德尔菲法作为标准委员会会议的替代方案,以确定森林生态系统管理的生态问题:一个案例研究

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2016-12-09 DOI:10.5558/TFC2016-081
WaldronK., ThiffaultN., BujoldF., St-OngeB.
{"title":"德尔菲法作为标准委员会会议的替代方案,以确定森林生态系统管理的生态问题:一个案例研究","authors":"WaldronK., ThiffaultN., BujoldF., St-OngeB.","doi":"10.5558/TFC2016-081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The face-to-face committee meeting is one of the most common expert consultation methods used in forest management. However, it is also laden with disadvantages, such as potential inequity in its consideration of participant opinion and the time involvement required. This led us to evaluate another expert consultation method, the Delphi method, namely by implementing it to identify ecological issues associated with second-growth boreal forests in eastern Canada. We compared this method to the committee meeting method with regard to the time investment required and the efficiency of the consultations. In all, 21 experts participated in three rounds of our implementation of the Delphi method. Subsequently, we administered an appreciation survey comparing the participants’ attitudes vis-a-vis the two methods. These comparisons showed that Delphi was less time-consuming compared to a committee meeting consultation of comparable scope. Participants also considered the Delphi method to be fair and impartial, as...","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5558/TFC2016-081","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Delphi method as an alternative to standard committee meetings to identify ecological issues for forest ecosystem-based management: A case study\",\"authors\":\"WaldronK., ThiffaultN., BujoldF., St-OngeB.\",\"doi\":\"10.5558/TFC2016-081\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The face-to-face committee meeting is one of the most common expert consultation methods used in forest management. However, it is also laden with disadvantages, such as potential inequity in its consideration of participant opinion and the time involvement required. This led us to evaluate another expert consultation method, the Delphi method, namely by implementing it to identify ecological issues associated with second-growth boreal forests in eastern Canada. We compared this method to the committee meeting method with regard to the time investment required and the efficiency of the consultations. In all, 21 experts participated in three rounds of our implementation of the Delphi method. Subsequently, we administered an appreciation survey comparing the participants’ attitudes vis-a-vis the two methods. These comparisons showed that Delphi was less time-consuming compared to a committee meeting consultation of comparable scope. Participants also considered the Delphi method to be fair and impartial, as...\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5558/TFC2016-081\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5558/TFC2016-081\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5558/TFC2016-081","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

面对面委员会会议是森林管理中最常用的专家咨询方法之一。然而,它也有许多缺点,例如在考虑参与者意见和所需的参与时间方面可能存在不公平。这导致我们评估另一种专家咨询方法,即德尔菲法,即通过实施它来确定与加拿大东部次生林北方针叶林相关的生态问题。我们就所需的时间投入和磋商的效率将这种方法与委员会会议方法进行了比较。总共有21位专家参与了我们对德尔菲法的三轮实施。随后,我们进行了一项评价调查,比较了参与者对这两种方法的态度。这些比较表明,与类似范围的委员会会议咨询相比,德尔菲更节省时间。与会者还认为德尔菲法是公平公正的,因为……
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
The Delphi method as an alternative to standard committee meetings to identify ecological issues for forest ecosystem-based management: A case study
The face-to-face committee meeting is one of the most common expert consultation methods used in forest management. However, it is also laden with disadvantages, such as potential inequity in its consideration of participant opinion and the time involvement required. This led us to evaluate another expert consultation method, the Delphi method, namely by implementing it to identify ecological issues associated with second-growth boreal forests in eastern Canada. We compared this method to the committee meeting method with regard to the time investment required and the efficiency of the consultations. In all, 21 experts participated in three rounds of our implementation of the Delphi method. Subsequently, we administered an appreciation survey comparing the participants’ attitudes vis-a-vis the two methods. These comparisons showed that Delphi was less time-consuming compared to a committee meeting consultation of comparable scope. Participants also considered the Delphi method to be fair and impartial, as...
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Prevalence and predictors of hand hygiene compliance in clinical, surgical and intensive care unit wards: results of a second cross-sectional study at the Umberto I teaching hospital of Rome. The prevention of medication errors in the home care setting: a scoping review. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families.
×
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