IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p17-d299300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Pete Bettinger

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Jacek Siry

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Bin Mei

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Jesse Abrams

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources and Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

Abstract

Sustainable forest management is important for advancing sustainable societal development. Effective communication plays a major role in how goals and objectives are achieved. This study aims to assess how sustainability is considered by people who develop forest management plans (or forest plans in short). We employed the snowball sample technique to locate the study’s respondents. In addition, an open-ended questionnaire and a mix method data collection (phone and email) and analysis (qualitative and quantitative) were found to be adequate methods to survey forest planners who have been involved in the development, implementation, evaluation, and/or revision of forest plans in the United States. Our approach helped us to understand their perceptions of and means of incorporating sustainability concerns in forest plans. A total of 55 surveys were completed by forest planners physically located in 26 of the 50 states in the country. Results suggested that planners generally placed environmental sustainability concerns over social and economic sustainability concerns. A variety of key terms were central to forest planners’ attempts to communicate sustainability, from which most were associated with philosophical and temporal principles that would then be associated with concrete actions and the human dimension. Nevertheless, respondents also acknowledged difficulties and misunderstandings in describing how forest sustainability should be demonstrated within a forest plan. Topics such as restoration, carbon sequestration, and resilience were infrequently associated with sustainability and sustainable forest management. Finally, we found that the respondents were divided on whether the language used in forest plans to demonstrate sustainability could be improved.

Suggested Citation

  • Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:17-:d:299300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/17/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/17/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baltar, Fabiola & Brunet Icart, Ignasi, 2012. "Social research 2.0: virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1875, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    2. Agostino Vollero & Alfonso Siano & Maddalena Della Volpe, 2019. "A Systems Perspective for Conceptualizing Sustainability in Long‐lived Family Businesses. Research Proposals on Risk Taking and Innovativeness," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 111-127, February.
    3. Tomas M. Koontz, 0. "Differences Between State and Federal Public Forest Management: The Importance of Rules," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 15-38.
    4. Siry, Jacek P. & Cubbage, Frederick W. & Ahmed, Miyan Rukunuddin, 2005. "Sustainable forest management: global trends and opportunities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 551-561, May.
    5. Edmund A. Spindler, 2013. "The History of Sustainability The Origins and Effects of a Popular Concept," Springer Books, in: Ian Jenkins & Roland Schröder (ed.), Sustainability in Tourism, edition 127, pages 9-31, Springer.
    6. Primmer, Eeva & Karppinen, Heimo, 2010. "Professional judgment in non-industrial private forestry: Forester attitudes and social norms influencing biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 136-146, February.
    7. Angelstam, Per & Elbakidze, Marine & Axelsson, Robert & Khoroshev, Alexander & Pedroli, Bas & Tysiachniouk, Maria & Zabubenin, Evgeny, 2019. "Model forests in Russia as landscape approach: Demonstration projects or initiatives for learning towards sustainable forest management?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 96-110.
    8. Shyam Singh & Nathalie Holvoet & Vivek Pandey, 2018. "Bridging Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility: Culture of Monitoring and Evaluation of CSR Initiatives in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Patrick Biernacki & Dan Waldorf, 1981. "Snowball Sampling: Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 10(2), pages 141-163, November.
    10. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    11. Conway, Gordon R., 1987. "The properties of agroecosystems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 95-117.
    12. Susan C Weller & Ben Vickers & H Russell Bernard & Alyssa M Blackburn & Stephen Borgatti & Clarence C Gravlee & Jeffrey C Johnson, 2018. "Open-ended interview questions and saturation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anne Jensen & Helle Ørsted Nielsen & Duncan Russel, 2020. "Climate Policy in a Fragmented World—Transformative Governance Interactions at Multiple Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-8, November.
    2. Hubert Paluš & Ján Parobek & Rastislav Šulek & Ján Lichý & Jaroslav Šálka, 2018. "Understanding Sustainable Forest Management Certification in Slovakia: Forest Owners’ Perception of Expectations, Benefits and Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    3. Park, J. & Seaton, R. A. F., 1996. "Integrative research and sustainable agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 81-100.
    4. Lauriane Mouysset & Luc Doyen & François Léger & Frédéric Jiguet & Tim G. Benton, 2018. "Operationalizing Sustainability as a Safe Policy Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-9, October.
    5. Tanzi Smith, 2011. "Using critical systems thinking to foster an integrated approach to sustainability: a proposal for development practitioners," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Wafa Khlif & Lotfi Karoui & Coral Ingley, 2022. "Systemic sustainability: toward an organic model of governance—a research note," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 26(1), pages 11-25, March.
    7. Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Weersink, Alfons, 1997. "A review and evaluation of agroecosystem health analysis: The role of economics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 601-626, December.
    8. Yuan Yuan Liu, 2017. "A Framework Identifying Factors Influencing Travel Motivations For Sustainable Tourism Destinations," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 11(1), pages 510-519.
    9. Francois Bonnieux & Jean Christophe Paoli, 2004. "Investment project evaluation : social and economic indicators for sustainable development," Working Papers hal-01594134, HAL.
    10. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    11. Tisdell, Clem, 2015. "Agricultural Development and Sustainability: A Review of Recent and Earlier Perspectives," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 197549, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    13. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    14. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    15. Jim Butcher, 2006. "The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: a critical analysis of development implications," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 6(2), pages 146-156, April.
    16. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    17. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    18. Megan Devonald & Nicola Jones & Sally Youssef, 2022. "‘We Have No Hope for Anything’: Exploring Interconnected Economic, Social and Environmental Risks to Adolescents in Lebanon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    20. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:17-:d:299300. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.