A participatory approach to design a toolbox to support forest management planning at regional level

Abstract

Aim of the study: Forest management planning in a region typically involves multiple stakeholders. Decisions processes are idiosyncratic, driven by individual goals and supported by segmented forest-based information. Nevertheless, stakeholders’ decisions do impact one another leading to complex interaction networks where communication, cooperation and negotiation play a key role. This research addresses the need to develop decision tools to support these roles. Emphasis is on the integration of participatory planning tools and techniques in the architecture of a regional decision support toolbox.Area of the study: The proposed approach was applied in the Chamusca County in Central Portugal although it is easily extended to other regions.Material and methods: This research proposes an Enterprise Architecture methodological approach to design a toolbox that may address distinct stakeholders’ interests and decision processes, while enabling communication, cooperation, negotiation and information sharing among all those involved in the regional interactions network.Main results: the proposed approach was tested in a regional network involving decision processes and information shared by 22 entities clustered into 13 stakeholders groups, including industrial owners, and non-industrial private forestland owners (NIPF) - acting individually or grouped into associations and federations -, national and regional offices of the forest authority, forest services providers, non-governmental organizations and research centers. Results suggest that the proposed approach may provide a toolbox that may effectively address stakeholders’ decision processes and goals and support the regional interaction network.Key-words: forest management; multiple stakeholders; decision support systems; enterprise architecture; participatory process.

Integrated and systemic management of storm damage by the forest-based sector and public authorities

“…Furthermore, participatory approaches could facilitate stakeholders' involvement in the decision-making processes (Ananda and Herath 2003) and increase the quality of decisions (Beierle 2002). This is mainly relevant to multi-stakeholder decision-making processes (Garcia-Gonzalo et al 2013) in which the willingness to share strategic information is a key factor of success (Marques et al 2013a). For natural risks, when uncertainty in the decisions made is coupled with a high degree of conflict among the affected interest groups, combining participatory planning and structuring instruments like multi-criteria decision analysis methods (Mendoza and Martins 2006) could serve to incorporate the risk preferences of stakeholders for policy-building (Gamper and Turcanu 2009).…”

The Challenge of Diffusion in Forest Plans: A Methodological Proposal and Case Study

“…In the proposed methodology, we identified three universal types of stakeholders: property, forest-resource users and regulators. Other authors establish different numbers: Kangas et al [21] propose eight; Marques et al [57] and Nordström et al [27] propose four; whereas Agnoloni et al [58] and Ferretti et al [59] propose two. The structure of categories must be simple enough to be capable of extrapolation to a wide range of forest areas.…”

Usefulness and perceived usefulness of Decision Support Systems (DSSs) in participatory forest planning: the final users’ point of view

“…The importance of involving stakeholders in the decision-making process -in particu- Pastorella lar in the definition of forest management strategies -has been underlined by several authors (Hickey 2004, Sheppard & Meitner 2005, Martins & Borges 2007, De Meo et al 2011, Marques et al 2011, Cantiani 2012, Bruña-García & Marey-Pérez 2014. As a consequence, participatory approaches to improve the planning processes using the views and experiences of stakeholders and experiential knowledge are often a highly valued component of forestry DSSs (Marques et al 2013). Nevertheless, the decision-making processes may engage with scientific complexity and political and social uncertainty, becoming gradually more complicated , Lawrence & Stewart 2011, Nordström et al 2011.…”