Comparing two sets of forest cover change knowledge used in forest landscape management planning
Michael Drescher and
Ajith Perera
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2010, vol. 53, issue 5, 591-613
Abstract:
Forecasts of future resource states are central to resource management planning. Many simulation models and planning tools are used to produce such forecasts and apply knowledge of resource change dynamics as key input. Consistency among knowledge sources is therefore important to avoid knowledge ambiguity and uncertainty in resource forecasts and management plan outcomes. Using Ontario's boreal forest landscape as a case study, this paper examined two knowledge sources of forest resource change, practitioner expertise and research studies, commonly applied in plans and policies for large forest landscapes. The two knowledge sources were quantitatively compared by constructing networks of forest cover change for both sources and determining their agreement in structure and transition times. Some networks agreed well, indicating little knowledge ambiguity and comparatively low uncertainty if they were used to forecast forest landscapes. Other networks showed low agreement, thus indicating higher knowledge ambiguity and a dilemma of choice for forest landscape planners who may have to select from these knowledge sets. It is suggested that knowledge disagreements may be widespread in knowledge-driven management planning of many natural resource types and their causes similar. These disagreements signal areas of knowledge uncertainty, where resource planners must address resulting uncertainty of management outcomes and research should focus on improving resource change knowledge.
Keywords: boreal forest; expert opinion; natural resources; Ontario; published data (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640561003727110 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:53:y:2010:i:5:p:591-613
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20
DOI: 10.1080/09640561003727110
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management is currently edited by Dr Neil Powe, Dr Ken Willis and George Bill Page
More articles in Journal of Environmental Planning and Management from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().