Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Managing city forests for or in spite of recreation? Perspectives of forest managers

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Journal of Forest Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper provides insights into foresters’ perceptions of forest recreation and its management. It is based on qualitative interviews with foresters in Berlin and the region of Stuttgart, Germany (N = 16). The results highlight the lack of strategic planning concerned with recreation management at both locations. Moreover, recreation management seems to depend mostly on the local forester in charge. Foresters’ perceptions of recreation, in turn, appear to be closely linked with how they perceive their work. Three narratives of the foresters’ self-perception are constructed that address three key items: perception of foresters’ skills and tasks, perception of the societal and political context of the foresters’ work and of their own scope of action in this context, and visions for future recreation management. The first narrative emphasises classical forestry and silvicultural aspects; the second understands foresters as multifunctional service providers for communal clients; and the last criticises the classical orientation of forestry and highlights new challenges for foresters in urban areas. These three views of recreation management in urban forests relate to classical forestry culture in different ways: either embodying this culture; differentiating from it; or adopting a new view which challenges this culture. Further research needs are discussed. The paper lastly argues for increased awareness of the importance of the social dimensions of forest management as one of the crucial future challenges for the forestry profession.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anders K (2003) Förster und Naturschützer: Thesen zum Verhältnis zweier Akteursgruppen. Bornimer Agrartech Ber 33:58–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Behan RW (1966) The myth of the omnipotent forester. J For 6:398–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell S, Tyrväinen L, Sieväinen T, Pröbstl U, Simpson M (2007) Outdoor recreation and nature tourism: a European perspective. Living Rev Landsc Res 1(2). URL: http://livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2, accessed 5 Jan 2012

  • Blumer H (1969) Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • BMELF (1998) Sammlung forstlicher Fachbegriffe. Deutsch—Englisch, 4th edn. Bundeministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten, Bonn

  • Boutefeu B (2008) La forêt, théâtre de nos émotions. ONF Rendez-vous techniques 19, Paris

  • Duerr WA, Duerr JB (1975) The role of faith in forest resource management. In: Rumsey F, Duerr WA (eds) Social sciences in forestry. A book of readings. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 30–41

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2006) Communication from the commission to the council and the European Parliament on an EU forest action plan. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 15.6.2006, SEC (2006) 748, COM (2006) 302 final

  • Edwards D, Jay M, Jensen F, Lucas B, Marzano M, Montagne C, Peace A, Weiss G (2012) Public preferences across Europe for different forest stand types as sites for recreation. Ecol Soc 17(1):27

    Google Scholar 

  • Glück P (1987) Social values in forestry. Ambio 16(2–3):158–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Glück P, Pleschberger W (1982) Das Harmoniedenken in der Forstpolitik. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung 7:650–655

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodstadt V (2011) The planning of green networks: making the connections. In: Keynote address at the 14th European forum on urban forestry, 1–4 June, Glasgow

  • Heeg B (1973) Zur Soziologie der Forstbeamten. Eine Studie über die Organisationsreform der Landesforstverwaltungen. Schriftenreihe der Forstwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Albert-Ludwig-Unibersität, Band 11, Freiburg

  • Helfferich C (2005) Die Qualität qualitativer Daten. Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer interviews, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, p 193

  • Jay M, Schraml U (2009) Understanding the role of urban forests for migrants—uses, perception and integrative potential. Urban For Urban Green 8:283–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen FS (1994) Landscape managers’ and politicians’ perception of the forest and landscape preferences of the population. For Landsc Res 1:79–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen FS, Koch NE (2004) Twenty-five years of forest recreation research in Denmark and its influence on forest policy. Scand J For Res 19(Suppl 4):93–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston M, Shimada LD (2004) Urban forestry in a multicultural society. J Arboric 30(3):185–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy JJ, Dombeck MP, Koch NE (1998) Values, beliefs and management of public forests in the Western world at the close of the twentieth century. Unasylva 49(192):16–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch NE, Kennedy JJ (1991) Multiple-use forestry for social values. Ambio 20(7):330–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Konijnendijk CC (2003) A decade of urban forestry in Europe. For Policy Econ 5:173–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konijnendijk CC (2008) The forest and the city. The cultural landscape of urban woodland. Springer, Berlin, p 245

    Google Scholar 

  • Konijnendijk C, Nilsson K, Randrup T, Schipperijn J (eds) (2005) Urban forests and trees. A reference book. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann C, Schraml U (2006) Anwendung und Eignung eines Konfliktanalysemodells für das Management von Erholungsräumen. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung 12:224–234

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann C, Pouta E, Gentin S, Jensen FS (2010) Outdoor recreation in forest policy and legislation. Urban For Urban Green 9(4):303–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MCPFE (2003a) Improved pan-European indicators for sustainable forest management as adopted by the MCPFE expert level meeting 7–8 October 2002, Vienna, Austria. MCPFE Liaison Unit, Vienna

  • MCPFE (2003b) Background information for improved pan-European indicators for sustainable forest management. MCPFE Liaison Unit, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead GH (1934) Mind, self and society. University Press, Chicago, p 400

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, p 338

    Google Scholar 

  • Oesten G (1978) Untersuchungen zur Sozialisation von Nachwuchsmitgliedern für die Forstverwaltungen. Dissertation, University of Freiburg

  • Peters K, Elands B, Buijs A (2010) Social interactions in urban parks: stimulating social cohesion? Urban For Urban Green 9:93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pregernig M (2001) Values of forestry professionals and their implications for the applicability of policy instruments. Scand J For Res 16:278–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pröbstl U, Wirth V, Elands B, Bell S (eds) (2010) Management of recreation and nature based tourism in European forests. Springer, Berlin, p 336

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson L (1990) Writing strategies. Reaching diverse audiences. Qualitative research methods, vol 1. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupf H (1960) Wald und Mensch im Geschehen der Gegenwart. In: Jahresbericht des Deutschen Forstvereins. Landwirtschaftsverlag G.m.b.H., Hiltrup bei Münster (Westf.), pp 30–45

  • Schanz H (1996) Forstliche Nachhaltigkeit. Sozialwissenschaftliche analyse der Begriffsinhalte und- funktionen. Schriften aus dem Institut für Forstökonomie Band 4, Freiburg

  • Schmidt S (1999) Institutionenökonomische analyse der staatlichen Forstwirtschaft in Deutschland: die Bedeutung formeller und informeller Institutionen. Dissertation, University of Freiburg

  • Schraml U (2011) Waldnaturschutz mit Zukunft. Natur und Landschaft 6:261–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraml U (2012) Was wollen wir? Waldnutzung nach ökologischen, sozialen oder kulturellen Standards? In: Müller M, Hirschmann M (eds) Wald—mehr als Holz. Nutzungsoptionen und Gestaltung unserer Wälder. Loccumer Protokolle 54/11, Rehberg-Loccum, pp 155–176

  • Simpson MC, Pichler V, Tyrväinen L, Collins K, Martin S, Strange N, Vuletic D (eds) (2008) The economic and social values of forests for recreation and nature tourism: a research overview. Working Group one, EU COST Action E33 FORREC, Cost Office, p 86

  • Strübing J (2006) Theoretisches sampling. In: Bohnsack R, Marotzki W, Meuser M (eds) Hauptbegriffe qualitativer Sozialforschung, 2nd edn. Verlag Barbara Budrich, Opladen, pp 154–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Suda M, Krause E (2010) Die Berliner und ihr Wald. LWF aktuell 75(2010):56–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Verband Region Stuttgart (2010) Einwohner und Fläche. Bevölkerungsentwicklungen. http://www.region-stuttgart.org/vrs/main.jsp?navid=104. Retrieved 7 Sep 2010

  • Warkotsch W (2001) Forstliches Wörterbuch, deutsch–englisch. Verlag Dr. Kessel, Remagen-Oberwinter, p 222

    Google Scholar 

  • Westermayer T (2010) Staatliche Forstverwaltungen im Wandel. Organisationsreformen und Geschlecht. In: Hehn M, Katz C, Mayer M, Westermayer T (eds) Abschied vom grünen Rock. Forstverwaltungen, waldbezogene Umweltbildung und Geschlechterverhältnisse im Wandel. Oekom, München, pp 121–146

  • Winkel G (2007) Waldnaturschutzpolitik in Deutschland. Bestandaufnahme, Analysen und Entwurf einer Story-line. Freiburger Schriften zur Forst- und Umweltpolitik Bd. 13, Freiburg

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research presented in this paper has been funded by the Graduate School “Environment, Society and Global Change” of the Faculty of Forest and Environmental Sciences, Freiburg.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marion Jay.

Additional information

Communicated by G. Brazaitis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jay, M., Schraml, U. Managing city forests for or in spite of recreation? Perspectives of forest managers. Eur J Forest Res 132, 93–105 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-012-0658-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-012-0658-x

Keywords

Navigation