The Sierra Nevada Example: Survey of Stakeholders

  • Peter J. BalintEmail author
  • Ronald E. Stewart
  • Anand Desai
  • Lawrence C. Walters


We turn now to practical aspects of the elicitation and analysis of stakeholder preferences and the application of the results to the learning network approach. We suggest that the techniques proposed in this chapter and the next can provide valuable insights into stakeholder preferences and their consequences that might otherwise be overlooked. The linking of preferences to potential consequences may help clarify the role of values in public participatory processes.


National Forest Public Involvement Wicked Problem Fuel Treatment Management Priority 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. National Research Council. 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  2. Nelson, Robert H. 1999. “The Religion of Forestry: Scientific Management.” Journal of Forestry 97 (11): 4–8.Google Scholar
  3. Pinchot, G. 1947. Breaking New Ground. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  4. USDA Forest Service. 2001a. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Statement. Sacramento: USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Island Press 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter J. Balint
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ronald E. Stewart
    • 2
  • Anand Desai
    • 3
  • Lawrence C. Walters
    • 4
  1. 1.George Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  2. 2.Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  3. 3.Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  4. 4.Brigham Young UniversityProvoUSA

Personalised recommendations