IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v68y2016icp105-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing survey-based research in forest science: Turning lemons into lemonade?

Author

Listed:
  • Stevanov, Mirjana
  • Dobšinska, Zuzana
  • Surový, Peter

Abstract

Survey-based research is the most widely applied and simultaneously most criticized approach. Whereas many disciplines failed to adhere to its fundamental principles, e.g. due to low response rates, often inadequate sampling procedures, or an over-reliance on the cross-sectional approaches, in forest science no systematic evidence can be found, even though this kind of inquiry has been used for almost six decades now. We therefore examine how much research in forest science is survey-based and how its amount has developed over time? Has survey-based research in forest science matured? Has this research applied sound methodology and what are the main avenues for improvement? To find answers, we analyzed survey-based articles published in 20 forest science journals from 2005 to 2014 and found that an average of 3.2% of research was survey-based. We could identify a significant increase in the percentage of survey-based articles among the total articles published throughout the same time period. By further analyzing the relative contribution of exploratory, descriptive and explanatory types of survey-based articles, among the total amount of articles we found that the increase in the percentage was mostly concentrated on the group of explanatory articles. According to the research maturity cycle, this indicates that survey-based research in forest science is maturing. By additionally applying a framework of 16 assessment items to our data, we evidenced that for half of these items methodology could have been more carefully applied. Respective improvement avenues were detected by using the Survey Assessment Matrix (SAM).

Suggested Citation

  • Stevanov, Mirjana & Dobšinska, Zuzana & Surový, Peter, 2016. "Assessing survey-based research in forest science: Turning lemons into lemonade?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 105-117.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:68:y:2016:i:c:p:105-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.07.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934115300241
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.07.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van der Vaart, Taco & van Donk, Dirk Pieter, 2008. "A critical review of survey-based research in supply chain integration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 42-55, January.
    2. Van Gossum, Peter & Arts, Bas & Verheyen, Kris, 2012. "“Smart regulation”: Can policy instrument design solve forest policy aims of expansion and sustainability in Flanders and the Netherlands?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 23-34.
    3. Baker, H. Kent & Singleton, J. Clay & Veit, E. Theodore, 2011. "Survey Research in Corporate Finance: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195340372, Decembrie.
    4. Arts, Bas, 2012. "Forests policy analysis and theory use: Overview and trends," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 7-13.
    5. H. Kent Baker & Tarun K. Mukherjee, 2007. "Survey research in finance: views from journal editors," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 3(1), pages 11-25, January.
    6. Opp Karl-Dieter, 2011. "The Production of Historical “Facts”: How the Wrong Number of Participants in the Leipzig Monday Demonstration on October 9, 1989 Became a Convention," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 231(5-6), pages 598-607, October.
    7. de Jong, Wil & Arts, Bas & Krott, Max, 2012. "Political theory in forest policy science," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-6.
    8. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Van der Stede, Wim A. & Young, S. Mark & Chen, Clara Xiaoling, 2005. "Assessing the quality of evidence in empirical management accounting research: The case of survey studies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(7-8), pages 655-684.
    10. Krott, Max, 2012. "Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 35-42.
    11. Stevanov, Mirjana & Böcher, Michael & Krott, Max & Krajter, Silvija & Vuletic, Dijana & Orlovic, Sasa, 2013. "The Research, Integration and Utilization (RIU) model as an analytical framework for the professionalization of departmental research organizations: Case studies of publicly funded forest research ins," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 20-28.
    12. Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2012. "Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 71-80.
    13. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    14. Winkel, Georg, 2012. "Foucault in the forests—A review of the use of ‘Foucauldian’ concepts in forest policy analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 81-92.
    15. Editors The, 2007. "From the Editors," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-5, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marzano, Mariella & Dandy, Norman & Papazova-Anakieva, Irena & Avtzis, Dimitrios & Connolly, Tom & Eschen, René & Glavendekić, Milka & Hurley, Brett & Lindelöw, Åke & Matošević, Dinka & Tomov, Rumen &, 2016. "Assessing awareness of tree pests and pathogens amongst tree professionals: A pan-European perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 164-171.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    2. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Böcher, Michael & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Forest Policy Analysis: Advancing the analytical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-6.
    3. Krott, Max & Giessen, Lukas, 2014. "Learning from practices — implications of the “practice based approach” for forest and environmental policy research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 12-16.
    4. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    5. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    6. Jacobs, Mark A. & Yu, Wantao & Chavez, Roberto, 2016. "The effect of internal communication and employee satisfaction on supply chain integration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P1), pages 60-70.
    7. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Rahman, Sabrina, 2016. "Forest in crisis: 2 decades of media discourse analysis of Bangladesh print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 16-21.
    8. Bürgel, Tobias R. & Hiebl, Martin R.W. & Pielsticker, David I., 2023. "Digitalization and entrepreneurial firms' resilience to pandemic crises: Evidence from COVID-19 and the German Mittelstand," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    9. Yu, Wantao & Jacobs, Mark A. & Salisbury, W. David & Enns, Harvey, 2013. "The effects of supply chain integration on customer satisfaction and financial performance: An organizational learning perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 346-358.
    10. Abdul-Rahman Khokhar, 2019. "Working Capital Investment: A Comparative Study - Canada Versus the United States," Multinational Finance Journal, Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 23(1-2), pages 65-102, March - J.
    11. Juan Manuel Ramon-Jeronimo & Raquel Florez-Lopez & Maria Angeles Ramon-Jeronimo, 2017. "Understanding the Generation of Value along Supply Chains: Balancing Control Information and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Downstream and Upstream Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-31, August.
    12. Holm, Morten & Kumar, V. & Plenborg, Thomas, 2016. "An investigation of Customer Accounting systems as a source of sustainable competitive advantage," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 18-30.
    13. Mendes-da-Silva, Wesley & Saito, Richard, 2014. "Listagem em bolsa induz sofisticação do orçamento de capital," RAE - Revista de Administração de Empresas, FGV-EAESP Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo (Brazil), vol. 54(5), September.
    14. Sebastian Goebel & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2017. "Effects of management control mechanisms: towards a more comprehensive analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 185-219, February.
    15. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    16. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Regional governance by the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program (SACEP)? Institutional design and customizable regime policy offering flexible political options," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 454-470.
    17. Hasanagas, Nikolaos D., 2016. "Managing information in forest policy networks: Distinguishing the influential actors from the “postmen”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 73-80.
    18. Prajogo, Daniel & Chowdhury, Mesbahuddin & Yeung, Andy C.L. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2012. "The relationship between supplier management and firm's operational performance: A multi-dimensional perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 123-130.
    19. Koch, Susanne & Tetley, Camilla, 2023. "What ‘counts’ in international forest policy research? A conference ethnography of valuation practice and habitus in an interdisciplinary social science field," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    20. Matthias Mahlendorf, 2015. "Allowance for failure: reducing dysfunctional behavior by innovating accountability practices," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 19(3), pages 655-686, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:68:y:2016:i:c:p:105-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.