Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
International Journal of Ecology
Volume 2011, Article ID 685708, 8 pages
Research Article

Stakeholders' Perception as Support for Forest Landscape Planning

1Agricultural Research Council-Forest Monitoring and Planning Research Unit (CRA-MPF), Nicolini 6, Villazzano, 38124 Trento, Italy
2Forest Ecology Laboratory, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, University of Trento, Via Mesiano 77, Mesiano, 38050 Trento, Italy
3Agricultural Research Council-Appennine Forestry Research Unit (CRA-SFA), Via Bellini 8, 86170 Isernia, Italy

Received 7 July 2011; Revised 1 September 2011; Accepted 1 September 2011

Academic Editor: Pavlos Kassomenos

Copyright © 2011 Isabella De Meo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. G. M. Hickey, “Regulatory approaches to monitoring sustainable forest management,” International Forestry Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 89–98, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. G. M. Hickey, J. L. Innes, and R. A. Kozak, “Monitoring and information reporting for sustainable forest management: a regional comparison of forestry stakeholder perceptions,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 572–585, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  3. European Commission, ““Natura 2000” e foreste: sfide ed opportunità. Guida interpretativa,” Ufficio delle pubblicazioni ufficiali della Comunità Europea, Lussemburgo, pp. 107, 2003.
  4. FAO-ECE-ILO, “Public participation in forestry in Europe and North America. Report of the FAO/ECE/ILO Joint Committee Team of Specialists on Participation in Forestry,” Working Paper 163, Sectorial Activities Department, International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  5. Y. Kazemi, “Instruments de la participation publique: quelques repères théoriques sur la notion de participation publique dans le cadre de l’article 18, alinéa 3 de l’Ordonnance fédérale sur les forêts. Document préparatoire au cours SSF/CRIFOR/CSAF,” Instruments de la Participation Publique. Olten, Switzerland, 2001.
  6. M. G. Cantiani, D. Bettelini, and S. Mariotta, “Participatory forest planning: a chance of communication between forest service and local communities,” in Proceedings of the International Conference FAO/ECE/ILO “Forestry meets the Public”, pp. 249–263, Rüttihubelbad, Switzerland, October 2001.
  7. A. S. Cheng, L. E. Kruger, and S. E. Daniels, ““Place” as an integrating concept in natural resource politics: propositions for a social science research agenda,” Society and Natural Resources, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 87–104, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. E. O'Brien, “A question of value: what do trees and forests mean to people in Vermont?” Landscape Research, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 257–275, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. V. F. Schmitehusen and S. Wild-Eck, “Uses and perceptions of forests by people living in urban areas findings from selected empirical studies,” Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt, vol. 119, no. 6, pp. 395–408, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. M. A. Tarrant and H. K. Cordell, “Amenity values of public and private forests: examining the value-attitude relationship,” Environmental Management, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 692–703, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  11. D. Trakolis, “Local people's perceptions of planning and management issues in Prespes Lakes National Park, Greece,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 227–241, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  12. O. Rackham, Ancient Woodland: Its History, Vegetation and Uses in England, Edward Arnold, London, UK, 1980.
  13. O. Rackham, The History of the Countryside, Joseph Malaby Dent, London, UK, 1986.
  14. I. D. Rotherham, “The implications of perceptions and cultural knowledge loss for the management of wooded landscapes: a UK case-study,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 249, no. 1-2, pp. 100–115, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. F. Vera, Grazing Ecology and Forest History, CABI Publishing, Oxon, UK, 2000.
  16. S. R. Harrison and M. E. Qureshi, “Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multicriteria decision models,” Natural Resources Forum, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 11–19, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. Hislop, Involving People in Forestry: A Toolbox for Public Involvement in Forest and Woodland Planning, Forestry Commission, 2004.
  18. R. Hair, P. Bush, and D. J. Ortinau, Marketing Research: A Practical Approach for the New Millennium, McGraw-Hill, Boston, Mass, USA, 2000.
  19. H. Abdi and D. Valentin, “Multiple correspondence analysis,” in Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics, N. J . Salkind, Ed., pp. 651–657, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif, USA, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  20. B. Le Roux and H. Rouanet, Geometric Data Analysis, From Correspondence Analysis to Structured Data Analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004.
  21. M. Greenacre and J. Blasius, Eds., Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Related Methods, Chapman & Hall/CRC, London, UK, 2006.