IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i9p5493-d807103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Use of Simple Language in Informal Forest Education as a Key to the Correct Interpretation of Sustainable Forest Management—The Experience of Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Korcz

    (Department of Natural Foundations of Forestry, Institute of Soil Science and Environment Management, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

  • Emilia Janeczko

    (Department of Forest Utilization, Institute of Forest Sciences, University of Life Sciences in Warsaw, Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Agata Kobyłka

    (Department of Tourism and Recreation, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland)

Abstract

In view of the increasing conflict between society and forest management and a significant increase in the social functions of the forest, informal forest education is becoming increasingly important. In Poland, it is carried out mainly based on the field educational infrastructure, which consists, among other things, of forest educational paths equipped with educational boards. The paper presents the results of research on the assessment of the availability of texts presented on educational boards. The study was conducted on the basis of photographs of educational boards located on six educational paths in the forests of the Regional Directorate of State Forests in Lublin. Using the Google Lans application, the main text from each board was read and then analyzed in the Promovolt software program to determine the level of text accessibility using the Fog Index. The results were then compared with the opinion of respondents using an online survey, which indicated that most of the boards are written in language that is either simple, understandable to middle/high school students, or quite difficult but understandable to first-degree students. On the other hand, the respondents generally indicated the level of accessibility of the text to be easier because, in their opinion, it is enough to have a primary education to understand the content of the boards. This observation leads to the conclusion that in order for education to be more effective, simple language should be used, which can be understood by the less educated members of the population.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Korcz & Emilia Janeczko & Agata Kobyłka, 2022. "The Use of Simple Language in Informal Forest Education as a Key to the Correct Interpretation of Sustainable Forest Management—The Experience of Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5493-:d:807103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5493/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5493/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leskinen, Leena A., 2004. "Purposes and challenges of public participation in regional and local forestry in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 605-618, October.
    2. Buchy, M. & Hoverman, S., 2000. "Understanding public participation in forest planning: a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 15-25, May.
    3. Atmis, Erdogan & Ozden, Sezgin & Lise, Wietze, 2007. "Public participation in forestry in Turkey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 352-359, April.
    4. Janse, Gerben & Ottitsch, Andreas, 2005. "Factors influencing the role of Non-Wood Forest Products and Services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 309-319, March.
    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. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    2. Sugimura, Ken & Howard, Theodore E., 2008. "Incorporating social factors to improve the Japanese forest zoning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 161-173, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Jose Eugenio Martínez-Falero & Esperanza Ayuga-Tellez & Concepcion Gonzalez-Garcia & M. Angeles Grande-Ortiz & Alvaro Sánchez De Medina Garrido, 2017. "Experts’ Analysis of the Quality and Usability of SILVANET Software for Informing Sustainable Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Scardina, Anthony V. & Mortimer, Michael J. & Dudley, Larkin, 2007. "Getting past the who and how many to the how and why in USDA Forest Service public involvement processes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 883-902, May.
    6. Kumar, Sushil & Kant, Shashi, 2005. "Bureaucracy and new management paradigms: modeling foresters' perceptions regarding community-based forest management in India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 651-669, May.
    7. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Gustavsson, Roland & Konijnendijk, Cecil & Ode, Asa, 2006. "Visualization and landscape laboratories in planning, design and management of urban woodlands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 811-823, November.
    8. Alessandro Paletto & Claudia Becagli & Francesco Geri & Sandro Sacchelli & Isabella De Meo, 2022. "Use of Participatory Processes in Wood Residue Management from a Circular Bioeconomy Perspective: An Approach Adopted in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Germain, Rene H. & Floyd, Donald W. & Stehman, Stephen V., 2001. "Public perceptions of the USDA Forest Service public participation process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 113-124, November.
    10. Živojinović, I. & Weiss, G. & Wilding, M. & Wong, J.L.G. & Ludvig, A., 2020. "Experiencing forest products – An innovation trend by rural entrepreneurs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    11. Floress, Kristin & Vokoun, Melinda & Huff, Emily Silver & Baker, Melissa, 2019. "Public perceptions of county, state, and national forest management in Wisconsin, USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 110-120.
    12. Lawrence, Anna & Deuffic, Philippe & Hujala, Teppo & Nichiforel, Liviu & Feliciano, Diana & Jodlowski, Krzysztof & Lind, Torgny & Marchal, Didier & Talkkari, Ari & Teder, Meelis & Vilkriste, Lelde & W, 2020. "Extension, advice and knowledge systems for private forestry: Understanding diversity and change across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    13. Shahi, Chander & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "An evolutionary game-theoretic approach to the strategies of community members under Joint Forest Management regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 763-775, April.
    14. Winkel, Georg & Lovrić, Marko & Muys, Bart & Katila, Pia & Lundhede, Thomas & Pecurul, Mireia & Pettenella, Davide & Pipart, Nathalie & Plieninger, Tobias & Prokofieva, Irina & Parra, Constanza & Pülz, 2022. "Governing Europe's forests for multiple ecosystem services: Opportunities, challenges, and policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    15. Ayhan Akyol & Türkay Türkoğlu & Sultan Bekiroğlu & Ahmet Tolunay, 2018. "Resident perceptions of livelihood impacts arising from the Kızıldağ National Park, Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1037-1052, June.
    16. Sajjad Ali & Dake Wang & Talib Hussain & Xiaocong Lu & Mohammad Nurunnabi, 2021. "Forest Resource Management: An Empirical Study in Northern Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    17. Kilchling, Petra & Hansmann, Ralf & Seeland, Klaus, 2009. "Demand for non-timber forest products: Surveys of urban consumers and sellers in Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 294-300, July.
    18. Wallin, Ida & Carlsson, Julia & Hansen, Hans Peter, 2016. "Envisioning future forested landscapes in Sweden – Revealing local-national discrepancies through participatory action research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 25-40.
    19. Silva Larson & Thomas G Measham & Liana J Williams, 2009. "Remotely Engaged? A Framework for Monitoring the Success of Stakeholder Engagement in Remote Regions," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    20. Atmis, Erdogan & Günsen, H. Batuhan & Lise, Banu Bayramoglu & Lise, Wietze, 2009. "Factors affecting forest cooperative's participation in forestry in Turkey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 102-108, March.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5493-:d:807103. 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.