Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Participatory Planning Processes in Action

  • Chapter
Decision Support for Forest Management

Part of the book series: Managing Forest Ecosystems ((MAFE,volume 30))

Abstract

In this chapter, we describe planning process examples suitable for public participation in different scales, from managing the forests of one city park to preparing of national forest programmes. We also discuss the decision support methods and tools required for handling a participatory planning process. Planning problems with several decision-makers are often messy. Such cases require problem structuring methods, where the perceptions and characteristics of the problem, as well as decision criteria and constraints, are explored together with the stakeholders. There are several approaches specifically designed for this sort of work, like SCA, SODA and SSM, but it is also possible to utilise common multi-criteria analysis tools for this purpose. We also describe how surveys and hearings fit for collecting information from the public. The information collected can also be location-specific information collected and utilised though participatory GIS systems. Finally, we present how the multi-criteria analysis methods and tools presented previously can be utilised as group decision support in stakeholder working groups.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (1994). Issues in computer and non-computer supported GDSSs. Decision Support Systems, 12, 381–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2001). SODA – Journey making and mapping in practice. In J. Rosenhead & J. Mingers (Eds.), Rational analysis for problematic world revisited (pp. 43–60). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aczel, J., & Saaty, T. L. (1983). Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 27, 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ananda, J., & Herath, G. (2003). The use of analytic hierarchy process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning. Forest Policy and Economics, 5(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bengston, D. N., Fan, D. P., & Celarier, D. N. (1999). A new approach to monitoring the social environment for natural resource management and policy: The case of US national forest benefits and values. Journal of Environmental Management, 56(3), 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., & Kyttä, M. (2014). Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography, 46, 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campo, P. C., Mendoza, G. A., Guizol, P., Villanueva, T. R., & Bousquet, F. (2009). Exploring management strategies for community-based forests using multi-agent systems: A case study in Palawan, Philippines. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 3607–3615.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1985). From optimizing to learning: A development of systems thinking for the 1990s. Journal of Operations Research Society, 36, 757–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1989). Soft systems methodology. In J. Rosenhead (Ed.), Rational analysis for problematic world. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1999). Soft systems methodology: A 30-year retrospective. In P. Checkland (Ed.), Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (2001). Soft systems methodology. In J. Rosenhead & J. Mingers (Eds.), Rational analysis for problematic world revisited (pp. 61–90). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, C. W. (1967). Wicked problems. Management Science, 14, 141–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criado, J. I., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2013). Government innovation through social media. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 319–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Carvalho, R. C., & Magrini, A. (2006). Conflicts over water resource management in Brazil: A case study of inter-basin transfers. Water Resource Management, 20(2), 193–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler, M., Wätzold, F., Johst, K., & Shogren, J. F. (2010). An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes. Resource and Energy Economics, 32(2), 261–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, R. F., & Forman, E. H. (1992). Group decision support with the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Support Systems, 8, 99–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1988). Cognitive mapping. European Journal of Operational Research, 36, 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1989). Using cognitive mapping for strategic options analysis (SODA). In J. Rosenhead (Ed.), Rational analysis for problematic world. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1990). Strategic thinking with computers. Long Range Planning, 23, 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (1998). Making strategy: The journey of strategic management. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2001). SODA – The principles. In J. Rosenhead & J. Mingers (Eds.), Rational analysis for problematic world revisited (pp. 21–42). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Simpson, P. (1989). SODA and cognitive mapping in practise. In J. Rosenhead (Ed.), Rational analysis for problematic world. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elsasser, P. (2007). Do “stakeholders” represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany. Forest Policy and Economics, 9(8), 1018–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etezadi-Amoli, J. (2010). The adoption and use of negotiation systems. In D. M. Kilgour & C. Eden (Eds.), Handbook of group decision and negotiation (Advances in group decision and negotiation, Vol. 4, pp. 393–408). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (1996). Basic principles and operational guidelines. Formulation, execution and revision of national forestry programmes. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman, E., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108, 165–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, L. A. (2007). Assessing the impact of problem structuring methods in multi- organizational settings: An empirical investigation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58(6), 760–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, L. A. (2009). Problem structuring methods as intervention tools: Reflections from their use with multi-organisational teams. Omega, 37(1), 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, L. A., & Montibeller, G. (2010). Facilitated modelling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 205(3), 489–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friend, J. (2011). The strategic choice approach. In Wiley encyclopedia of operations research and management science. doi:10.1002/9780470400531.eorms0971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friend, J., & Hickling, A. (2005). Planning under pressure: The strategic choice approach (3rd ed.). London: Routledge, 387 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friend, J. K., & Jessop, W. N. (1969). Local government and strategic choice. London: Tavistock. 112 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D., & Gibbs, J. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1159–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heberlein, T. A. (1976). Some observations on alternative mechanisms for public involvement: The hearing, public opinion poll, the workshop and the quasi-experiment. Natural Resources Journal, 16, 197–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiltunen, V., Kangas, J., & Pykäläinen, J. (2008). Voting methods in strategic forest planning — Experiences from Metsähallitus. Forest Policy and Economics, 10(3), 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiltunen, V., Kurttila, M., Leskinen, P., Pasanen, K., & Pykäläinen, J. (2009). Mesta: An internet-based decision-support application for participatory strategic-level natural resources planning. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hjortsø, N. C. (2004). Enhancing public participation in natural resource management using Soft OR – An application of strategic option development and analysis in tactical forest planning. European Journal of Operational Research, 152, 667–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogl, K., Kvarda, E., Nordbeck, R., & Pregernig, M. (2012). Legitimacy and effectiveness of environmental governance – Concepts and perspectives. In K. Hogl, E. Kvarda, R. Nordbeck, & M. Pregernig (Eds.), Environmental governance: The challenge of legitimacy and effectiveness (pp. 1–26). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hovland, C. I., Lumsdaine, A. A., & Sheffield, F. D. (1965). Experiences on mass communication. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hujala, T., & Kurttila, M. (2010). Facilitated group decision making in hierarchical contexts. In D. M. Kilgour & C. Eden (Eds.), Handbook of group decision and negotiation (Advances in group decision and negotiation, Vol. 4, pp. 325–337). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hujala, T., Khadka, C., Wolfslehner, B., & Vacik, H. (2013). Supporting problem structuring with computer-based tools in participatory forest planning. Forest Systems, 22(2), 270–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hytönen, L. A. (2000). Osallistamismenetelmät metsätalouden päätöksenteossa. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja, 3(2000), 443–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hytönen, L. A., Leskinen, P., & Store, R. (2002). A spatial approach to participatory planning in forestry decision making. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 17, 62–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janse, G., & Konijnendijk, C. C. (2007). Communication between science, policy and citizens in public participation in urban forestry – Experiences from the neighborwoods project. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 6, 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jumppanen, J., Kurttila, M., Pukkala, T., & Uuttera, J. (2003). Spatial harvest scheduling approach for areas involving multiple ownership. Forest Policy and Economics, 5(1), 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J. (1994). An approach to public participation in strategic forest management planning. Forest Ecology and Management, 70, 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., & Store, R. (2003). Internet and teledemocracy in participatory planning of natural resource management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 62, 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., Loikkanen, T., Pukkala, T., & Pykäläinen, J. (1996). A participatory approach to tactical forest planning (Acta forestalia Fennica, Vol. 251). Helsinki: The Finnish Society of Forest Science. 24 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., Hytönen, L., & Loikkanen, T. (2001). Integrating the AHP and HERO into the process of participatory natural resources planning. In D. Schmoldt, J. Kangas, G. A. Mendoza, & M. Pesonen (Eds.), The analytic hierarchy process in natural resource and environmental decision making (Managing forest ecosystems, Vol. 3, pp. 187–197). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, A., Haapakoski, R., & Tyrväinen, L. (2008). Integrating place-specific social values into forest planning – Case of UPM-Kymmene forests in Hyrynsalmi, Finland. Silva Fennica, 42, 773–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, A., Saarinen, N., Saarikoski, H., Leskinen, L. A., Hujala, T., & Tikkanen, J. (2010). Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes. Forest Policy and Economics, 12, 213–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, A., Heikkilä, J., Malmivaara-Lämsä, M., & Löfström, I. (2014a). Case Puijo—Evaluation of a participatory urban forest planning process. Forest Policy and Economics, 45, 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, A., Nurmi, M., & Rasinmäki, J. (2014b). From strategic plan to a tactical plan using hierarchic optimization. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 29, 154–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, A., Rasinmðki, J., Eyvindson, K., & Chambers, P. (2015). A mobile phone application for the collection of opinion data for forest planning purposes. Environmental Management, 55, 961–971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (Vol 1 and 2). New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G., & Lai, H. (2010). Electronic negotiations: Foundations, systems, and processes. In D. M. Kilgour & C. Eden (Eds.), Handbook of group decision and negotiation (Advances in group decision and negotiation, Vol. 4, pp. 361–392). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Khadka, C., Hujala, T., Wolfslehner, B., & Vacik, H. (2013). Problem structuring in participatory forest planning. Forest Policy and Economics, 26(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khisty, J. (1995). Soft systems methodology as learning and management tool. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 121, 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouplevatskaya-Yunusova, I., & Buttound, G. (2006). Assessment of an iterative process: The double spiral of re-designing participation. Forest Policy and Economics, 8, 529–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurttila, M. (2001). The spatial structure of forests in the optimization calculations of forest planning — A landscape ecological perspective. Forest Ecology and Management, 142(1-3), 129–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurttila, M., Heinonen, T., Hujala, T., Kangas, A., Nuutinen, T., Pukkala, T., Pykäläinen, J., Rasinmäki, J., & Tikkanen, J. (2014). The use of forest decision support systems in Finland. In J. G. Borges, E.-M. Nordström, J. Garcia-Gonzalo, T. Hujala, & A. Trasobares (Eds.), Computer-based tools for supporting forest management. The experience and the expertise world-wide (pp. 116–133). Sweden: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laamanen, R., & Kangas, A. (2011). Large scale forest owner’s information needs in operational planning of timber harvesting – Some practical views in Metsähallitus, Finnish state owned enterprise. Silva Fennica, 4, 711–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauber, B. T., & Knuth, B. A. (1998). Refining our vision of citizen participation: Lessons from a moose reintroduction project. Society and Natural Resources, 11, 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, R. L., Daniels, S. E., & Stankey, G. H. (1997). Procedural justice and public involvement in natural resource decision making. Society & Natural Resources, 10(6), 577–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leskinen, L. A. (2004). Purposes and challenges of public participation in regional and local forestry in Finland. Forest Policy and Economics, 6(6), 605–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liss, B. -M. (1999). National Forest Programmes. Concept for a Policy and Planning Framework towards Sustainable Forest Management. GTZ/TWRP. 9 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, H., & Borges, J. (2007). Addressing collaborative planning methods and tools in forest management. Forest Ecology and Management, 248(1–2), 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K. A., & Scherer, C. W. (1999). Providing balanced risk information in surveys used as citizen participation mechanisms. Society and Natural Resources, 12, 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniels, T. L., & Thomas, K. (1999). Eliciting preferences for land use alternatives: A structured value referendum with approval voting. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 264–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., & Prabhu, R. (2003). Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management. Forest Ecology and Management, 174, 329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Rosenhead, J. (2004). Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research, 152, 530–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Rosenhead, J. (2011). Introduction to the special issue: Teaching soft O.R., problem structuring methods, and multimethodology. INFORMS Transactions on Education, 12(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustajoki, H., Saarikoski, H., Marttunen, M., Ahtikoski, A., Hallikainen, V., Helle, T., Hyppönen, M., Jokinen, M., Naskali, A., Tuulentie, S., Varmola, M., Vatanen, E., & Ylisirniö, A. L. (2011). Use of decision analysis interviews to support the sustainable use of the forests in Finnish Upper Lapland. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 1550–1563.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, A., & Väyrynen, J. (1999). Regional forest programmes: A participatory approach to support forest based regional development (EFI proceedings, Vol. 32). Torikatu: European Forest Institute. 236 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordström, E.-M., Eriksson, L. O., & Öhman, K. (2010). Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(8), 562–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordström, E.-M., Eriksson, L. O., & Öhman, K. (2011). Multiple criteria decision analysis with consideration to place-specific values in participatory forest planning. Silva Fennica, 45(2), 253–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan, J. (1976). The public involvement program in the Okangan basin study. In A. E. Utton, W. R. D. Sewell, & T. O’Riordan (Eds.), Natural resources for a democratic society: public participation in decision-making. Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pregernig, M., & Bröcher, M. (2013). The role of expertise in environmental governance. Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. In B. Siebenhüner, M. Arnold, K. Eisenack, & K. Jacob (Eds.), Long-term governance for social-ecological change (pp. 29–46). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Primmer, E. (2011). Policy, project and operational networks: Channels and conduits for learning in forest biodiversity conservation. Forest Policy and Economics, 13, 132–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primmer, E., & Kyllönen, S. (2006). Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme. Forest Policy and Economics, 8(8), 838–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pülzl, H., & Rametsteiner, E. (2002). Grounding international modes of governance into National Forest Programmes. Forest Policy and Economics, 4(4), 259–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pykäläinen, J., Kangas, J., & Loikkanen, T. (1999). Interactive decision analysis in participatory strategic forest planning: Experiences from State owned boreal forests. Journal of Forest Economics, 5, 341–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pykäläinen, J., Hiltunen, V., & Leskinen, P. (2007). Complementary use of voting methods and interactive utility analysis in participatory strategic forest planning: Experiences gained from western Finland. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37(5), 853–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rantanen, H., & Kyttä, M. (2009). The SoftGIS approach to local knowledge. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(6), 1981–1990.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. S., Moxey, A., Prager, K., Hanley, N., Skates, J., Bonn, A., Evans, C. D., Glenki, K., & Thomson, K. (2014). Improving the link between payments and the provision of ecosystem services in agri-environment schemes. Ecosystem Services, 9, 44–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickenbach, M., Schulte, L. A., Kittredge, D. B., Labich, W. G., & Shinneman, D. J. (2011). Cross-boundary cooperation: A mechanism for sustaining ecosystem services from private lands. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 66(4), 91A–96A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead, J. (Ed.). (1989). Rational analysis for problematic world. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouwette, E. A. J. A., Vennix, J. A. M., & Felling, A. J. A. (2009). On evaluating the performance of problem structuring methods: An attempt at formulating a conceptual model. Group Decision and Negotiation, 18(6), 567–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saarikoski, H., Tikkanen, J., & Leskinen, L. A. (2010). Public participation in practice — Assessing public participation in the preparation of regional forest programs in Northern Finland. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(5), 349–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saarikoski, H., Åkerman, M., & Primmer, E. (2013). The challenge of governance in regional forest planning: An analysis of participatory forest program processes in Finland. Society & Natural Resources, 25(7), 667–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarvašová, Z., Dobšinská, Z., & Šálka, J. (2014). Public participation in sustainable forestry: The case of forest planning in Slovakia. iForest Biogeosciences and Forestry, 7, 414–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satterfield, T., & Gregory, R. (1998). Reconciling environmental values and pragmatic choices. Society and Natural Resources, 11, 629–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008). Ecological momentary assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 1–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tikkanen, J., & Kurttila, M. (2007). Participatory and regional approach on forest planning. Present state and an ideal model for private land in Finland. In H. Mäkinen (Ed.), Enhancing training on collaborative planning of natural resources management (Reports of Finnish Environment Institute, Vol. 26, pp. 112–122).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyrväinen, L., Mäkinen, K., & Schipperijn, J. (2007). Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79, 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vacik, H., Kurttila, M., Hujala, T., Khadka, C., Haara, A., Pykäläinen, J., Honkakoski, P., Wolfslehner, B., & Tikkanen, J. (2014). Evaluating collaborative planning methods supporting programme-based planning in natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 144, 304–315.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vainikainen, N., Kangas, A., & Kangas, J. (2008). Empirical study on voting power in participatory forest planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 88, 173–180.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. T., DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1998). Using a GDSS to facilitate group consensus: Some intended and unintended consequences. MIS Quarterly, 12(3), 463–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, L. (2006). Evaluating problem-structuring methods: Developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 842–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkel, G., & Sotirov, M. (2011). An obituary for national forest programmes? Analyzing and learning from the strategic use of “new modes of governance” in Germany and Bulgaria. Forest Policy and Economics, 13, 143–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Economics and Society, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Joensuu, Finland

    Annika Kangas

  2. Bio-based Business and Industry, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Joensuu, Finland

    Mikko Kurttila

  3. Bio-based Business and Industry, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Helsinki, Finland

    Teppo Hujala

  4. Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Kyle Eyvindson

  5. School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland

    Jyrki Kangas

Authors
  1. Annika Kangas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mikko Kurttila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Teppo Hujala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kyle Eyvindson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jyrki Kangas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kangas, A., Kurttila, M., Hujala, T., Eyvindson, K., Kangas, J. (2015). Participatory Planning Processes in Action. In: Decision Support for Forest Management. Managing Forest Ecosystems, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23522-6_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation