IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v175y2025ics1389934125000760.html

Integrating cultural perspectives in pro-sustainable-forest-management behavior: Evidence from Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups in Ontario, Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Yiwen, Zhang
  • Kant, Shashi
  • Vertinsky, Ilan

Abstract

Incorporating stakeholders' forest values, a key to Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), requires an understanding of stakeholders' beliefs and values and their relationships to pro-SFM behavior. In a cross-cultural context, it is essential to understand cultural differences in these attributes and relationships, and use culture-sensitive data elicitation and interpretation methods. We proposed a pro-SFM behavior model, that integrates the key elements of selected models pro-environmental behavior proposed in the environmental psychology and resource economics literature, to examine the role of assigned forest values (AFVs) and beliefs in pro-SFM behavior. We tested the model in the context of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal forest stakeholders in Ontario, Canada, using the data collected through surveys and field experiments in three Aboriginal and three non-Aboriginal communities. Our key findings are: (i) the rankings of different domains of AFVs are different among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups; (ii) for Aboriginal people, their AFVs assigned from the community perspective have significantly higher mean scores than their AFVs assigned from their individual/household's perspective; (iii) the community AFVs and the individual/household AFVs were the better predictors of pro-SFM behaviors for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups, respectively; and (iv) AFVs have significant mediation effects between environmental worldviews and pro-SFM behavior for non-Aboriginal people, while environmental worldviews directly influence pro-SFM behavior of Aboriginal people with no mediation through AFVs. The paper concludes with the implications of these results to SFM theories and practices and calls for incorporating cultural differences in designing SFM policies and practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2025. "Integrating cultural perspectives in pro-sustainable-forest-management behavior: Evidence from Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups in Ontario, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:175:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125000760
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125000760
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103497?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kumar, Sushil & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "Exploded logit modeling of stakeholders' preferences for multiple forest values," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 516-526, January.
    2. Zander, Kerstin K. & Straton, Anna, 2010. "An economic assessment of the value of tropical river ecosystem services: Heterogeneous preferences among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2417-2426, October.
    3. Wiktor Adamowicz & J. Deshazo, 2006. "Frontiers in Stated Preferences Methods: An Introduction," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 1-6, May.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Marie Pratzer & Álvaro Fernández-Llamazares & Patrick Meyfroidt & Tobias Krueger & Matthias Baumann & Stephen T. Garnett & Tobias Kuemmerle, 2023. "Agricultural intensification, Indigenous stewardship and land sparing in tropical dry forests," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 671-682, June.
    6. Oleson, Kirsten L.L. & Barnes, Michele & Brander, Luke M. & Oliver, Thomas A. & van Beek, Ingrid & Zafindrasilivonona, Bienvenue & van Beukering, Pieter, 2015. "Cultural bequest values for ecosystem service flows among indigenous fishers: A discrete choice experiment validated with mixed methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 104-116.
    7. Helseth, Elisabeth Veivåg & Vedeld, Paul & Vatn, Arild & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2023. "Value asymmetries in Norwegian forest governance: The role of institutions and power dynamics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    8. Kant, Shashi & Lee, Susan, 2004. "A social choice approach to sustainable forest management: an analysis of multiple forest values in Northwestern Ontario," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 215-227, June.
    9. Thomas C. Brown, 1984. "The Concept of Value in Resource Allocation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(3), pages 231-246.
    10. Pascua, Pua‘ala & McMillen, Heather & Ticktin, Tamara & Vaughan, Mehana & Winter, Kawika B., 2017. "Beyond services: A process and framework to incorporate cultural, genealogical, place-based, and indigenous relationships in ecosystem service assessments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 465-475.
    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. Zhang Yiwen & Shashi Kant & Ilan Vertinsky, 2024. "Enhancing stakeholder engagement in sustainable forest management: A multi‐domain comparative analysis of forest‐related beliefs, values, and behaviors of Canadian Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal groups," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 4202-4221, August.
    2. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Chan, Kai M.A., 2019. "When value conflicts are barriers: Can relational values help explain farmer participation in conservation incentive programs?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 464-475.
    3. Xiaoshu Li & G. Andrew Stainback, 2020. "On-Site Experience Effect on Stakeholders’ Preferences of Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Miller, Sini & Tait, Peter & Saunders, Caroline, 2015. "Estimating indigenous cultural values of freshwater: A choice experiment approach to Māori values in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 207-214.
    5. Manero, Ana & Taylor, Kat & Nikolakis, William & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Marshall, Virginia & Spencer-Cotton, Alaya & Nguyen, Mai & Grafton, R. Quentin, 2022. "A systematic literature review of non-market valuation of Indigenous peoples’ values: Current knowledge, best-practice and framing questions for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    6. Sophal Chhun & Paul Thorsnes & Henrik Moller, 2013. "Preferences for Management of Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems: A Choice Experiment in New Zealand," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-33, September.
    7. Ford, R.M. & Anderson, N.M. & Nitschke, C. & Bennett, L.T. & Williams, K.J.H., 2017. "Psychological values and cues as a basis for developing socially relevant criteria and indicators for forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 141-150.
    8. Hoelting, Kristin R. & Martinez, Doreen E. & Schuster, Rudy M. & Gavin, Michael C., 2024. "Advancing knowledge pluralism and cultural benefits in ecosystem services theory and application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    9. Cati Torres & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Communicating research on the economic valuation of coastal and marine ecosystem services," DEA Working Papers 81, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    10. Schulz, Christopher & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Glenk, Klaus & Ioris, Antonio A.R., 2017. "The Value Base of Water Governance: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 241-249.
    11. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    12. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    13. Clara Cardone-Riportella & María José Casasola-Martinez & Isabel Feito-Ruiz, 2014. "Do Entrepreneurs Come From Venus Or Mars? Impact Of Postgraduate Studies: Gender And Family Business Background," Working Papers 14.04, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Financial Economics and Accounting (former Department of Business Administration), revised Sep 2014.
    14. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    15. Ruijie Zhu & Guojing Zhao & Zehai Long & Yangjie Huang & Zhaoxin Huang, 2022. "Entrepreneurship or Employment? A Survey of College Students’ Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    17. Pan, Jing Yu & Liu, Dahai, 2022. "Mask-wearing intentions on airplanes during COVID-19 – Application of theory of planned behavior model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 32-44.
    18. Zhang, Kai & Cheng, Xiaoting, 2025. "Determinants of consumers’ intentions to use smart home devices from the perspective of perceived value: A mixed SEM, NCA, and fsQCA study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    19. Mohammed Akhmaaj, Asmaeil Ali & Sharif, Mohamed Omar, 2024. "The effects of planned behavior model constructs and technology acceptance model constructs on online purchasing behavior: An empirical study on internet users in the Libya city of Tripoli," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    20. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:175:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125000760. 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.