IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i2p215-d1572869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perception and Self-Concept of Suburban Foresters in Their Role as Forest Recreation Managers

Author

Listed:
  • Sabina Autratova

    (Department of Landscape Management, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Jitka Fialova

    (Department of Landscape Management, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Katerina Sedlackova

    (Department of Landscape Management, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The study aimed to explore the perception of foresters in relation to forest recreational management in the Czech Republic. Using qualitative research methods, specifically semi-structured in-depth interviews, the study gathered data to uncover the positive and negative factors influencing the work of foresters as recreational managers. Fifteen respondents from across the country, all involved in the development and management of forest recreation, participated in the study. Content analysis and grounded theory were applied to analyze the interviews with the aid of ATLAS.ti software (Student Semester License). The findings highlight foresters’ perception from two perspectives: as forest users and as professionals. The professional perspective also revealed challenges, benefits, and obstacles in managing recreational activities. A key theme that emerged was the relationship and communication with the public. The study found that foresters’ views on recreation management are complex, encompassing both positive and negative aspects. While they value contributing to the public good, they face issues such as environmental pollution, conflicts with visitors, rule enforcement, and a lack of recognition for their efforts. These challenges shape their professional outlook. The insights gained could guide future research and inform strategies to enhance forest recreation management.

Suggested Citation

  • Sabina Autratova & Jitka Fialova & Katerina Sedlackova, 2025. "The Perception and Self-Concept of Suburban Foresters in Their Role as Forest Recreation Managers," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:215-:d:1572869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/2/215/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/2/215/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    3. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    6. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    7. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    8. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    9. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    10. Aggelos Tsaligopoulos & Stella Kyvelou & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi & Aimilia Karapostoli & Chris Economou & Yiannis G. Matsinos, 2021. "Revisiting the Concept of Quietness in the Urban Environment—Towards Ecosystems’ Health and Human Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Jonas Smit Andersen & Sara Maria Lerer & Antje Backhaus & Marina Bergen Jensen & Hjalte Jomo Danielsen Sørup, 2017. "Characteristic Rain Events: A Methodology for Improving the Amenity Value of Stormwater Control Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    12. Jeroen Degerickx & Martin Hermy & Ben Somers, 2020. "Mapping Functional Urban Green Types Using High Resolution Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, March.
    13. Jacqueline Theis & Christopher K. Woolley & Philip J. Seddon & Danielle F. Shanahan & Claire Freeman & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Yolanda van Heezik, 2025. "The New Zealand Biodiversity Factor—Residential (NZBF-R): A Tool to Rapidly Score the Relative Biodiversity Value of Urban Residential Developments," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-32, March.
    14. Holt, Alison R. & Mears, Meghann & Maltby, Lorraine & Warren, Philip, 2015. "Understanding spatial patterns in the production of multiple urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-46.
    15. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Qindong Fan & Xiaoyu Yang & Chenming Zhang, 2022. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Research Focusing on China against the Background of Urbanization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Célestin Adeito Mavunda & Madjouma Kanda & Fousséni Folega & Demirel Maza-esso Bawa & Bilouktime Badjare & John Katembo Mukirania & Marra Dourma & Koffi Akpagana, 2023. "Kinshasa Province (Democratic Republic of Congo): Typology of Peri-Urban Ecosystems Providing Edible Insects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Shiva Gharibi & Kamran Shayesteh, 2024. "Evaluation of flow, supply, and demand for noise reduction in urban area, Hamadan in Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Leon Yan-Feng Gaw & Alex Thiam Koon Yee & Daniel Rex Richards, 2019. "A High-Resolution Map of Singapore’s Terrestrial Ecosystems," Data, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-10, August.
    20. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.

    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:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:215-:d:1572869. 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.