森林所有者对机器学习的看法:来自瑞典林业的启示

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2024-11-17 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103945
Joakim Wising , Camilla Sandström , William Lidberg
{"title":"森林所有者对机器学习的看法:来自瑞典林业的启示","authors":"Joakim Wising ,&nbsp;Camilla Sandström ,&nbsp;William Lidberg","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103945","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Machine learning is becoming increasingly important in environmental decision-making, particularly in forestry. While forest-owner typologies help in understanding private forest management strategies, they often overlook owners' relationships with technology. This is crucial for ensuring that data-driven advancements in forestry benefit society. Using Swedish forestry policy as a case, we applied Q-methodology to explore forest owners' perceptions of machine learning. We conducted 11 qualitative interviews to generate 33 <strong>statements</strong>, which were then ranked by 26 participants. Inverted factor analysis identified four ideal-type perceptions of machine learning, interpreted through self-determination theory. The first perception views machine learning as unhelpful and socially disruptive. The second sees it as a complement to forest governance. The third expresses no strong opinions reflecting a relative disengagement from forestry. The fourth considers it essential for decision-making, particularly for absentee forest owners. The extracted perceptions align with existing forest owner typologies when it comes to reliance on others and willingness to take advice. The discussion includes concrete policy recommendations, focusing on privacy concerns, educational initiatives, and strategies for communicating uncertainty.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 103945"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forest owners’ perceptions of machine learning: Insights from swedish forestry\",\"authors\":\"Joakim Wising ,&nbsp;Camilla Sandström ,&nbsp;William Lidberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103945\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Machine learning is becoming increasingly important in environmental decision-making, particularly in forestry. While forest-owner typologies help in understanding private forest management strategies, they often overlook owners' relationships with technology. This is crucial for ensuring that data-driven advancements in forestry benefit society. Using Swedish forestry policy as a case, we applied Q-methodology to explore forest owners' perceptions of machine learning. We conducted 11 qualitative interviews to generate 33 <strong>statements</strong>, which were then ranked by 26 participants. Inverted factor analysis identified four ideal-type perceptions of machine learning, interpreted through self-determination theory. The first perception views machine learning as unhelpful and socially disruptive. The second sees it as a complement to forest governance. The third expresses no strong opinions reflecting a relative disengagement from forestry. The fourth considers it essential for decision-making, particularly for absentee forest owners. The extracted perceptions align with existing forest owner typologies when it comes to reliance on others and willingness to take advice. The discussion includes concrete policy recommendations, focusing on privacy concerns, educational initiatives, and strategies for communicating uncertainty.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"162 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103945\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112400279X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112400279X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

机器学习在环境决策中的重要性与日俱增,尤其是在林业领域。虽然森林所有者类型学有助于了解私人森林管理策略,但它们往往忽略了所有者与技术的关系。这对于确保数据驱动的林业进步造福社会至关重要。以瑞典林业政策为例,我们采用 Q 方法探讨了森林所有者对机器学习的看法。我们进行了 11 次定性访谈,得出了 33 项陈述,然后由 26 位参与者对这些陈述进行排序。通过自决理论的解释,倒因子分析确定了机器学习的四种理想类型认知。第一种看法认为机器学习无益且具有社会破坏性。第二种认为机器学习是森林治理的补充。第三种人没有表达强烈的意见,反映出他们相对脱离了林业。第四种人认为机器学习对决策至关重要,尤其是对缺席的森林所有者而言。在依赖他人和接受建议的意愿方面,所提取的观点与现有的森林所有者类型一致。讨论包括具体的政策建议,重点是隐私问题、教育倡议和不确定性沟通策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Forest owners’ perceptions of machine learning: Insights from swedish forestry
Machine learning is becoming increasingly important in environmental decision-making, particularly in forestry. While forest-owner typologies help in understanding private forest management strategies, they often overlook owners' relationships with technology. This is crucial for ensuring that data-driven advancements in forestry benefit society. Using Swedish forestry policy as a case, we applied Q-methodology to explore forest owners' perceptions of machine learning. We conducted 11 qualitative interviews to generate 33 statements, which were then ranked by 26 participants. Inverted factor analysis identified four ideal-type perceptions of machine learning, interpreted through self-determination theory. The first perception views machine learning as unhelpful and socially disruptive. The second sees it as a complement to forest governance. The third expresses no strong opinions reflecting a relative disengagement from forestry. The fourth considers it essential for decision-making, particularly for absentee forest owners. The extracted perceptions align with existing forest owner typologies when it comes to reliance on others and willingness to take advice. The discussion includes concrete policy recommendations, focusing on privacy concerns, educational initiatives, and strategies for communicating uncertainty.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Forest owners’ perceptions of machine learning: Insights from swedish forestry Understanding how landscape value and climate risk discourses can improve adaptation planning: Insights from Q-method Articulating futures: Community storylines and assisted ecosystem adaptation in the Great Barrier Reef Insights into the public engagement of coastal geoscientists Flood data platform governance: Identifying the technological and socio-technical approach(es) differences
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1