Effects of information on the social acceptability of alternatives to clearfelling in australian wet eucalypt forests

Environmental Management

Volumn 44, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1149-1162

  Ford, Rebecca M ^a   Williams, Kathryn J H ^a   Bishop, Ian D ^a   Hickey, John E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b FORESTRY TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Beliefs; Environmental values; Information effects; Landscape perception; Social acceptability

Indexed keywords

AGGREGATED RETENTION; ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES; EUCALYPT FOREST; FOREST HARVEST; SELECTIVE HARVEST; SELECTIVE HARVESTING; SIMULATED IMAGES; SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY; STILL IMAGES; VALUES AND BELIEFS;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; REFORESTATION; VALUE ENGINEERING;

HARVESTING;

CLEARCUTTING; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES; EVERGREEN FOREST; FOREST MANAGEMENT; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; TIMBER HARVESTING;

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CONTROLLED STUDY; FOREST; FOREST MANAGEMENT; HARVESTING; INFORMATION; LANDSCAPE; PHOTOGRAPHY; REGENERATION; SOCIAL ASPECT; SOCIAL ATTITUDE; WETLAND;

AUSTRALIA; EUCALYPTUS; FORESTRY; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL CONDITIONS;

ENGINEERING; HARVESTING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; REFORESTATION; VALUE ADDED;

AUSTRALIA; TASMANIA;

EID: 73449105372     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-009-9392-7     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs
2. Bishop ID, Fasken G, Ford RM, Hickey JE, Loiterton D, Williams KJH (2003) Visual simulation of forest regrowth under different harvest options. Trends in landscape modelling. In: Proceedings at Anhalt University of applied sciences, Dessau, Germany, May 15-16, pp 46-55
3. Bishop ID, Ford RM, Loiterton D, Williams KJH (2005) Studying the acceptability of forest management practices using visual simulation of forest regrowth. In: Bishop ID, Lange E (eds) Visualization in landscape and environmental planning. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 112-119
4. M Brueckner J Duff R McKenna P Horwitz 2006 What are they taking us for: the participatory nature of Western Australia's regional forest agreement process Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 13 6 16
5. M Brunson DK Reiter 1996 Effects of ecological information on judgements about scenic impacts of timber harvest Journal of Environmental Management 46 31 42 10.1006/jema.1996.0004 (Pubitemid 26126935)
6. Burchfield JA, Miller JM, Allen S, Schroeder RF, Miller T (2003) Social implications of alternatives to clearcutting on the tongass national forest-an exploratory study of residents' responses to alternative silvicultural treatments at Hanus Bay, Alaska. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, PNW-GTR-575, Missoula, Montana
7. S Coakes 1998 Valuing the social dimension: social assessment in the regional forest agreement process Australian Journal of Environmental Management 5 47 54
8. Daniel TC (2001) Aesthetic preference and ecological sustainability. In: Sheppard SRJ, Harshaw HW (eds) Forests and landscapes: linking ecology, sustainability and aesthetics, IUFRO Research Series #6. CABI Publishing in Association with the International Union of Forestry Research Organisations, Wallingford, Oxon, pp 15-29
9. Dreyfuss H (1972) Symbol sourcebook: an authoritative guide to international graphic symbols. McGraw-Hill, New York
10. Eysenck MW (2006) Fundamentals of cognition. Psychology Press, New York
11. Ford RM (2006) Social acceptability of forest management systems. PhD thesis, The University of Melbourne, Parkville
12. Ford RM, Williams KJ, Bishop ID, Webb TJ (2005) Social acceptability of forest management systems: project overview. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne. http://www.landfood.unimelb.edu.au/research/social/psychology/ projects.html
13. RM Ford KJ Williams ID Bishop TJ Webb 2009 A value basis for the social acceptability of clearfelling in Tasmania, Australia Landscape and Urban Planning 90 196 206 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.11.006
14. Ford RM, Williams KJ, Bishop ID, Hickey JE An investigation of public judgements of the social acceptability of silvicultural alternatives in tasmanian wet eucalypt forests. Aust For (in press)
15. Forestry Tasmania (2009) A new silviculture for Tasmania's public forests: a review of the variable retention program. Forestry Tasmania, Hobart
16. PH Gobster 1999 An ecological aesthetic for forest landscape management Landscape Journal 18 1 54 64
17. JE Hickey MG Neyland OD Bassett 2001 Rationale and design for the warra silvicultural systems trial in wet Eucalyptus obliqua forests in Tasmania Tasforests 13 2 155 182
18. RB Hull GJ Buhyoff 1986 The scenic beauty temporal distribution method: an attempt to make scenic beauty assessments compatible with forest planning efforts Forest Science 32 2 271 286
19. AR Kearney 1994 Understanding global change: a cognitive perspective on communicating through stories Climatic Change 27 419 441 10.1007/BF01096270
20. AR Kearney 2001 Effects of an informational intervention on public reactions to clear-cutting Society and Natural Resources 14 777 790 10.1080/089419201753210594 (Pubitemid 33011731)
21. Kimmins JP (2001) Visible and non-visible indicators of forest sustainability: beauty, beholders and belief systems. In: Sheppard SRJ, Harshaw HW (eds) Forests and landscapes linking ecology, sustainability and aesthetics, IUFRO Research Series #6. CABI Publishing in Association with the International Union of Forestry Research Organisations, Wallingford, Oxon, pp 43-56
22. Mertens DM (1998) Research methods in education and psychology: integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
23. E Pouta M Rekola 2001 The theory of planned behaviour in predicting willingness to pay for abatement of forest regeneration Society and Natural Resources 14 93 106 10.1080/089419201300000517 (Pubitemid 32300603)
24. R Ribe 1989 The aesthetics of forestry: what has empirical preference research taught us? Environmental Management 13 1 55 74 10.1007/BF01867587
25. R Ribe 1999 Regeneration harvests versus clearcuts: public views of the acceptability and aesthetics of northwest forest plan harvests Northwest Science 73 Special Issue 102 117
26. R Ribe 2006 Perceptions of forestry alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest: information effects and acceptability distribution analysis Journal of Environmental Psychology 26 100 115 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.05.004 (Pubitemid 44660740)
27. Robertson B (1988) How to draw charts and diagrams. North Light Books, Cincinnati
28. B Shelby J Thompson M Brunson R Johnson 2003 Changes in scenic quality after harvest: a decade of ratings for six silvicultural treatments Journal of Forestry 101 2 30 35
29. Shindler BA, Steel BS, List P (1996) Public judgements of adaptive management a response from forest communities. Journal of Forestry 94:8-12
30. GH Stankey Shindler 2006 Formation of social acceptability judgements and their implications for management of rare and little-known species Conservation Biology 20 1 28 37 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00298.x
31. State of Tasmania, Commonwealth of Australia (2000) Tasmanian regional forest agreement: sustainability indicators for the first review in 2002. State of Tasmania and Commonwealth of Australia, Hobart
32. State of Tasmania, Commonwealth of Australia (2007) Sustainability indicators for tasmanian forests 2001-2006: prepared by the Tasmanian and Australian Governments for the ten year review of the tasmanian regional forest agreement. State of Tasmania and Commonwealth of Australia, Hobart
33. PC Stern 2000 Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour Journal of Social Issues 56 3 407 424 10.1111/0022-4537.00175
34. PC Stern T Dietz L Kalof GA Guagnano 1995 Values, beliefs and proenvironmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25 18 1611 1636 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995. tb02636.x
35. AJ Thorn TC Daniel B Orland N Brabyn 1997 Managing forest aesthetics in production forests New Zealand Forestry 42 21 29
36. RG Wagner J Flynn R Gregory CK Mertz P Slovic 1998 Acceptable practices in Ontario's forests: differences between the public and forestry professionals New Forests 16 139 154 10.1023/A:1006577019706 (Pubitemid 28407811)
37. KJ Williams RM Ford ID Bishop D Loiterton JE Hickey 2007 Realism and Selectivity in data-driven visualisations: a process for developing viewer-oriented landscape surrogates Landscape and Urban Planning 81 213 224 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.11.008 (Pubitemid 46802865)
38. RB Zajonc 1980 Feeling and thinking preferences need no inferences American Psychologist 35 2 151 175 10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151