什么是公平的城市森林治理?系统文献综述

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Kaitlyn Pike , Lorien Nesbitt , Tenley Conway , Susan D. Day , Cecil Konijnendijk
{"title":"什么是公平的城市森林治理?系统文献综述","authors":"Kaitlyn Pike ,&nbsp;Lorien Nesbitt ,&nbsp;Tenley Conway ,&nbsp;Susan D. Day ,&nbsp;Cecil Konijnendijk","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Urban forest governance comprises the formal and informal rules, institutions, and processes that influence collective decision-making in urban forest management. As such, it shapes key processes and outcomes that are implicated in urban environmental justice, including whose priorities and values are reflected in urban forest management and how and where urban trees are distributed. However, despite its central role in determining urban forest processes and outcomes, equity within urban forest governance remains obscure. To address this, we conducted a literature review to identify how equitable urban forest governance is conceptualized and evaluated in the literature, and what gaps in knowledge remain. Our review found that while distributional justice was the prevalent framing in the literature, recommendations for collaborative governance approaches reflect a shift towards procedural and recognitional justice. Most studies, however, used a top-down approach to evaluate policy outcomes and few incorporated community experiences or involvement within governance processes, leaving the roles and experiences of community actors underexplored. Our findings suggest that the existing literature has thus far failed to explicitly interrogate procedural and recognitional justice within urban forest governance. This highlights a critical need to more clearly incorporate procedural and recognitional justice themes and approaches into future urban forest governance theory, research, and practice. Based on our review, we offer a guiding analytical framework that identifies key considerations for equitable urban forest governance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 103951"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is equitable urban forest governance? A systematic literature review\",\"authors\":\"Kaitlyn Pike ,&nbsp;Lorien Nesbitt ,&nbsp;Tenley Conway ,&nbsp;Susan D. Day ,&nbsp;Cecil Konijnendijk\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103951\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Urban forest governance comprises the formal and informal rules, institutions, and processes that influence collective decision-making in urban forest management. As such, it shapes key processes and outcomes that are implicated in urban environmental justice, including whose priorities and values are reflected in urban forest management and how and where urban trees are distributed. However, despite its central role in determining urban forest processes and outcomes, equity within urban forest governance remains obscure. To address this, we conducted a literature review to identify how equitable urban forest governance is conceptualized and evaluated in the literature, and what gaps in knowledge remain. Our review found that while distributional justice was the prevalent framing in the literature, recommendations for collaborative governance approaches reflect a shift towards procedural and recognitional justice. Most studies, however, used a top-down approach to evaluate policy outcomes and few incorporated community experiences or involvement within governance processes, leaving the roles and experiences of community actors underexplored. Our findings suggest that the existing literature has thus far failed to explicitly interrogate procedural and recognitional justice within urban forest governance. This highlights a critical need to more clearly incorporate procedural and recognitional justice themes and approaches into future urban forest governance theory, research, and practice. Based on our review, we offer a guiding analytical framework that identifies key considerations for equitable urban forest governance.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"162 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103951\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124002855\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124002855","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

城市森林治理包括影响城市森林管理集体决策的正式和非正式规则、机构和流程。因此,它决定了与城市环境正义相关的关键过程和结果,包括城市森林管理中反映的优先事项和价值,以及城市树木的分布方式和地点。然而,尽管公平在决定城市森林进程和结果方面发挥着核心作用,但城市森林治理中的公平问题仍不为人所知。为了解决这个问题,我们进行了一次文献综述,以确定文献中是如何对公平的城市森林治理进行概念化和评估的,以及还存在哪些知识差距。我们的综述发现,虽然分配公正是文献中的普遍框架,但对合作治理方法的建议反映了向程序公正和认可公正的转变。然而,大多数研究都采用自上而下的方法来评估政策成果,很少有研究将社区经验或参与纳入治理过程,因此对社区行动者的作用和经验的探讨不够。我们的研究结果表明,迄今为止,现有文献未能明确探讨城市森林治理中的程序正义和认可正义。这凸显了在未来的城市森林治理理论、研究和实践中更明确地纳入程序正义和认可正义主题和方法的迫切需要。根据我们的回顾,我们提供了一个指导性分析框架,确定了公平城市森林治理的关键考虑因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What is equitable urban forest governance? A systematic literature review
Urban forest governance comprises the formal and informal rules, institutions, and processes that influence collective decision-making in urban forest management. As such, it shapes key processes and outcomes that are implicated in urban environmental justice, including whose priorities and values are reflected in urban forest management and how and where urban trees are distributed. However, despite its central role in determining urban forest processes and outcomes, equity within urban forest governance remains obscure. To address this, we conducted a literature review to identify how equitable urban forest governance is conceptualized and evaluated in the literature, and what gaps in knowledge remain. Our review found that while distributional justice was the prevalent framing in the literature, recommendations for collaborative governance approaches reflect a shift towards procedural and recognitional justice. Most studies, however, used a top-down approach to evaluate policy outcomes and few incorporated community experiences or involvement within governance processes, leaving the roles and experiences of community actors underexplored. Our findings suggest that the existing literature has thus far failed to explicitly interrogate procedural and recognitional justice within urban forest governance. This highlights a critical need to more clearly incorporate procedural and recognitional justice themes and approaches into future urban forest governance theory, research, and practice. Based on our review, we offer a guiding analytical framework that identifies key considerations for equitable urban forest governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
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