IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9685-d624335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Influencing the Level of Local Participation in Planning and Management of the Planned Salzburger Lungau & Kärntner Nockberge Biosphere Reserve in Austria

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Huber

    (Institute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, Department of Spatial, Landscape and Infrastructure Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Peter Jordan Strasse 82, 1190 Vienna, Austria
    E.C.O. Institute of Ecology, Lakeside B07b, 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria)

  • Arne Arnberger

    (Institute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, Department of Spatial, Landscape and Infrastructure Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Peter Jordan Strasse 82, 1190 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

The participation of the local population in the planning and management of biosphere reserves is one of the preconditions for success. While numerous studies underpin its importance, few studies have addressed to what extent participation is desired by local residents and which factors determine the level of participation. A postal survey among local residents ( n = 449) explored factors influencing their willingness to participate in the planning and management of the Salzburger Lungau & Kärntner Nockberge Biosphere Reserve in Austria before it was officially recognised by UNESCO. By applying the “Theory of Planned Behaviour”, the study found a high willingness to be involved among the local population, but a considerable variance as to what extent. Regression models showed a strong influence of perceived behavioural control and the social environment, whereas the factors identified in previous studies were less relevant. The results show that the readiness to become active seems to be higher than expected by local bodies and more linked to the design of the participatory process or other barriers. The results support the biosphere reserve management in developing appropriate participatory approaches to maximise satisfaction with participation and management success.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Huber & Arne Arnberger, 2021. "Factors Influencing the Level of Local Participation in Planning and Management of the Planned Salzburger Lungau & Kärntner Nockberge Biosphere Reserve in Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-16, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9685-:d:624335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9685/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9685/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ann Zanetell, Brooke & Knuth, Barbara A., 2004. "Participation Rhetoric or Community-Based Management Reality? Influences on Willingness to Participate in a Venezuelan Freshwater Fishery," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 793-807, May.
    2. Coulibaly-Lingani, Pascaline & Savadogo, Patrice & Tigabu, Mulualem & Oden, Per-Christer, 2011. "Factors influencing people's participation in the forest management program in Burkina Faso, West Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 292-302, April.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Lise, Wietze, 2000. "Factors influencing people's participation in forest management in India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 379-392, September.
    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. Mudaca, Joao Daniel & Tsuchiya, Toshiyuki & Yamada, Masaaki & Onwona-Agyeman, Siaw, 2015. "Household participation in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A case study from Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-27.
    2. Soe, Khaing Thandar & Yeo-Chang, YOUN, 2019. "Perceptions of forest-dependent communities toward participation in forest conservation: A case study in Bago Yoma, South-Central Myanmar," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 129-141.
    3. Hussein Luswaga & Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2020. "Participatory Forest Management in West Usambara Tanzania: What Is the Community Perception on Success?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Siriluck Thammanu & Hee Han & E. M. B. P. Ekanayake & Yoonkoo Jung & Joosang Chung, 2021. "The Impact on Ecosystem Services and the Satisfaction Therewith of Community Forest Management in Northern Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-31, December.
    5. Paudel, Jayash, 2016. "Community-Managed Forests and Household Welfare: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235481, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Shrestha, Sujata & Shrestha, Uttam Babu, 2017. "Beyond money: Does REDD+ payment enhance household's participation in forest governance and management in Nepal's community forests?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 63-70.
    7. Dave, Radhika & Tompkins, Emma L. & Schreckenberg, Kate, 2017. "Forest ecosystem services derived by smallholder farmers in northwestern Madagascar: Storm hazard mitigation and participation in forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 72-82.
    8. Moses Kazungu & Eliza Zhunusova & Gillian Kabwe & Sven Günter, 2021. "Household-Level Determinants of Participation in Forest Support Programmes in the Miombo Landscapes, Zambia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Tsegaye T. Gatiso, 2019. "Households’ dependence on community forest and their contribution to participatory forest management: evidence from rural Ethiopia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 181-197, February.
    10. Etongo, Daniel & Kanninen, Markku & Epule, Terence Epule & Fobissie, Kalame, 2018. "Assessing the effectiveness of joint forest management in Southern Burkina Faso: A SWOT-AHP analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 31-38.
    11. Pandit, Ram, 2018. "REDD+ adoption and factors affecting respondents' knowledge of REDD+ goal: Evidence from household survey of forest users from REDD+ piloting sites in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 107-115.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Jacqueline Ruth & Steffen Willwacher & Oliver Korn, 2022. "Acceptance of Digital Sports: A Study Showing the Rising Acceptance of Digital Health Activities Due to the SARS-CoV-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-16, 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:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9685-:d:624335. 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.