Indicators of forest-dependent community sustainability: The evolution of  research

Beckley, Thomas M.; Parkins, John R.; Stedman, Richard C.

doi:10.5558/tfc78626-5

Cited by 61 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This supports Berkes and Turner (2006) who mention that institutional arrangements and ecological knowledge need to be tested and revised in an ongoing process of trial and error. It is also consistent with the findings of Beckley et al (2002) and Sherry et al (2005) who looked at indicators of community well-being to find that there should be increased focus on the community dimension as a whole rather than isolating a series of Aboriginal issues. As mentioned by Hickey (2008) the meaning of SFM will vary depending on people, scale of management and time period.…”

Section: Candi Framework: Just Another Reference Point?supporting

confidence: 77%

Expert opinion on the criteria and indicator process and Aboriginal communities: Are objectives being met?

Adam

Kneeshaw

2011

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developed in the 1990s, the process of criteria and indicators (C&I) has been used to conceptualize, evaluate and implement sustainable forest management (SFM). However, to assess their effectiveness we explore whether their use in management leads to changes, especially at the local level in Aboriginal communities. More specifically, can C&I justify Aboriginal use of C&I? Since local-level C&I are a recent initiative, the effectiveness of the C&I process in assessing progress towards SFM was assessed via interviews with experts associated with the development of local-level Aboriginal C&I frameworks in Canada on use, integration and needs of Aboriginal communities for C&I. Our results suggest that C&I in Aboriginal communities are considered to be "just another reference point" because: 1) Aboriginal objectives are maintained at arm's length from the forest management process; 2) the use of C&I as a negotiating tool has not been sufficient to culturally adapt forest management for Aboriginal values and objectives and 3) Aboriginal values have been restricted to the elaboration of C&I and the Aboriginal definition of SFM, but they are not part of the evaluation nor the implementation of SFM. In contrast to the forest industry, Aboriginal communities identified the following objectives as motivation for using C&I: Aboriginal representation, Aboriginal engagement, capacity building and empowerment. Without explicitly acknowledging these Aboriginal community objectives, C&I becomes a tool restricted primarily to forest managers and thus sustainable forest management becomes unattainable. In effect, the underlying issue is not C&I in themselves but the limited role Aboriginal communities have been allowed to have in the SFM process.

show abstract

Section: Candi Framework: Just Another Reference Point?supporting

confidence: 77%

Expert opinion on the criteria and indicator process and Aboriginal communities: Are objectives being met?

Adam

Kneeshaw

2011

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In extreme situations, dissatisfaction can lead to conflict and social strife in communities (such as the road blockades in Clayoquot Sound in the summer of 1993). But it can also affect perceived quality of life, and tangible things such as housing prices (Beckley et al 2002). As such, we argue that satisfaction with various facets of forest management can be seen as an indicator of the subjective aspect of social sustainability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the social bases of satisfaction with public participation in forest management decision-making in British Columbia

Tindall¹,

Harshaw²,

Sheppard³

2010

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study draws upon the results of a survey of the general public in three communities in British Columbia to examine the social bases of satisfaction with public participation in forest management decision-making at both the local and provincial levels. The main findings are that those members of the general public who are relatively more biocentrically oriented (as indicated by the NEP Scale) are less satisfied, and those who have acquaintanceship ties to people employed in the forestry sector are more satisfied. Women and those with more education were less satisfied (at the provincial level), and Vancouver residents were more satisfied (compared to Kelowna and Armstrong residents). Overall, satisfaction with public participation in forest management decision-making was relatively low. It was, however, slightly higher at the local level than at the provincial scale. Policy and research implications of this study are discussed.Key words: social networks, public participation, gender, New Ecological Paradigm, satisfaction with forest management, and sustainable forest management RÉSUMÉCette étude porte sur les résultats d'un sondage effectué auprès du grand public dans trois communautés de la ColombieBritannique dans le but d' étudier les références sociales de la satisfaction rattachée à la participation du public lors de la prise de décision portant sur l'aménagement forestier tant au niveau local que provincial. Les principaux éléments retenus indiquent que les personnes en provenance du grand public qui ont une orientation centrée surtout sur la nature (tel qu'indiqué selon l' échelle NEP) sont moins satisfaites et celles qui ont des contacts avec des gens à l' emploi du secteur forestier sont plus satisfaites. Les femmes et les personnes ayant un niveau de scolarité plus élevé sont moins satisfaites (au niveau provincial) et les résidants de Vancouver sont plus satisfaits (comparativement aux résidants de Kelowna et d' Armstrong). Somme toute, la satisfaction portant sur la participation du public lors de la prise de décision en aménage-ment forestier était relativement faible. Elle était, toutefois, légèrement supérieure au niveau local dans l' ensemble de la province. Les implications de cette étude en matière de politiques et de recherche sont présentées.Mots clés : réseaux sociaux, participation publique, sexe, nouveau paradigme de l' écologie, satisfaction reliée à l'aménage-ment forestier, aménagement forestier durable

show abstract

“…Sense of place offers measures that may be used as indicators of well-being at an individual and community level (Theodori 2001, Beckley et al 2002, Lewicka 2011 or to quantify subjective wellbeing. For example, sense of place may be used to assess how ecosystem services contribute to well-being of different groups or to assess outcomes of a flood, market collapse, or rapid energy development (e.g., Stedman 2013, 2014).…”

Section: Assess Stewardship Outcomes and Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The contribution of sense of place to social-ecological systems research: a review and research agenda

Masterson¹,

Stedman²,

Enqvist³

et al. 2017

E&S

330

273

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. To develop and apply goals for future sustainability, we must consider what people care about and what motivates them to engage in solving sustainability issues. Sense of place theory and methods provide a rich source of insights that, like the socialecological systems perspective, assume an interconnected social and biophysical reality. However, these fields of research are only recently beginning to converge, and we see great potential for further engagement. Here, we present an approach and conceptual tools for how the sense of place perspective can contribute to social-ecological systems research. A brief review focuses on two areas where relation to place is particularly relevant: stewardship of ecosystem services, and responses to change in social-ecological systems. Based on the review, we synthesize specific ways in which sense of place may be applied by social-ecological systems researchers to analyze individual and social behaviors. We emphasize the importance of descriptive place meanings and evaluative place attachment as tools to study the patterned variation of sense of place within or among populations or types of places and the implications for resilience and transformative capacity. We conclude by setting out an agenda for future research that takes into account the concerns of resilience thinking such as the effects of dynamic ecology, interactions between temporal and spatial scales, and the interplay of rapid and incremental change on sense of place and place-related behaviors. This future research agenda also includes concerns from the broader sense of place literature such as the importance of structural power relationships on the creation of place meanings and how scaling up a sense of place may influence pro-environmental behavior.

show abstract

Indicators of forest-dependent community sustainability: The evolution of research

Cited by 61 publications

References 4 publications

Expert opinion on the criteria and indicator process and Aboriginal communities: Are objectives being met?

Expert opinion on the criteria and indicator process and Aboriginal communities: Are objectives being met?

Understanding the social bases of satisfaction with public participation in forest management decision-making in British Columbia

The contribution of sense of place to social-ecological systems research: a review and research agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About