Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 213-222

  Kangas, A ^a   Saarinen, N ^a   Saarikoski, H ^b   Leskinen, L A ^c   Hujala, T ^c   Tikkanen, J ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^c FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^d University Eye Hospital Oulu   (Finland)

Author keywords

Commitment; Consensus; Finland; Forest policy; Framing; Public participation

Indexed keywords

FINLAND; FOREST POLICY; GENERAL PUBLICS; PARTICIPATORY PROCESS; POLICY PROCESS; PUBLIC PARTICIPATION; REGIONAL FORESTS; SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT;

TIMBER;

FORESTRY;

FINLAND; FORESTRY; FORESTS; SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT;

EID: 74449091947     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2009.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Åkerman M., and Peltola T. Temporal scales and environmental knowledge production. Landscape and urban planning 61 (2002) 147-156
2. Alueelliset metsäohjelmat 2006-2010, yhteenveto metsäkeskusten metsäohjelmista. 2006. [Summary of Regional Forest Programmes of Forest Centres 2006-2010]. Ministry of agriculture and forestry 4/2006. 45p.
3. Ananda J. Implementing participatory approaches in formulating regional forest policy. International Journal of Sustainable Development 7 (2004) 398-409
4. Appelstrand M. Participation and societal values: the challenge for lawmakers and policy practitioners. Forest Policy and Economics 4 (2002) 281-290
5. Barry J., and Proops J. Seeking sustainability discourses with Q-methodology. Ecological Economics 28 (1999) 337-345
6. Beierle T. The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Analysis 22 (2002) 739-749
7. Bengston D.N., Fan D.P., and Celarier D.N. A new approach to monitoring the social environment for natural resource management and policy: the case of US national forest benefits and values. Journal of Environmental Management 56 (1999) 181-193
8. Benz A. Multi-level Governance. In: Glück P., Oesten G., Schanz H., and Volz K.-R. (Eds). Formulation and implementation of national forest programmes, theoretical aspects. EFI Proceedings 30 vol. I (1999), European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland 73-84
9. Brown M. Illuminating patterns of perception: an overview of Q methodology. Technical note, copyright 2004 (2004), Carnegie Mellon University
10. Buchy M., and Hoverman S. Understanding public participation in forest planning: a review. Forest Policy and Economics 1 (2000) 15-25
11. Chess C., and Purcell K. Public participation and the environment: do we know what works?. Environmental Science and Technology 33 (1999) 2685-2692
12. Daniels S., and Walker G. Working Through Environmental Conflict. The Collaborative Learning Approach (2001), Praeger, Westport
13. Dennis K.F., and Goldberg A.P. Weight control self-efficacy types and transitions affect weight-loss outcomes in obese women. Addictive Behaviors 21 (1996) 116-130
14. Innes J. Consensus building: clarification for the critics. Planning Theory 3 1 (2004) 5-20
15. Kyllönen S., and Raitio K. Ympäristöristiriidat ja niiden hallinta: puuntuotannon ja poronhoidon välinen konflikti Inarissa. [The environmental conflicts and their management: the conflict between timber management and reindeer herding in Inari, in Finnish]. Alue ja Ympäristö 33 (2004) 3-20
16. Leskinen L.A. Purposes and challenges of public participation in regional and local forestry in Finland. Forest Policy and Economics 6 (2004) 605-618
17. Leskinen, L. A. 2007. Kestävyyden tulkinnat metsäkeskusten yhteistoiminnallisissa käytännöissä. [The interpretations of sustainability in collaborative practises of forestrt centres]. Doctoral thesis . 62 pp. + Appendices.
18. Leskinen, L. A., Tikkanen, J. and Leskinen, P. 2002. Pohjoisten metsäkeskusten yhteistyöryhmät ja niiden osallistuminen alueellisten metsäohjelmien laadintaan. [The collaborative groups of northern forestry centres and their participation in the preparation of Regional Forest Programme, in Finnish], Metsätieteen aikakauskirja pp. 99-114.
19. Leskinen P., Leskinen L.A., and Tikkanen J. Assessing objectives of regional forest policy in Northern Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 19 (2004) 180-190
20. Marres N. The issue deserve more credit: pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy. Social Studies of Science 37 5 (2007) 759-780
21. McKeown B., and Thomas D. Q methodology (1988), Sage publications 83 p
22. In: Niskanen A., and Väyrynen J. (Eds). Regional Forest Programmes: a Participatory Approach to Support Forest Based Regional Development. EFI Proceedings vol. 32 (1999) 240
23. Pqmethod manual. [http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~schmolck/qmethod/pqmanual.htm], downloaded 2.4.2007.
24. Primmer E., and Kyllönen S. Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme. Forest Policy and Economics 8 (2006) 838-853
25. Raitio, K. 2008. "You can't please everyone". - Conflict management practices, frames and institutions in Finnish State forests. Joensuun yliopiston yhteiskuntatieteellisiä julkaisuja 86.
26. Sampson K.A., Goodrich C.G., and Taylor N.C. A social assessment of community response to forest policy change in South Westland, New Zealand. Society and Natural Resources 20 3 (2007) 199-212
27. Sheppard, S.R.J. and Achiam, C.M. 2004. Social and collaborative forestry: Public participation in Forest Decision Making. Encyclopedia of Forest Sciences, pp. 1173-1182.
28. Stephenson W. The study behavior: Q-technique and its methodology (1953), University of Chicago press 361s
29. Susskind, L., Cruikshank, J., 1987. Breaking the Impasse. Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public Disputes. Basic Books.
30. Tikkanen J., Leskinen L.A., and Leskinen P. Forestry organisation network in Northern Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 18 (2003) 547-599
31. Tuler S., and Webler T. Voices from the forest: what participants expect of a public participation process. Society and Natural Resources. 12 (1999) 437-453
32. UNECE 1998. Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.
33. Visser M., Moran J., Regan E., Gormally M., and Skeffington M.S. The Irish agri-environment: how Turlough users and non-users view converging EU agendas of Natura 2000 and CAP. Land Use Policy 24 (2007) 362-373
34. Walter G. Images of success: how Illinois farmers define the successful farmer. Rural Sociology 62 1 (1997) 48-68
35. Webler T., and Tuler S. Public participation in watershed management planning: views on process from people in the field. Human Ecology Review 8 2 (2001) 29-39
36. Webler T., Tuler S., and Krueger R. What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environmental Management 27 (2001) 435-450
37. Wondolleck J.M., and Yaffe S. Making collaboration work: lessons form innovation in natural resource management (2000), Island Press, Washington, DC
38. World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future (1987), Oxford University Press, Oxford
39. Zografos C. Rurality discourses and the role of the social enterprise in regenerating rural Scotland. Journal of Rural Studies 23 (2007) 38-51