Meaningful public participation in the planning and management of publicly owned forests

1991 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan S. Tanz ◽  
Andrew F. Howard
Keyword(s):  
Resource Management ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Management Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Resource ◽  
Management Alternatives ◽  
Public Forests

Foresters responsible for the management of public forests in Canada need a new approach. Multiple resource management and meaningful public involvement in management decision making are the distinguishing characteristics of this approach. This paper examines public participation in the management of public forests by trying to answer three questions; 1. Why involve citizens in resource management at all?, 2. Who may participate?, and 3. How can the public participate? Deciding who may participate is a difficult task, but utilizing the concept of forest constituency may help. We suggest that the public must be involved not only in policy-making decisions, but also in management decisions. Doing so, however, requires the use of computerized decision aids designed specifically for cooperative exploration of management alternatives.

Mechanisms Affecting Public Acceptance of Resource Management Policies and Strategies

1987 ◽  
Vol 44 (S2) ◽  
pp. s306-s312 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ben Peyton
Keyword(s):  
Resource Management ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Management Process ◽  
Value Conflicts ◽  
The Public ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
Management Policies

Managing the issues which arise from Great Lakes rehabilitation efforts will involve some expertise in psychology and sociology and in the administration of public involvement processes. The components of issues which must be managed include inadequacies in our science, incomplete and/or conflicting public beliefs, and conflicting public values. Decisions must often be made without the benefit of complete scientific information, and the public is poorly prepared to deal with this limitation. Even when scientific knowledge is adequate, segments of the public may be uninformed and create issues. Most issues result from conflicts between users with differing value priorities in a management decision. Public involvement strategies exist to increase representative and interactive participation by citizens needed to resolve or avoid many issues, but additional strategies must be developed to deal with the difficult dynamics of value conflicts. The response of management agencies should be to implement long-range programs to develop their own expertise in the dynamics of public perceptions, citizen skills to participate in the management process, and more effective strategies for involving citizens in the difficult, value-laden resource management process.

The public—expert interface in local waste management decisions: expertise, credibility and process

1997 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Petts
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Learning Process ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Top Down ◽  
The Public ◽  
Management Decision Making

Decision-making strategies which favour the top-down model do not recognize expertise as a communication and learning process, and have been seen to fail in many risk management contexts, in particular in local waste management decision-making. Examination of a novel public involvement programme in the development of a local waste strategy provides an opportunity to understand expertise as a process: in particular, (i) how expert knowledge is selected at the technical-democratic interface, (ii) how information is shaped and balanced, and (iii) whether knowledge shifts during processes of exposure to expertise. It provides evidence that counters expert views that the public are irrational, lack interest, and are concerned only about zero-risk options. Most importantly, it provides evidence that expertise is inextricably linked to its source, and that perceptions that expertise is not independent have a significant impact on public responses. Means to optimize the process of expertise are discussed.

scholarly journals Participation in Florida Growth Management Decisions

EDIS ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 2006 (14) ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy Carriker
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Growth Management ◽  
Resource Economics ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Management Decisions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fact Sheet ◽  
The Subject

FE644, a 2-page fact sheet by Roy Carriker, introduces members of the public to the subject of public participation in official growth management decision processes. Published by the UF Department of Food and Resource Economics, August 2006.

What water managers need to know about public participation: one US practitioner's perspective

Water Policy ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Creighton
Keyword(s):  
Water Management ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
The Us ◽  
Management Decision Making ◽  
The Usa

Increasingly, public participation is a precondition for water management decision making. In the USA, water management agencies have been utilizing public participation since the early 1970s, with varying degrees of success and commitment to the process. Some of the US experience may not be transferable to other countries or other cultures. But the author describes basic lessons he believes are fundamental to effective public participation in virtually all countries and situations.

Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessments Between Spain and Portugal

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. 1550022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Vicente ◽  
Teresa Fidélis ◽  
Gonzalo Méndez
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Considerable Increase ◽  
Significant Development ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Impact

Since 2000, the Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (TEIA) process in the Iberian context has undergone significant development due to new circumstances that came into play at the bilateral and European levels: (i) the adoption of a collaborative TEIA Protocol between Spain and Portugal in 2008; and (ii) the increasing number of cross-border projects supported by European Union funds. Despite these developments, the impact of this bilateral regulation on public participation, the cornerstone of any Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), has not yet been fully examined. Drawing from specific literature focusing on the involvement of the public as the basis of effective improvement of the TEIA, this paper critically analyses if the lates transboundary provision has encouraged public participation in this context. Although the analysis of the TEIA enforcement revealed a considerable increase in the number of consultations between the neighbouring states compared to the previous situation, public involvement has not increased. Based on these findings, this paper presents a set of recommendations to more effectively involve the public in transboundary consultations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document