Who cares what happens with planted forests? A public typology to assist community engagement and communication

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Karen M. Bayne , Andrea Grant
{"title":"Who cares what happens with planted forests? A public typology to assist community engagement and communication","authors":"Karen M. Bayne ,&nbsp;Andrea Grant","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Typology studies relating to forestry have typically tried to characterise private forest owners for the purposes of designing policies to fit owners' motivations and drives. However, little is known about how the public may perceive forestry both during and at the end of a planted rotation. As such, indications of public concern for current forest management practice can help to identify a different set of segments to influence decision making. Such a typology can help our understanding of social acceptability towards forest management practice as a legitimate consideration for wider public engagement in forest policy development.</p><p>A quantitative segmentation study was conducted into New Zealand public responses to planted forest operations, characterised by social acceptability concerns regarding three forest management practices – steepland harvesting, use of chemicals and mixed species forest regimes. We identified five key segments clustered according to differences in 22 dimensions along a gradient from most to least concern: ‘<em>Culturally Concerned’</em>; ‘<em>Distrustful Forest Users’; ‘Disengaged Socially Equitable Organics’</em>; ‘<em>High-Trust Non-Environmentalists’;</em> and ‘<em>Forestry-Supportive Environmentalists.’</em> Characteristics of these clusters based on demographics, value orientations and attitudes to forest management were derived creating a public-acceptance typology to support forestry communication and engagement efforts.</p><p>In addition to identification of forest management engagement strategies, our findings show increased visits and forest experience do not result in higher forest sector support for management practice, reflecting a need for more targeted levels of sector engagement with forest users. Recommendations on engaging diverse public segments in planted forestry management and maintaining social licence are provided.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 103332"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862/pdfft?md5=8f87f6b08f84288d3999b44b2cc707f3&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124001862-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Typology studies relating to forestry have typically tried to characterise private forest owners for the purposes of designing policies to fit owners' motivations and drives. However, little is known about how the public may perceive forestry both during and at the end of a planted rotation. As such, indications of public concern for current forest management practice can help to identify a different set of segments to influence decision making. Such a typology can help our understanding of social acceptability towards forest management practice as a legitimate consideration for wider public engagement in forest policy development.

A quantitative segmentation study was conducted into New Zealand public responses to planted forest operations, characterised by social acceptability concerns regarding three forest management practices – steepland harvesting, use of chemicals and mixed species forest regimes. We identified five key segments clustered according to differences in 22 dimensions along a gradient from most to least concern: ‘Culturally Concerned’; ‘Distrustful Forest Users’; ‘Disengaged Socially Equitable Organics’; ‘High-Trust Non-Environmentalists’; and ‘Forestry-Supportive Environmentalists.’ Characteristics of these clusters based on demographics, value orientations and attitudes to forest management were derived creating a public-acceptance typology to support forestry communication and engagement efforts.

In addition to identification of forest management engagement strategies, our findings show increased visits and forest experience do not result in higher forest sector support for management practice, reflecting a need for more targeted levels of sector engagement with forest users. Recommendations on engaging diverse public segments in planted forestry management and maintaining social licence are provided.

谁会关心人造林的后果?协助社区参与和沟通的公众类型学
与林业有关的类型学研究通常试图描述私人森林所有者的特征,以便制定符合所有者动机和驱动力的政策。然而,人们对公众在种植轮伐期间和轮伐结束时如何看待林业却知之甚少。因此,表明公众对当前森林管理实践的关注有助于确定一组不同的群体来影响决策。我们对新西兰公众对人工林作业的反应进行了一项定量细分研究,其特点是社会对三种森林管理实践--陡地采伐、化学品的使用和混交种森林制度--的可接受性的关注。我们根据 22 个方面的差异,按照从最关注到最不关注的梯度,确定了五个关键群体:"文化关注者"、"不信任的森林使用者"、"脱离社会公平的有机主义者"、"高度信任的非环保主义者 "和 "支持林业的环保主义者"。除了确定森林管理参与策略外,我们的研究结果表明,增加访问量和森林体验并不会提高林业部门对管理实践的支持度,这反映出林业部门需要更有针对性地与森林使用者进行接触。我们还就如何让不同的公众群体参与人工林管理和维护社会许可提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信