IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v85y2019icp368-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest intensification in Ireland: Developing an approximation of social acceptability

Author

Listed:
  • Duesberg, Stefanie
  • Ní Dhubháin, Áine

Abstract

It is forecast that Ireland will experience a shortage in timber supply by 2020 due to rising demand for fuel and construction. The option to increase the wood production by expanding Ireland’s relatively low forest area of 11% is limited. Despite generous afforestation programs afforestation rates have plummeted and there is a competition for land resources with food production and other land-uses. Hence, timber supply from existing forests needs to increase, which requires intensifying production without compromising environmental and social ecosystem services. The purpose of this study was to find out how intensively forests in Ireland could be managed without creating a negative impact on society’s overall benefits from forests. A number of studies have been conducted to date researching the preferences of forest stakeholders with regard to forest management operations. In these studies preferences represent an ideal outcome or situation. Rather than looking at an ideal outcome we wanted to know how far forest management intensification could go, without creating conflict. In other words we were looking for the most intensive forest management options still acceptable to a majority of forest stakeholders with interests in environmental and recreational forest ecosystem services. For this purpose we conducted a multi-method study including in-depth interviews and an online survey with forest stakeholders interested in these ecosystem services. The results show that further intensifying forest management in Ireland could bear conflict potential as none of the currently used forest management intensities are accepted by a majority of participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Duesberg, Stefanie & Ní Dhubháin, Áine, 2019. "Forest intensification in Ireland: Developing an approximation of social acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 368-386.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:85:y:2019:i:c:p:368-386
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718306148
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.028?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. Curtis, Sarah & Gesler, Wil & Smith, Glenn & Washburn, Sarah, 2000. "Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: examples in the geography of health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(7-8), pages 1001-1014, April.
    2. Upton, Vincent & Dhubháin, Áine Ní & Bullock, Craig, 2012. "Preferences and values for afforestation: The effects of location and respondent understanding on forest attributes in a labelled choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 17-27.
    3. David Edwards & Marion Jay & Franck S Jensen & Beatriz Lucas & Mariella Marzano & Claire C. Montagné-Huck & Andrew Peace & Gerhard Weiss, 2012. "Public preferences across europe for different forest stand types as site for recreation," Post-Print hal-02647764, HAL.
    4. Prno, Jason & Scott Slocombe, D., 2012. "Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 346-357.
    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. Vidyaratne, Herath & Vij, Akshay & Regan, Courtney M., 2020. "A socio-economic exploration of landholder motivations to participate in afforestation programs in the Republic of Ireland: The role of irreversibility, inheritance and bequest value," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Jin, Yan, 2022. "Understanding planting preferences – A case-study of the afforestation choices of farmers in Ireland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Jodie Asselin, 2022. "Plantation politics and discourse: Forests and property in upland Ireland," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 336-348, June.
    4. Gençay, Gökçe, 2020. "Legal framework of private afforestation: The case of Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Kilcline, Kevin & Dhubháin, Áine Ní & Heanue, Kevin & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2021. "Addressing the challenge of wood mobilisation through a systemic innovation lens: The Irish forest sector innovation system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).

    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. Ciesielski, Mariusz & Stereńczak, Krzysztof, 2021. "Using Flickr data and selected environmental characteristics to analyse the temporal and spatial distribution of activities in forest areas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    2. Kilcline, Kevin & Dhubháin, Áine Ní & Heanue, Kevin & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2021. "Addressing the challenge of wood mobilisation through a systemic innovation lens: The Irish forest sector innovation system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    3. Oksana Pelyukh & Alessandro Paletto & Lyudmyla Zahvoyska, 2019. "People's attitudes towards deadwood in forest: evidence from the Ukrainian Carpathians," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(5), pages 171-182.
    4. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    5. Van Alstine, James & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "Business and development: Changing discourses in the extractive industries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 4-16.
    6. Susanne Neuner & Thomas Knoke, 2017. "Economic consequences of altered survival of mixed or pure Norway spruce under a dryer and warmer climate," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 519-531, February.
    7. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    8. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    9. Aleta Lederwasch & Pierre Mukheibir, 2013. "The Triple Bottom Line and Progress toward Ecological Sustainable Development: Australia’s Coal Mining Industry as a Case Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, March.
    10. Wright, Susan & Bice, Sara, 2017. "Beyond social capital: A strategic action fields approach to social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 284-295.
    11. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    12. Badera, Jarosław & Kocoń, Paweł, 2014. "Local community opinions regarding the socio-environmental aspects of lignite surface mining: Experiences from central Poland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 507-516.
    13. Luthra, Sunil & Garg, Dixit & Haleem, Abid, 2015. "An analysis of interactions among critical success factors to implement green supply chain management towards sustainability: An Indian perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(P1), pages 37-50.
    14. Fraser, Jocelyn & Kunz, Nadja C. & Batdorj, Bulgan, 2019. "Can mineral exploration projects create and share value with communities? A case study from Mongolia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    16. Zeng, Lijun & Guo, Jiaqi & Wang, Bingcheng & Lv, Jun & Wang, Qin, 2019. "Analyzing sustainability of Chinese coal cities using a decision tree modeling approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    17. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    18. Pretzsch, Hans, 2022. "Facilitation and competition reduction in tree species mixtures in Central Europe: Consequences for growth modeling and forest management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).
    19. McGrath, Luke & Hynes, Stephen & McHale, John, 2019. "Augmenting the World Bank's estimates: Ireland's genuine savings through boom and bust," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Dong-Hyeon Kim & Byeong-Il Ahn & Eui-Gyeong Kim, 2016. "Metropolitan Residents’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for a Life Zone Forest for Mitigating Heat Island Effects during Summer Season in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.

    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:lauspo:v:85:y:2019:i:c:p:368-386. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.