How and why forest managers adapt to socio-economic changes: A case study analysis in Swiss forest enterprises

Ingold, Karin; Zimmermann, Willi

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.06.003

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the systemic approach has been used in only a small number of cases (e.g. Buttoud et al, 2011;Ingold and Zimmermann, 2011;Kubeczko et al, 2006;Nybakk and Hansen, 2008;Rametsteiner et al, 2010;Rametsteiner and Weiss, 2006a;Weiss et al, 2011). More frequently the systemic approach appears in papers dealing with sectors closely related to forest management-timber processing (Alfranca et al, 2014), agro-food (Gagliardi et al, 2014) and crop protection (Schut et al, 2014).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To maintain such versatility of forest functions at a high level, it is necessary to consider not only the multi-functionality of forests, but also the whole of forest management. As Ingold and Zimmermann (2011) mentioned, in recent years, this sector has had to tackle far-reaching changes taking place in the social, economic and political systems. In many other sectors, implementing diverse methods of innovation is a motor for revival, and York and Venkataraman (2010) suggest innovative change as an alternative to "returning to a simpler time".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of the sectoral innovation system for forestry of the Czech Republic. Does it even exist?

Jarský

2015

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the sectoral innovation system for forestry of the Czech Republic. Does it even exist?

Jarský

2015

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This strategy also outlines the role of consultation for stakeholder groups which is 'usually in the form of a Pest Risk Analysis published on the (Fera) 1 website', and an aspiration to develop a communication strategy with stakeholders. In the past, policy has too frequently been built on the needs of single sectors to the neglect of wider effects [74][75][76]. Similar limitations have been addressed in developing environmental policy through involvement of a greater range of expertise [36].…”

Section: Hindsight and The Future Of Regulatory Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating natural and social science perspectives on plant disease risk, management and policy formulation

Mills

Dehnen‐Schmutz

Ilbery

et al. 2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant diseases threaten both food security and the botanical diversity of natural ecosystems. Substantial research effort is focused on pathogen detection and control, with detailed risk management available for many plant diseases. Risk can be assessed using analytical techniques that account for disease pressure both spatially and temporally. We suggest that such technical assessments of disease risk may not provide an adequate guide to the strategies undertaken by growers and government to manage plant disease. Instead, risk-management strategies need to account more fully for intuitive and normative responses that act to balance conflicting interests between stakeholder organizations concerned with plant diseases within the managed and natural environments. Modes of effective engagement between policy makers and stakeholders are explored in the paper, together with an assessment of such engagement in two case studies of contemporary non-indigenous diseases in one food and in one non-food sector. Finally, a model is proposed for greater integration of stakeholders in policy decisions.

show abstract

“…Industrialized societies often value cultural ecosystem services ahead of other services . Demand for cultural ecosystem services is expected to further grow in industrialized societies (Carpenter et al 2009, Guo et al 2010, Ingold and Zimmermann 2011 owing to increasing budget shares for recreation . By contrast, in traditional communities, cultural ecosystem services are essential for cultural identity and even survival (e.g., Le Maitre et al 2007, Brown and Neil 2011.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural Ecosystem Services: A Literature Review and Prospects for Future Research

Milcu¹,

Hanspach²,

Abson³

et al. 2013

E&S

737

473

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Cultural ecosystem services constitute a growing field of research that is characterized by an increasing number of publications from various academic disciplines. We conducted a semiquantitative review of publications explicitly dealing with cultural ecosystem services. Our aims were: (1) to provide an overview of the current state of research, (2) to classify the diversity of research approaches by identifying clusters of publications that address cultural ecosystem services in similar ways, and (3) to highlight some important challenges for the future of cultural ecosystem services research. We reviewed 107 publications and extracted 20 attributes describing their type and content, including methods, scales, drivers of change, and trade-offs between services. Using a cluster analysis on a subset of attributes we identified five groups of publications: Group 1, conceptual focus, deals with theoretical issues; Group 2, descriptive reviews, consists mostly of desktop studies; Group 3, localized outcomes, deals with case studies coming from different disciplines; Group 4, social and participatory, deals mainly with assessing preferences and perceptions; and Group 5, economic assessments, provides economic valuations. Emerging themes in cultural ecosystem services research relate to improving methods for cultural ecosystem services valuation, studying cultural ecosystem services in the context of ecosystem service bundles, and more clearly articulating policy implications. Based on our findings, we conclude that: (1) cultural ecosystem services are well placed as a tool to bridge gaps between different academic disciplines and research communities, (2) capitalizing on the societal relevance of cultural ecosystem services could help address real-world problems, and (3) cultural ecosystem services have the potential to foster new conceptual links between alternative logics relating to a variety of social and ecological issues.

show abstract

How and why forest managers adapt to socio-economic changes: A case study analysis in Swiss forest enterprises

Cited by 19 publications

References 12 publications

Analysis of the sectoral innovation system for forestry of the Czech Republic. Does it even exist?

Analysis of the sectoral innovation system for forestry of the Czech Republic. Does it even exist?

Integrating natural and social science perspectives on plant disease risk, management and policy formulation

Cultural Ecosystem Services: A Literature Review and Prospects for Future Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About