Understanding the social acceptability of natural resource decisionmaking processes by using a knowledge base modeling approach.

Abstract

Kakoyannis, Christina; Shindler, Bruce; Stankey, George 2001. Understanding the social acceptability of natural resource decisionmaking processes by using a knowledge base modeling approach. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-518. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 40 p. Natural resource managers are being confronted with increasing conflict and litigation with those who find their management plans unacceptable. Compatible and sustainable management decisions necessitate that natural resource agencies generate plans that are not only biologically possible and economically feasible but also socially acceptable. Currently, however, we lack a framework to integrate socially acceptable judgments with the biological and economic factors that help define successful forest management plans. This research examines the ability of a knowledge base approach to assess the social acceptability of natural resource decisionmaking processes and to determine its suitability for use in forest management planning. We note four main caveats with using knowledge bases for evaluating social acceptability: (1) the importance of asking and answering the right question, (2) the ability of the knowledge base to become a "black box," (3) problems associated with using a numerical value to estimate a concept as complex as social acceptability, (4) and our incomplete understanding of the factors that influence social acceptability judgments. Acknowledging the caveats, however, can make the knowledge base model a useful tool in forest management planning. We determined that knowledge bases can account for various factors affecting social acceptability and can facilitate discussions about the compatibility and links among social, biological, and economic decision factors.

Social acceptability of a marine protected area: The case of Reunion Island

“…Although a number of publications have dealt with social acceptability in subject areas including health or environmental risk [24][25][26] or forestry management [27][28][29], the social acceptability of protected areas remains a poorly explored area of research.…”

Social Concerns, Risk and The Acceptability of Forest Vegetation Management Alternatives: Insights for Managers

“…Taylor and Daniel (1984) found no significant difference for visual and recreational acceptability of prescribed fire between respondents that were informed and not informed. However, they also found that information increased public tolerance and understanding of fire; a finding supported by Kakoyannis et al (2001). Ford et al (2009b) found that information about the consequences of forest management activities changed the relative acceptability of alternative harvesting treatments.…”

“…Kakoyannis et al (2001) suggest that "the main role of science in natural resource management is to provide information about different alternatives that can assist managers in making decisions to achieve societal goals". This suggests that resource managers should provide a range of options, presenting information about the relative advantages and disadvantages, with the goal of finding a position that has wider acceptance (although it is unlikely that all opposing viewpoints can be accommodated).…”

“…They are based in social values and, as such, provide a more reliable guide to assessing public responses in a variety of contexts (Kakoyannis et al 2001, Stankey and Shindler 2006, Rousseau 2008. Hence, we use concerns as representing an output or as a manifestation of a perceived risk to something that people care about and that needs to be protected from some form of threat.…”

“…Recognizing how the public perceives and evaluates risk is important if resource managers are to communicate effectively with the public (Slovic 1987, Tesh 1999. To reach a socially acceptable decision, the public needs to be involved in defining the problem and the risks associated with possible solutions (Kakoyannis et al 2001, Rousseau 2008. Understanding the need for an action can contribute to building support for it.…”