{"title":"谁会关心人造林的后果?协助社区参与和沟通的公众类型学","authors":"Karen M. Bayne , Andrea Grant","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Typology studies relating to forestry have typically tried to characterise private forest owners for the purposes of designing policies to fit owners' motivations and drives. However, little is known about how the public may perceive forestry both during and at the end of a planted rotation. As such, indications of public concern for current forest management practice can help to identify a different set of segments to influence decision making. Such a typology can help our understanding of social acceptability towards forest management practice as a legitimate consideration for wider public engagement in forest policy development.</p><p>A quantitative segmentation study was conducted into New Zealand public responses to planted forest operations, characterised by social acceptability concerns regarding three forest management practices – steepland harvesting, use of chemicals and mixed species forest regimes. We identified five key segments clustered according to differences in 22 dimensions along a gradient from most to least concern: ‘<em>Culturally Concerned’</em>; ‘<em>Distrustful Forest Users’; ‘Disengaged Socially Equitable Organics’</em>; ‘<em>High-Trust Non-Environmentalists’;</em> and ‘<em>Forestry-Supportive Environmentalists.’</em> Characteristics of these clusters based on demographics, value orientations and attitudes to forest management were derived creating a public-acceptance typology to support forestry communication and engagement efforts.</p><p>In addition to identification of forest management engagement strategies, our findings show increased visits and forest experience do not result in higher forest sector support for management practice, reflecting a need for more targeted levels of sector engagement with forest users. Recommendations on engaging diverse public segments in planted forestry management and maintaining social licence are provided.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 103332"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862/pdfft?md5=8f87f6b08f84288d3999b44b2cc707f3&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124001862-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who cares what happens with planted forests? A public typology to assist community engagement and communication\",\"authors\":\"Karen M. Bayne , Andrea Grant\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Typology studies relating to forestry have typically tried to characterise private forest owners for the purposes of designing policies to fit owners' motivations and drives. However, little is known about how the public may perceive forestry both during and at the end of a planted rotation. As such, indications of public concern for current forest management practice can help to identify a different set of segments to influence decision making. Such a typology can help our understanding of social acceptability towards forest management practice as a legitimate consideration for wider public engagement in forest policy development.</p><p>A quantitative segmentation study was conducted into New Zealand public responses to planted forest operations, characterised by social acceptability concerns regarding three forest management practices – steepland harvesting, use of chemicals and mixed species forest regimes. We identified five key segments clustered according to differences in 22 dimensions along a gradient from most to least concern: ‘<em>Culturally Concerned’</em>; ‘<em>Distrustful Forest Users’; ‘Disengaged Socially Equitable Organics’</em>; ‘<em>High-Trust Non-Environmentalists’;</em> and ‘<em>Forestry-Supportive Environmentalists.’</em> Characteristics of these clusters based on demographics, value orientations and attitudes to forest management were derived creating a public-acceptance typology to support forestry communication and engagement efforts.</p><p>In addition to identification of forest management engagement strategies, our findings show increased visits and forest experience do not result in higher forest sector support for management practice, reflecting a need for more targeted levels of sector engagement with forest users. Recommendations on engaging diverse public segments in planted forestry management and maintaining social licence are provided.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"volume\":\"169 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862/pdfft?md5=8f87f6b08f84288d3999b44b2cc707f3&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124001862-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Who cares what happens with planted forests? A public typology to assist community engagement and communication
Typology studies relating to forestry have typically tried to characterise private forest owners for the purposes of designing policies to fit owners' motivations and drives. However, little is known about how the public may perceive forestry both during and at the end of a planted rotation. As such, indications of public concern for current forest management practice can help to identify a different set of segments to influence decision making. Such a typology can help our understanding of social acceptability towards forest management practice as a legitimate consideration for wider public engagement in forest policy development.
A quantitative segmentation study was conducted into New Zealand public responses to planted forest operations, characterised by social acceptability concerns regarding three forest management practices – steepland harvesting, use of chemicals and mixed species forest regimes. We identified five key segments clustered according to differences in 22 dimensions along a gradient from most to least concern: ‘Culturally Concerned’; ‘Distrustful Forest Users’; ‘Disengaged Socially Equitable Organics’; ‘High-Trust Non-Environmentalists’; and ‘Forestry-Supportive Environmentalists.’ Characteristics of these clusters based on demographics, value orientations and attitudes to forest management were derived creating a public-acceptance typology to support forestry communication and engagement efforts.
In addition to identification of forest management engagement strategies, our findings show increased visits and forest experience do not result in higher forest sector support for management practice, reflecting a need for more targeted levels of sector engagement with forest users. Recommendations on engaging diverse public segments in planted forestry management and maintaining social licence are provided.
期刊介绍:
Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.