Forest sustainability indicator systems as procedural policy tools in global environmental governance

Grainger, Alan

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.001

Cited by 41 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We would argue that it matters greatly, because indicators often have conceptual and symbolic uses far beyond their instrumental uses [44][45][46]: they do not merely reflect what is important in society, but also contribute to defining what is perceived as important [47,48]. The current absence of ethical values-based indicators may contribute to perpetuating a situation in which -nation-states are -managed‖ to enhance GDP ahead of almost all other concerns‖ [49] (p. 225), while thorny issues of moral accountability are neatly evaded.…”

Section: Toward Ethical Values-based Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We echo McCool and Stankey [37] in calling for a shift away from a convenience-driven technical approach (-what can be measured‖, using the methods and datasets that are currently available), towards a normative approach based on creative and critical thinking (-what should be measured‖). In our view, what is required at this stage is not mere accumulation of indicators [44], but greater efforts to conceptualize and operationalize -sustainability‖ from scratch in diverse contexts where explicit discourses of ethical values already exist-including grassroots transnational networks such as the Earth Charter Initiative that promote a clear set of principles, faith-based organizations which articulate values, and Indigenous communities where customary laws incorporating shared values are known and respected.…”

Section: Potential For the Further Development Of Values-based Indicamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bringing the “Missing Pillar” into Sustainable Development Goals: Towards Intersubjective Values-Based Indicators

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that the need for a core -fourth pillar‖ of sustainability/sustainable development, as demanded in multiple arenas, can no longer be ignored on the grounds of intangibility. Different approaches to this vital but missing pillar (cultural-aesthetic, religious-spiritual, and political-institutional) find common ground in the area of ethical values. While values and aspects based on them are widely assumed to be intangible and immeasurable, we illustrate that it is possible to operationalize them in terms of measurable indicators when they are intersubjectively conceptualized within clearly defined practical contexts. The processes require contextual localization of items, which can nonetheless fit into a generalizable framework. This allows useful measurements to be made, and removes OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2013, 5 3036 barriers to studying, tracking, comparing, evaluating and correlating values-related dimensions of sustainability. It is advocated that those involved in operationalizing sustainability (especially in the context of creating post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals), should explore the potential for developing indicators to capture some of its less tangible aspects, especially those concerned with ethical values.

show abstract

Section: Toward Ethical Values-based Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Potential For the Further Development Of Values-based Indicamentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing the “Missing Pillar” into Sustainable Development Goals: Towards Intersubjective Values-Based Indicators

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the other extreme, measurement of sustainability is often attempted by devising internationally acknowledged sets of criteria and indicators (C&I), such as the Pan-European C&I for sustainable forest management [19]. Contrary to the formally stated intentions, these are more frequently used for political negotiations or simply for structuring international reporting, rather than as functional instruments to measure and monitor sustainability [20]. Just a glimpse into the Pan-European C&I suffices to realize that they are too decontextualized to suit the purposes of our study.…”

Section: Analysis At Macro Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Forest Sustainability: Comparison between Lithuania and Sweden

Brukas

Mizaras

Mizaraitė

2014

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The study conceptualizes economic forest sustainability as "the forest-related income and economic well-being sustained over time" and then compares Lithuania and Sweden at different scales. Sweden adopts a holistic perspective of the forest sector, where forestry and forest industries are perceived as a well-integrated economic branch. Forestry is expected to deliver raw material to forest industries, at the same time creating good preconditions for profitable forest management. Forest owners are given large freedom to act according to market signals and their own household needs, while the resulting intensive forest management cumulatively leads to a significant contribution to the country's welfare. Lithuania, in contrast, lacks an integrated sector perspective, forestry and forest industries being regarded as two separate realms. Private forest property rights are severely constrained by numerous legislative stipulations, leading to a significant reduction of economic value in production forests. On top of that, thirty percent of private owners face additional restrictions through forestland zoning, leading to further substantial loss of economic value. We suggest several measures for improving the economic forest sustainability in Lithuania, where a genuine national forest program could serve as a suitable bearing medium. OPEN ACCESSForests 2015, 6 48

show abstract

“…These objectives have been accepted by the 7 key levels regarded as the framework of SFM on a global scale, which were listed as follows: Extent of forest resources; biodiversity; health and vitality of forest ecosystems; protective functions of forests; productive functions of forests; socioeconomic functions; and legal, policy and institutional framework (Castañeda 2000;Grainger 2012;Siry et al 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Appropriate Biodiversity Indicators for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management at National Level

Tolunay¹,

Akyol²

2015

JSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Forest sustainability indicator systems as procedural policy tools in global environmental governance

Cited by 41 publications

References 71 publications

Bringing the “Missing Pillar” into Sustainable Development Goals: Towards Intersubjective Values-Based Indicators

Bringing the “Missing Pillar” into Sustainable Development Goals: Towards Intersubjective Values-Based Indicators

Economic Forest Sustainability: Comparison between Lithuania and Sweden

Identification of Appropriate Biodiversity Indicators for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management at National Level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About