer‐aided scenario design using participatory backcasting: A case study of sustainable vision creation in a Japanese city," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), March.
    17. Jean Hugé & Behara Satyanarayana & Nibedita Mukherjee & Viviana Otero & Katherine Vande Velde & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2023. "Mapping research gaps for sustainable forest management based on the nominal group technique," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 10101-10121, September.

    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. Roland W Scholz & Michael Stauffacher, 2007. "Managing Transition in Clusters: Area Development Negotiations as a Tool for Sustaining Traditional Industries in a Swiss Prealpine Region," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(10), pages 2518-2539, October.
    2. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    3. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    4. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    5. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    6. Nazemi, Neda & Foley, Rider W. & Louis, Garrick & Keeler, Lauren Withycombe, 2020. "Divergent agricultural water governance scenarios: The case of Zayanderud basin, Iran," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    7. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    10. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    11. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. repec:ags:ijag24:345027 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    14. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    15. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Gatti, Stefano, 2013. "Risk analysis with contractual default. Does covenant breach matter?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 431-443.
    16. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    17. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Flavio R. Arroyo M. & Luis J. Miguel, 2019. "The Trends of the Energy Intensity and CO 2 Emissions Related to Final Energy Consumption in Ecuador: Scenarios of National and Worldwide Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    19. Clare Bayley & Simon French, 2008. "Designing a Participatory Process for Stakeholder Involvement in a Societal Decision," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 195-210, May.
    20. Richard Apatewen Azerigyik & Michael Poku-Boansi & Justice Kuffour Owusu-Ansah, 2024. "Herders’ Haven or Farmers’ Foe? Exploring Multi-Stakeholder Perspectives on Grazing Reserves and Transhumance Corridors," World, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-24, July.
    21. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    22. Peter Wilshusen, 2009. "Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 137-162, May.

    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:61:y:2015:i:c:p:122-134. 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.