Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Incorporating Values into Community-Scale Sustainable Forest Management Plans: An Application of Q Methodology

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Small-scale Forestry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Incorporating people’s values into forest management plans is an important component of sustainable forestry practice. Q methodology was used to identify perspectives on sustainable management of a community-owned forest reserve in a village in Puebla, Mexico. The study demonstrates the value of Q methodology in characterizing the views of citizens toward the forest and accommodating these views in a sustainable forest management plan. The plan we developed based on our research enjoyed widespread community support and far outdistanced its support of two alternative plans developed by outsiders. Our plan reflected the village’s strong preference for non-consumptive uses with regulated timber harvesting to sustain the ecological health of the forest and to provide short-term economic benefits.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Moreover, CBFM can serve as a model for other communities that experience problems with organization (Fraser et al. 2006; Sherry et al. 2005).

  2. This background was extracted from an unpublished document, Ordenacion Territorial del Municipio de Tlahuapan, which is part of a project established by the ONG Enlace and the government of Puebla.

  3. The current condition of some areas of the forest is poor. Unhealthy old grow forest is predominant as well as a large population of seedling with low probability of development without thinning.

  4. A detail discussion on the analysis and deliberation meetings is not part of the objective of this paper.

References

  • Adam MC, Kneeshaw D (2008) Local level criteria and indicator frameworks: a tool used to assess aboriginal forest ecosystem values. For Ecol Manag 255:2024–2037. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.12.051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alteiri MA, Rojas A (1999) Ecological impacts of Chile’s neoliberal policies, with special emphasis on agroecosystems. Environ Develop Sustain 1:55–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvai JL, Gregory R, McDaniels TL (2001) Testing a structured decision approach: value-focused thinking for deliberative risk communication. Risk Anal 21(6):1065–1076. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.216175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barry J, Proops J (1999) Seeking sustainability discourses with q methodology. Ecol Econ 28(3):337–345. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00053-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjade M, Ojha H (2005) Facilitating deliberative governance: innovations from Nepal’s community forestry program—a case study in Karmapunya. For Chron 81(3):403–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F, Folke C (1998) Linking social and ecological systems for resilience and sustainability. In: Berkers F, Folke C (eds) Linking social and ecological systems. Management practices and social mechanism for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Berninger K, Kneeshaw D, Messier C (2009) The role of cultural models in local perceptions of SFM—differences and similarities of interest groups from three boreal regions. J Environ Manag 90(2):740–751. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchet K (2001) Participatory development: between hopes and reality. Int Soc Sci J 53:637–641. doi:10.1111/1468-2451.00350

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown SR (1980) Political subjectivity: applications of Q methodology in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown SR (1993) A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subj 16(3/4):91–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr DS, Halvorsen K (2001) An evaluation of three democratic, community-based approaches to citizen participation: surveys, conversations with community groups, and community dinners. Soc Nat Res 14:107–126. doi:10.1080/089419201300000526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers D (2001) Environmental politics in Chile: legacies of dictatorship and democracy. Third World Quart 22(3):343–358. doi:10.1080/01436590120061642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke AH (2002) Understanding sustainable development in the context of emergent environmental perspectives. Pol Sci 35:69–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cojti-Cuxil D (1998) The theory and practice of indigenous development. In indigenous development: poverty, democracy and sustainability. First General Assembly of the Found for the Development of the Indigenous People of the Latin America and the Caribbean, Washington

  • Dasgupta P, Vira B (2005) Q methodology for mapping stakeholder perceptions in participatory forest management. Institute of Economic Growth Deli, Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Dourojeanni MJ, Seve JE (2006) Synthesis report on ex-post evaluations. Overall evaluation of ITTO projects on community participation in sustainable forest management. In: Thirty Ninth Session, Yokohama, Japan: ITTO International Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama

  • FAO.(2007) Towards sustainable forest management. http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/sfm/en/. November 2007. Accessed Jan 2009

  • Focht W (2002) Assessment and management of policy conflict in the Illinois river watershed in Oklahoma: an application of Q methodology. Int J Public Admin 25:1311–1349. doi:10.1081/PAD-120013349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Focht W, Lawler J (2000) Environmental policy. an application of Q methodology. In: Addams H, Proops J (eds) Using Q methodology to facilitate policy dialogue. Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, pp 100–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser EDG, Dougill AJ, Mabee WE, Reed M, McAlpine P (2006) Bottom up and top down: analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. J Environ Manag 78(2):114–127. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison S, Suh J (2004) Progress and prospects of community forestry in developing and developed countries. Small-scale For Econ Manag Pol 3(3):287–302. doi:10.1007/s11842-004-0021-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker AM (2001) Beliefs regarding society and nature: a framework for listening in forest and environmental policy. Operant Subj 24:159–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt LM, Haider W (2001) Fair and effective decision making in forest management planning. Soc Nat Res 14:873–887. doi:10.1080/089419201753242788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klooster DJ (2002) Toward adaptive community forest management: integrating local forest knowledge with scientific forestry. Econ Geogr 78(1):43–70. doi:10.1111/j.1944-8287.2002.tb00175.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knopp T, Caldbeck ES (1990) The role of participatory democracy in forest management. J For 88(5):13–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane MB, McDonald G (2005) Community-based environmental planning: operational dilemmas, planning principles and possible remedies. J Environ Plan Manag 48(5):709–731. doi:10.1080/09640560500182985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane BL, Boxall PC (2000) Factors influencing forest values and attitudes of two stakeholder groups: the case of the foothills model forest, Alberta, Canada. Soc Nat Res 13(7):649–651. doi:10.1080/08941920050121927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeown B, Thomas D (1988) Q methodology. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzies NK (2007) Our forest, your ecosystem, their timber. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Midlarsky MI (1998) Democracy and the environment: an empirical assessment. J Peace Res 35(3):341–361. doi:10.1177/0022343398035003005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RE (2006) Environmental governance in Mexico: two case studies of Oaxaca’s community forest sector. J Latin Am Stud 38:519–548. doi:10.1017/S0022216X06001155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mrosek T, Balsillie D, Schleifenbaum P (2006) Field testing of a criteria and indicators system for sustainable forest management at the local level. Case study results concerning the sustainability of the private forest Haliburton forest and wild life reserve in Ontario, Canada. For Pol Econ 8 (6):593–609. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2004.11.002

  • Niemeyer S, Dryzek JS (2007) The ends of deliberation: metaconsensus and intersubjective rationality as ideal outcomes. Swiss Pol Sci Rev 13:497–526. doi:10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00087.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijnik M (2005) The use of Q methodology to understand public perspectives on forest’s contribution to climate change mitigation. Sustainable Forestry in Theory and Practice, Edinburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijnik M, Nijnik A, Bizikova L (2009) Analysing the development of small-scale forestry in Central and Eastern Europe. Small-scale For 8:159–174. doi:10.1007/sl1842-009-9077-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ockwell D (2006) Empirical analysing the implications of discursive democracy for environmental sustainability. Int J Environ Cult Econ Soc Sustain 2:173–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Ockwell D (2008) Opening up policy to reflexive appraisal: a role for Q methodology? A case study of fire management in Cape York, Australia. Pol Sci 41(4):263–292. doi:10.1007/s11077-008-9066-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkins JR, Mitchell RE (2005) Public participation as public debate: a deliberative turn in natural resources management. Soc Nat Res 18:529–540. doi:10.1080/08941920590947977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier D, Kraak V, McCullum C, Uusitalo U, Rich R (1999) The shaping of collective values through deliberative democracy: an empirical study from New York’s North Country. Pol Sci 32:103–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce-Colfer CJP (2005) The equitable forest: diversity, community, and resource management. Resources for the Future and CIFOR, Washington, DC

  • PQMethod (2002) v. 2.11. The QMethod page. http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~schmolck/qmethod. Accessed l July 2008

  • Pujadas A, Castillo A (2007) Social participation in conservation efforts: a case study of a biosphere reserve on private lands in Mexico. Soc Nat Res 20(1):57–72. doi:10.1080/08941920600981371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards M, Davies J, Yaron G (2003) Stakeholder incentives in participatory forest management, a manual for economic analysis. ITDG, East Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2004) Evaluating public- participation exercises: a research agenda. Sci Technol Human Val 29(4):512–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard SRJ (2005) Participatory decision support for sustainable forest management: a framework for planning with local communities at the landscape level in Canada. Can J For Res-Reve Canadienne De Recherche Forestiere 35(7):1515–1526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard SRJ, Meitner M (2005) Using multi-criteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups. For Ecol Manag 207(1–2):171–187. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherry E, Halseth R, Fondahl G, Karjala M, Leon B (2005) Local-level criteria and indicators: an aboriginal perspective on sustainable forest management. Forestry 78(5):513–539. doi:10.1093/forestry/cpi048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steelman TA, Maguire LA (1999) Understanding participant perspectives: Q methodology in national forest management. J Policy Anal Manag 18(3):361–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson W (1953) The study of behavior: Q technique and its methodology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T (2002) From participation to partnership in biodiversity protection: experience from Germany and South Africa. Soc Nat Res 15:161–177. doi:10.1080/089419202753403337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swedeen P (2006) Post-normal science in practice: a q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA. Ecol Econ 57(2):190–208. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter C (2005) Preferences and values for forest and wetlands: a comparison of farmers, environmentalists, and the general public in Australia. Soc Nat Res 18:541–555. doi:10.1080/08941920590947986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodley S, Alward G, Gutierrez L I, Hoekstra T, Holt B, Livingston L, Loo J, Skibicki A, Williams C, Wright P (1999) North American test for criteria and indicators of sustainable forestry: USDA Forest Service Inventory and Monitoring Institute

  • Wright PA, Colby JL, Gregory A, Hoekstra TW, Tegler B, Turner M (2002) Monitoring for forest management unit scale sustainability: the local unit criteria and indicators development (lucid) test: USDA Forest Service

  • Xu Z, Bengston DN (1997) Trends in national forest values among forestry professionals, environmentalists, and the news media, 1982–1993. Soc Nat Res 10(1):43–59. doi:10.1080/08941929709381008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This project was supported by the Associate Dean of Academics at the College of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources in Oklahoma State University and the office of the Vice president for Outreach and Development at Universidad Popular Autonoma del Estado de Puebla, Mexico. Special thanks to the members of the community La Preciosita for their willingness to participate and Mr. James Esbenshade for the 2007 scholarship in Rural Sustainability. We also thank our two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments that greatly improved this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA

    Sandra Rodriguez-Piñeros

  2. Department of Political Science, Oklahoma State University, 201 Murray Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Will Focht

  3. Department of Natural Resources Ecology and Management, Oklahoma State University, 008 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    David K. Lewis

  4. School of Applied Health and Educational Psychology, Oklahoma State University, 424 Willard Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Diane Montgomery

Authors
  1. Sandra Rodriguez-Piñeros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Will Focht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David K. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Diane Montgomery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandra Rodriguez-Piñeros.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rodriguez-Piñeros, S., Focht, W., Lewis, D.K. et al. Incorporating Values into Community-Scale Sustainable Forest Management Plans: An Application of Q Methodology. Small-scale Forestry 11, 167–183 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9182-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9182-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation