United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Southern

Research Station

General Technical

Report SRS–65

A Human Dimensions Framework:

Guidelines for Conducting

Social Assessments

Alan D. Bright, H. Ken Cordell, Anne P. Hoover, and

Michael A. Tarrant

Sustainable

Ecosystems

Physical Human

Biological
Jennifer D. Knoepp, Research Soil Scientist, and

James M. Vose, Project Leader, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station,

Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, 3160 Coweeta Lab Road,

Otto, NC 28763.

The Authors:

Alan D. Bright, Associate Professor, Department of Natural Resource

Recreation and Tourism, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO

80523-1874; H. Ken Cordell, Project Leader, Recreation, Wilderness,

Urban Forestry, and Demographic Trends Research, USDA Forest

Service, Athens, GA 30602-2044; Anne P. Hoover, National Program

Leader, Social Science Research, USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC

22209; and Michael A. Tarrant, Associate Professor, Warnell School of

Forest Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-6555.

June 2003

Southern Research Station

P.O. Box 2680

Asheville, NC 28802

Abstract

This paper provides a framework and guidelines for identifying and organizing human dimension

information for use in forest planning. It synthesizes concepts from a variety of social science

disciplines and connects them with measurable indicators for use in analysis and reporting.

Suggestions of analytical approaches and sources of data for employment of the identified social

indicators are provided.

Keywords: Forest planning, human dimensions, social indicators.
i

A Human Dimensions Framework:

Guidelines for Conducting Social Assessments
ii
iii

Table of Contents

Page

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Part I: The Need for and Development of the Human Dimensions Framework ................................... 3

Chapter 1: Human Dimensions in Ecosystem Management: Needs, Guiding Principles, and Definitions ............ 5

Toward Developing a Human Dimensions Framework.................................................................................................. 5

Applications of Social Science Information ................................................................................................................... 5

Advancements in Social Science Research Methods ..................................................................................................... 6

Guiding Principles for an Human Dimensions Framework ........................................................................................... 6

The Role of Social Sciences in Land Management Planning ......................................................................................... 7

Using Information from Multiple Social Science Disciplines........................................................................................ 8

The Organizational Role of an Human Dimensions Framework ................................................................................... 8

The Nature of Ecosystems .............................................................................................................................................. 9

Ecosystem Management ................................................................................................................................................. 9

Definition and Principles of Ecosystem Management.................................................................................................... 9

Human Dimensions in Ecosystem Management ............................................................................................................ 10

Societal Trends Toward a Human Dimension in Ecosystem Management .................................................................... 10

What is Meant by Human Dimensions Information ....................................................................................................... 12

Benefits of Collecting Social Information ...................................................................................................................... 12

Integrating Social Information into Ecosystem Management......................................................................................... 12

Integrated Planning and Land Management ................................................................................................................... 13

How Can Integration be Achieved .................................................................................................................................. 13

Using Stakeholder Input into Ecosystem Management .................................................................................................. 14

Chapter 2: The Role of Social Assessment in Integrating Human Dimensions Information .................................... 15

The Nature of Social Assessments.................................................................................................................................. 15

Social Assessment ........................................................................................................................................................... 15

The Role of Social Assessment in Integration ................................................................................................................ 16

The Importance of Scale in Social Assessment .............................................................................................................. 16

The Process of Conducting Social Assessments ............................................................................................................ 18

Chapter 3: The Human Dimensions Framework: Determining Relevant Characteristics

of the Social Environment ................................................................................................................................................ 21

The Human Dimensions Framework .............................................................................................................................. 21

Using the Human Dimensions Framework ..................................................................................................................... 21

The Human Dimensions Framework for Guiding Assessments ..................................................................................... 22

Indicators of Social Dimensions and Concepts in Social Assessment ........................................................................... 25

Social Indicators and Their Role in Ecosystem Management ........................................................................................ 25

Criteria for the Appropriate Use of Social Indicators ..................................................................................................... 25

Perceptual Indicators and Their Role in Ecosystem Management ................................................................................. 26

Specifying the Information: Identifying and Measuring Human Dimensions Framework

(Dimensions, Concepts, and Indicators) ..................................................................................................................... 26

Dimension I—Historical Background ............................................................................................................................ 27

Dimension II—Population Characteristics ..................................................................................................................... 27

Dimension III—Community Resources ......................................................................................................................... 28

Dimension IV—Social Organization Structures and Processes ..................................................................................... 29

Dimension V—Public Perceptions and Well-Being ....................................................................................................... 31

Part II: Data Collection ................................................................................................................................................ 33

Chapter 4: Collection and Use of Secondary Documentary and Historical Data ..................................................... 35

The Identification and Collection of Secondary Documentary Data ............................................................................. 35

Sources of Secondary Documentary Data ...................................................................................................................... 35
iv

Page

Conducting a Literature Search from Previous Research ............................................................................................... 39

Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary Data........................................................................................................ 40

A World Wide Web Tool for Collecting Secondary Information .................................................................................... 40

Chapter 5: Developing and Administering Survey Research ...................................................................................... 41

Factors Affecting the Survey Method Decision ............................................................................................................. 41

Sampling ......................................................................................................................................................................... 41

Type of Population .......................................................................................................................................................... 41

Question Structure .......................................................................................................................................................... 41

Organizing the Survey .................................................................................................................................................... 43

Pretesting the Survey ...................................................................................................................................................... 43

Desired Response Rates .................................................................................................................................................. 43

Costs of Survey Administration ...................................................................................................................................... 44

Available Facilities.......................................................................................................................................................... 44

Length of Data Collection............................................................................................................................................... 44

Description of Survey Methodologies ............................................................................................................................ 44

Comparing Self-Administered Surveys, Telephone Surveys, and Personal Interviews ................................................. 47

Bibliography for Conducting Survey Research .............................................................................................................. 48

Chapter 6: Developing and Administering Group Interviews...................................................................................... 49

Brainstorming ................................................................................................................................................................. 49

Consensus-Building Techniques ..................................................................................................................................... 49

The Nominal Group Technique ...................................................................................................................................... 49

The Delphi Technique ..................................................................................................................................................... 49

Natural and Formal Field Interviews .............................................................................................................................. 49

Focus-Group Interviews ................................................................................................................................................. 50

Use of the Focus-Group Interview ................................................................................................................................. 50

When to Use and Not to Use a Focus-Group Interview ................................................................................................. 50

Preparing for a Focus-Group Interview .......................................................................................................................... 51

Steps for Conducting a Focus-Group Interview ............................................................................................................. 52

Bibliography for Conducting Group Interviews ............................................................................................................. 53

Chapter 7: Selecting a Sample of Respondents from the Population .......................................................................... 55

Probability Samples ........................................................................................................................................................ 55

Probability Sampling Procedures.................................................................................................................................... 56

Nonprobability Samples ................................................................................................................................................. 56

Nonprobability Sampling Procedures ............................................................................................................................. 56

References ............................................................................................................................................................................... 59

Appendix: Description of Dimensions, Concepts, and Indicators .................................................................................... 61
1

Introduction

On April 8 through 10, 1997, a workshop focusing on the

need for improved human dimensions information for

ecosystem management and, more specifically, for U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest Service)

planning processes, was held in Salt Lake City, UT. The

workshop brought together social scientists from a variety of

academic disciplines and research social scientists from

within the Forest Service, its regional offices and national

forests, and its State and Private Forestry branch of

operations, to discuss social science applications. Academic

disciplines represented at the workshop included social

psychology, environmental psychology, rural sociology,

resource economics, anthropology, archaeology, political

science, geographic information systems, ecology, social

ecology, history, and landscape architecture. Discussion and

ideas generated there resulted in the development of this

publication.

Our purpose in writing these guidelines is twofold. First, it

presents a framework for identifying and organizing human

dimensions information—the human dimensions framework

(HDF). The HDF brings together concepts from a variety of

social science disciplines, categorizes them into basic social

dimensions, and connects the concepts with measurable

indicators designed to represent those concepts. Secondly, it

provides guidance in use of the HDF. A variety of

approaches have been developed to aid land managers in

collecting and using human dimensions information. These

guidelines focus on one of those approaches, the social

assessment. A social assessment has been defined (Bitterroot

Social Research Institute 1994) as:

. . . a method of data collection and analysis used to

generate information about (1) social structure, (2)

social processes, and (3) the social changes being

wrought in given social structure(s) and process(es).

A variety of methods and tools for collecting social

assessment information are available. The HDF connects

concepts and indicators from the social sciences with

appropriate methods for collecting relevant data. It includes

consideration of primary data such as information about the

values and perceptions of local community residents, which

can be gathered by means of various types of surveys as well

as personal and group interviews. It also includes secondary

data such as historical records about a community or region,

including sociodemographic and socioeconomic

characteristics. Historical data are available in the form of

interviews with residents, newspaper archives, and historical

documents found in libraries or similar depositories.

Sociodemographic and socioeconomic data are available

from the U.S. Bureau of the Census and other repositories of

statistical information.

How one uses this document will depend on the purpose for

doing a social assessment. Its effective use will not require

an individual to read this document from beginning to end.

There are two parts, written logically to follow one another;

but, users are encouraged to move directly to the part or

chapter most relevant to them.

Part I is presented in three chapters, and it discusses the

nature of ecosystems and their management, the ultimate

role of social assessments in ecosystem management, and a

framework for examining the human dimension of

ecosystems. Chapter 1 discusses the nature of ecosystems,

ecosystem management, and the role of human dimensions

in ecosystem management. It also reviews some current

thinking on the integration of human dimensions with the

ecosystem planning process. Chapter 2 describes social

assessments, their role in the integration of human

dimensions information; the importance of the spatial,

social, and temporal scales of analysis; and a description of a

general process for conducting a social assessment. Chapter

3 presents the HDF in the form of a matrix of social

dimensions, concepts, and indicators. Following a brief

description of the HDF, chapter 3 explores the steps taken

when conducting a social assessment and discusses the need

to establish purpose and scope. In addition, it examines

characteristics of the social environment that are relevant to

a social assessment within the context of the HDF and

includes an outline of the types of information that should be

gathered (social and perceptual indicators). Chapter 3 also

includes a description of social dimensions and their relevant

concepts and indicators identified in the HDF.

Part II describes the collection of data necessary when

conducting a social assessment under the HDF and is

organized into four chapters. Chapter 4 describes the

collection and use of secondary documentary and historical

data. Chapter 5 describes the development and

administration of survey research. Chapter 6 describes the

development and administration of group interviews; and

chapter 7 briefly discusses sampling issues. Part II is

intended to introduce readers to basic techniques for

collecting social information, not to replace the significant

amount of time and experience that trained social scientists

devote to learning their work. When a social assessment of a

region or community is being considered, we highly

recommend that forest planners consult with their regional

office social science coordinator or other social scientists

about the most appropriate methods for conducting various

aspects of their assessment.

The target audience of Part II includes forest planners,

interdisciplinary team leaders, or other individuals who are
2

responsible for conducting a social assessment for a forest

region, community, or other level of interest. Although no

knowledge of social science methods is necessary, training

or experience, or both, in the social sciences will enhance

the manager’s ability to apply the presented information

directly to a social assessment.

Performance and learning objectives focus on what the

manager will gain from information about social science

methods. The information presented will enable the manager

to

1. Contribute to the process of making decisions about

what type of data collection method is appropriate for

various types of social assessments.

2. Participate in the data collection process.

3. Consult a bibliographic listing of additional publications

providing additional information about data collection

techniques. In addition to these citations, the manager is

encouraged to consult a regional social science

coordinator or other available social scientists about the

most appropriate method.

This paper describes a framework and system tested in the

late 1990s. It explores concepts that may be useful in

developing practical new systems of social science research.
3

Part I

The Need for and Development of

the Human Dimensions Framework
4
5

Chapter 1

Human Dimensions in Ecosystem Management:

Needs, Guiding Principles, and Definitions

This chapter discusses the need for and use of human

dimensions information in forest planning—one of the

processes of ecosystem management. It describes how

human dimensions needs were identified and principles

developed in a workshop setting. It considers the nature of

ecosystems, the practices followed in ecosystem

management, and the integration of human dimensions

information into ecosystem management.

Toward Developing a Human Dimensions

Framework

On April 8 through 10, 1997, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest Service) officials held a

workshop focusing on the need for improved human

dimensions information in land management planning. Held

in Salt Lake City, UT, this workshop brought together social

scientists from a variety of academic disciplines, Forest

Service research social scientists, and a full complement of

forest management and extension specialists from

throughout the agency. Represented academic disciplines

included social psychology, environmental psychology, rural

sociology, resource economics, anthropology, archaeology,

political science, geographic information systems (GIS),

ecology, social ecology, history, and landscape architecture.

The workshop’s purpose was to facilitate discussions of

human dimensions information as germane to responsible

management of public resources and to develop a framework

that will aid planners in integrating such information into

regional assessments, project planning, and policy analysis.

Over the course of that workshop, participants identified a

variety of needs as well as the roles that social scientists can

play in answering those needs. Although workshop

participants identified a significant number of items where

current forest planning efforts are not making sufficient use

of human dimensions information, the most prevalent

concerns focused on the nature of efforts to apply social

science to planning and decisionmaking and advancements

in the methods of social science research. The needs

described here are not exhaustive; however, they represent

the tenor of workshop discussions about what is necessary in

developing an effective human dimensions framework.

Applications of Social Science Information

Workshop participants identified and discussed five needs

pertaining to the use of social science in Forest Service

planning and policy development:

1. To synthesize human dimensions analysis

2. To recognize the public as an equal partner in natural

resource management

3. To recognize and accept that diverse resource values

must be considered in managing ecosystems

4. To connect social science theory with practical

applications of forest planning

5. To promote effective resource stewardship on

nonindustrial private forest, rural, and urban lands

Need 1

After much discussion, participants agreed that forest

planning must synthesize human dimensions analysis in two

distinct but equally important ways. First, social science data

must be linked to biological and physical science

information if the planner is to recognize the complex,

interactive role that humans play in natural systems. Second,

the planner must use information from a number of social

science disciplines in the planning process to obtain the

broadest possible perspective of human interaction with the

natural world. Such synthesis will tell a more comprehensive

story than has been told about the effects of policies and

practices within a region.

Need 2

Forest Service managers at every level of agency activity are

better understanding the need to move away from expertbased decisionmaking and towards the sharing of roles,

power, and knowledge. Our public partners’ lives continue to

be influenced both directly and indirectly by efforts to sustain

ecosystems whose functions are vital to stakeholders.

Ecosystem management must, therefore, be a collaborative

process that invites input from and involvement with all

stakeholders. To facilitate such collaboration, we need to take

steps that will ensure knowledge-based public participation.

Need 3

For decades, many have noticed that nonmarket values

related to recreation, science, culture, and aesthetics are just

as important as traditional, market-based values. As a result,

conflicts are common among competing interests, and the

values of different stakeholder groups are continuously

changing. A shift to focus more on the importance of such

values in forest management may help the manager to

identify policy directions that benefit both natural resources

and humans.
6

Need 4

Human dimensions information from a variety of earlier

research has lessened the need to replicate studies and has

invited a more complete understanding of complex social

issues. However, human dimensions information gathered

from social science inventory techniques is practically

useless if it is not applicable to the geographic area being

considered. Operationally, an HDF may best be limited to

the scope and scale applicable to a national forest plan or a

landscape assessment.

Need 5

Forest Service State and Private Forestry officials must

focus their attention on community stewardship in forestdependent rural areas. Collaborative and integrated

community and resource stewardship is key to expanding

any program of outreach education and information

dissemination, as well as in the development of community

stewardship indicators.

Advancements in Social Science Research

Methods

In addition, to advance the usefulness of human dimensions

information in forest planning, we identified five needs that

can be met using current research methods, or methods yet

to be developed

• Training of Forest Service personnel to gather human

dimensions information

• Methods for continuous monitoring of the social

environment

• Effective integration of present and future methodologies

• A comprehensive database of case studies showing

successful application of social science methodologies

• A guide that provides information about the social

assessment process

Need 6

Although the technical expertise is primarily within the

purview of social scientists, forest planners familiar with the

HDF concept will understand the processes by which social

information is identified, collected, and analyzed. Such

understanding will enable the planner to take a more

informed and active role in the collection, analysis, and

integration of human dimensions information.

Need 7

Over time, human values are continually changing as

demographics shift both within and among regions. The

social assessment can be an effective tool for tracking such

changes and ensuring that decisions consider current social

conditions. In addition, long-term data collection will allow

ongoing analysis of a region’s changing social environment.

Need 8

There are extensively tested methods for gathering social

information, and each is effective in obtaining and analyzing

a variety of data types. A complete social assessment will

have considered information collected by a variety of

methods, thereby allowing a more comprehensive and

corroborating analysis of the social environment in space

and time.

Need 9

Related to the need for integrating current and future

methodologies is a need to identify completed case studies

or assessments. Identification of successful and unsuccessful

aspects of their use in earlier forest planning efforts will

serve as valuable and useful lessons. Learning from

documented experience will lead to continuing improvement

in the collection and integration of social information.

Need 10

Several comprehensive social assessments have been

conducted at the ecoregion level. However, managers also

have identified the need for social assessments at smaller

scales; e.g., the community level. Forest Service personnel in

rural or urban communities have opportunities to play an

active role, if not a lead role, in conducting such

assessments. On-site personnel usually have greater

knowledge of connections among planning issues and the

social environment of an area, which allows them to make

realistic and sensitive recommendations for management

activities and gives them an improved ability to implement

recommendations. Because few forest planners have a social

science background, a guide to the nature of social

assessment and the appropriate scope or scale of geographic

analysis would allow them to take a more active role. Such

local involvement does not preclude the need for trained

social scientists, but a more active role by local planners

would help ensure that issues unique to the area, and most

likely understood best by those who work and live there, are

adequately addressed.

Guiding Principles for a Human Dimensions

Framework

Doing a better job of including social information within the

decision-making processes may ultimately be the driving

force behind successful application of the Forest Service

mission of collaborative stewardship. It can help give voice

to a broad range of potential stakeholders and invite them
7

into the planning process. Such an approach recognizes the

importance of cultural diversity and the value of differing

public views and attitudes. Done effectively, the social

assessment explores not only how humans affect resources,

but also how resource management affects humans.

Many types of social information are useful in making a

comprehensive social assessment. Similarly, a wide array of

methods is available for gathering such information.

Generally, attempts to understand the social environment

within a geographic region using unnecessary, limited

information or methods will lead to inadequate and

inaccurate estimates of the social climate. An HDF should

be built from a social assessment that considers and uses all

relevant information types and methods. It should provide

guidance on how that information will increase

understanding and guide forest management decisions.

For an HDF to be responsive to Forest Service social

assessment needs, as well as the needs of an individual

national forest, it should be composed according to

fundamental principles that provide consistency across all

levels of analysis. In conceptualizing the HDF, we identified

10 key principles.

Guiding principles for a human dimensions framework:

Principle 1. A prerequisite for integrating human

dimensions information with biophysical

information in ecosystem management is an

understanding of the social environment of the

affected region.

Principle 2. A social assessment should include

information that is representative of all

constituencies that have an interest or stake in

the area or region.

Principle 3. The collection and analysis of social

information should be a collaborative effort of

forest planners and all potential stakeholders.

Principle 4. The social assessment should provide both an

historical and a current description of the

social environment and include predictions of

future trends.

Principle 5. Information from diverse social science

disciplines should be integrated in ways that

allow the planner to explore the full extent of

social conditions.

Principle 6. A variety of data sources, types, and

collection methods should be used to

synthesize social information.

Principle 7. Social information should illustrate the

connections among theory, research, and

practical managerial applications.

Principle 8. An HDF should be built from social

information collected and analyzed on

multiple scales.

Principle 9. An HDF should show the connections among

specific social concepts, their relevant

indicators, and agreed upon principles and

guidelines.

Principle 10. An HDF should clearly show the relationships

among resource issues, social assessment

questions, and social science concepts and

indicators.

These principles address several concerns, including

identification of the role of social science information in

Forest Service planning, the need to use information from

multiple social science disciplines, and the special qualities

an HDF must have to organize the information effectively.

The Role of Social Sciences in

Land Management Planning

Principles 1 through 4 address the basic role of social

sciences in Forest Service planning, policy, and decisionmaking processes.

Principle 1

Information collected by social science research is gathered

from a variety of interrelated sources. These data sources

cover the social and cultural units of a region; its

demographics, economic structures, market forces,

technology, political institutions; and the values and

behaviors of stakeholders and other interested publics.

Given the complex array of important social information

available, it should be possible to thoroughly understand all

aspects of the social environment that are relevant to specific

ecosystem management planning issues.

Principle 2

This involves ensuring that individuals in all public sectors,

not just those who happen to live in the local community, are

recognized as stakeholders. Ecosystem management means

different things to different people, and there is a growing

diversity of people with a stake in how public resources are

managed.

Principle 3

Ensuring the usefulness of social assessment in applied

ecosystem management requires a clear understanding of

resource challenges and policy issues. Stakeholders should be

involved early in the process and make collaborative efforts

to understand important problems and policies. Social science
8

is not decision-making; rather, it provides input for decisionmaking. All resource management decisions are inherently

social and fundamentally political. Turning all issues into

technical problems to be solved by a few biophysical

scientists and forest planners is no longer a viable option.

Principle 4

The sociodemographic and socioeconomic character of a

geographic region, as well as the attitudes and values of

stakeholders there, may not be stable; over time they may

change. Historical analysis of a social environment will

provide clues to that character. In turn, an historical analysis

also may provide insight to future issues.

Using Information from Multiple Social

Science Disciplines

Principles 5 through 7 speak to the importance of

incorporating social assessment indicators drawn from a

variety of social science disciplines.

Principle 5

To understand the human dimension of ecosystems, the

planner will need information from a variety of social

science disciplines. The practice of ecosystem management

must be consistent with the dynamics of human society and

mindful of the effects humans have on the natural world.

Participants in the social assessment may include

psychologists, sociologists, economists, anthropologists,

archaeologists, political scientists, geographic information

systems (GIS) technologists, ecologists, historians,

landscape architects, and others.

Principle 6

An effective synthesis of social information from the work of

various social science disciplines requires the recognition

that not all sociocultural information can be expressed in

documents and databases. A variety of information sources

should be explored. Both secondary and primary data will be

necessary. In addition, both quantitative and qualitative data

may be relevant to the analysis; e.g., quantitative indicators

may not provide sufficient information about the political

sensitivity of an issue, including which agencies and interest

groups are involved. Qualitative data are necessary for a

comprehensive analysis of the political environment. Finally,

social information should include data from both new and

proven collection methods. It may be helpful to formally

catalogue successful case studies and develop a system for

providing planners and managers with access to the data. By

using various sources, types, and methods of data collection,

the planner will be able to share with stakeholders the

historical and current social contexts in which ecosystem

management policies are established.

Principle 7

Often, stakeholders point to a perceived chasm between

theoretical research and the ability to respond to actual

needs identified by on-site managers and planners.

Appropriate use of scientific data entails the communication

of practical human dimensions information that will improve

a manager’s understanding of the social environment and

lead him or her to better decision-making.

The Organizational Role of a Human

Dimensions Framework

Principles 8 through 10 address the extent to which an HDF

can organize social information and provide methods for

gathering that information.

Principle 8

Biophysical scientists have developed a mapable,

hierarchical classification of natural ecological units to

facilitate the study of ecosystem functions. Such units

consider similar patterns in physical features including soils,

landform and topography, and climate. Ecosystem

management must consider multiple scales—from large-area

ecoregions to natural drainages and smaller areas. To

account for similar, multilevel social environments, social

scientists have developed a hierarchical means of assessing

social conditions. In addition, the multiple social scales

relevant to ecosystem management must consider the

temporal dimension or recognize that human values and

social conditions change over time. Social scientists say that

within an HDF we can find guidelines for assessing the

social environment in terms of trends across all relevant

spatial and temporal scales.

Principle 9

Broad principles and guidelines facilitate management

consistency across regions and over time, in that managers

use a common means of data collection and processing when

conducting individual assessments. Although there is not

always a single correct interpretation of social or cultural

data, or both, if social science concepts and their indicators

are to be relevant, they should reflect a system of principles

and guidelines generally agreed upon by various potential

users and scientists; and they should focus on stated goals,

strategic priorities, and desired outcomes.

Principle 10

In the context of ecosystem management, land management

planning should begin with identification of important

questions. To be most applicable to planning processes, an

HDF should clearly show the connections between general
9

issues and relevant questions. Social science concepts and

indicators relevant to the assessment also should be

identified and connected to real issues and problems.

The Nature of Ecosystems

According to documents written for the Interior Columbia

Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) in the

Pacific Northwest, ecosystems are:

places where all plants, animals, soils, waters, climate,

people, and processes of life interact as a whole. They

may be small, such as a rotting log, or large, such as an

entire continent; smaller ecosystems are subsets of

larger ones. All ecosystems have flows of things—

organisms, energy, water, air, nutrients—moving

among them. Ecosystems change over space and time,

so it is not possible to draw a line around an ecosystem

and try to keep it the same. Instead, managing

ecosystems means understanding and working with the

processes that cause ecosystems to vary and to change

(Quigley and others 1996, p. 18).

Within this description, the authors intimate several important

concepts (ICBEMP 1996). First, ecosystems are dynamic,

evolutionary, and resilient. Current conditions have resulted

from both natural and human historical events. They are

constantly and naturally evolving in response to fire and

floods, landslides and volcanic eruptions, shifts in climate, and

other natural occurrences. Second, the links that exist within

and among ecosystems can (and should) be studied at a variety

of scales. Ecosystems may be small, but they ultimately are

subsets of larger systems. It is important to recognize

multilevel organization when trying to understand the dynamic

nature of ecosystems. Third, ecosystems have biophysical,

economic, and social limits. Given the evolving nature of

ecosystems and the environmental elements that support them,

human benefits ultimately are limited by the ecosystem’s

ability to meet human demands. Finally, we are limited in the

extent to which we can predict changes in ecosystems. The

wide variety of assumptions and uncertainties inherent in

predicting ecosystems changes makes even the most

sophisticated modeling approaches little more than educated

guesses about how ecosystems will change over time.

Ecosystem Management

The dynamic, complex, limited, and uncertain nature of

ecosystems and of human interactions with them have raised

complex issues for those who are charged with managing

them. Concerns about long-term sustainability have led land

managers to adopt ecosystem management as a philosophy

and guiding principle. Concerns have become so pervasive

that at least 18 Federal agencies are now committed to the

practice of ecosystem management (Morrissey and others

1994).

Definition and Principles of Ecosystem

Management

Definitions of Ecosystem Management

While there is no common, universal definition of ecosystem

management, the following are some definitions that have

been offered:

• The careful and skillful use of ecological, economic,

social, and managerial principles in managing land and

resources (ecosystems) to produce, restore, or sustain

ecosystem integrity and desired conditions, uses, products,

values, and services over the long term (Overbay 1992).

• The strategy by which the full array of forest values and

functions, in aggregate, is maintained at the landscape

level. Coordinated management at the landscape level,

including across ownerships, is an essential component

(Society of American Foresters 1993).

• A strategy or plan to manage ecosystems for all associated

organisms, as opposed to a strategy or plan for managing

individual species (Forest Ecosystem Management Team

1993).

• The optimum integration of societal values and

expectations, ecological potentials, and economic plus

technological considerations (Everett and others 1994).

• A resource management system designed to maintain or

enhance ecosystem health and productivity while

producing essential commodities and other values to meet

human needs and desires within the limits of socially,

biologically, and economically acceptable risk (Berg and

others 1993).

• Integrating scientific knowledge of ecological

relationships within a complex sociopolitical and values

framework toward the general goal of protecting native

ecosystem integrity over the long term (Grumbine 1994).

• Integration of ecological, economic, and social principles

to manage biological and physical systems in a manner

that safeguards the ecological sustainability, natural

diversity, and productivity of the landscape (Wood

1994).

• A collaborative process that strives to reconcile the

promotion of economic opportunities and livable

communities with the conservation of ecological integrity

and biodiversity (Keystone Center 1996).

• Multiple-use management that integrates the needs of

people with environmental values in such a way that the

national forests and grasslands are maintained over time as

diverse, productive, and sustained ecosystems (Driver and

others 1996).

Whichever definition one may adopt, each shares the

common theme of maintaining healthy ecological conditions

while sustaining the production of those natural resources to

which humans assign value.
10

Principles of Ecosystem Management

In a review of literature in the areas of conservation biology,

ecosystem management, environmental management,

adaptive management, and other areas, the authors identified

several common principles of ecosystem management

(Cortner and others 1996, Moote and others 1994)

• The first principle called for socially defined goals and

management objectives. Goals and objectives should be

stated explicitly in terms of desired future conditions and

behaviors, rather than on deliverables like board feet of

timber, total catch of fish, or recreation visitor days

(Ecological Society of America 1996). However, the

primary thrust of this principle is that such goals should be

socially defined. Ecosystem management as described in

the publication and the process of identifying desired

future conditions ultimately reflects social values.

• The second principle calls for an integrated, holistic view

of the function and structure of ecosystems. We recognize

ecosystems as complex, dynamic systems of interrelated

components that include social, political, economic,

biological, and physical features. In any such system, the

human species not only challenges sustainability, but also

can play an important role in achieving it.

• The third principle calls on the manager to consider

broader spatial and temporal scales during the analysis

process. The appropriate scale should be determined for

each ecosystem, based to a large degree on societal values

and goals. However, increasing understanding of the scale

of ecological processes at the genetic, species, and

ecosystem levels requires reconciliation of both spatial

and temporal scales (Ecological Society of America

1996). When considering spatial scales, the manager must

recognize a number of ecological, political, generational,

and ownership boundaries that may be relevant to longterm management of the resources (Cortner and others

1996). In addition, while management agencies must make

short-term decisions; e.g., on a fiscal year basis,

ecosystem management practices will be framed on time

scales that reach beyond any human lifetime. The need for

making short-term decisions within the context of longterm planning and commitment is of paramount

importance (Ecological Society of America 1996).

• The fourth principle calls for collaborative

decisionmaking. It asks the manager to recognize the need

for input from a variety of individuals, agencies, and

organizations. Considering the interests of all stakeholders

requires open lines of communication and the continuing

collaboration of social and biological scientists, land

management agencies, and private interest groups.

• The fifth principle emphasizes the need for institutions to

be adaptable to shifting social values and perceptions, as

well as ecosystem components. Land management

agencies, as well as the laws, policies, and management

practices that govern land and resource uses, need to

reflect changes in social values, environmental conditions,

political pressures, available data, and knowledge (Cortner

and others 1996). Similarly, social and biological

scientists must consider a growing body of knowledge that

changes—sometimes fundamentally—our understanding

of ecosystem function and integrity. Management goals

and strategies should be considered hypotheses that are

continuously tested through monitoring. Using objective

measures, the manager conducts monitoring progress to

compare baseline with desired conditions, recognizing

human limitations. Conventional management practices

may be shown to affect the function and intensity of a

complex ecosystem in unknown ways (Ecological Society

of America 1996, Likens 1992).

These principles urge the land manager to view possibilities

of ecosystem management as the worthy goal of maintaining

healthy biological ecosystems. Effective ecosystem

management is as much a social (Forest Ecosystem

Management Team 1993) and political process (Cortner and

Moote 1992) as it is a scientific process.

Human Dimensions in Ecosystem Management

In the ICBEMP, biophysical and social scientists presented a

general planning model for ecosystem management (Quigley

and others 1996). The described four primary activities are:

• Assessments of stakeholders and their questions about

biophysical, social, and economic situations; potential

tradeoffs and limitations; future conditions; and the

element of risk

• Decisions regarding management goals in light of

management alternatives, likely impacts of alternatives;

preferred alternatives, and the selected alternative

• Implementation of decisions on the ground through

established partnerships, publicity and participation plans,

and adaptive management

• Monitoring biophysical outcomes, social and economic

outcomes, and societal values and goals

As do other strategic models, this general planning model

encourages monitoring throughout the planning process,

which will allow the manager to make adjustments

consistent with a changing environment. It emphasizes the

inclusion of more than just biophysical information at all

stages of the planning and management process.

Societal Trends Toward a Human Dimension in

Ecosystem Management

The principles of ecosystem management and the ICBEMP

general planning model expand on a long-established view

of how America should manage her natural resources.
11

Traditionally, decisionmakers relied almost exclusively on

information provided by resource managers with expertise in

the biological and physical sciences. Political power

regarding management of our natural resources was largely

in the hands of land management agencies and industry.

Recently, however, there has been a shift in philosophy

about how land and resource management should proceed.

Over the last four decades, this shift has led to passage of

several Federal laws that have (a) expanded the view of

natural resource management as a commodity-producing

enterprise to one that recognizes a broader set of human

values related to the resources; e.g., the Wilderness Act of

1964, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, and the

Endangered Species Act of 1973; (b) directly considered

human welfare as a condition of the overall natural

environment; e.g., the Clear Air and Clean Water Acts; and

(c) encouraged, and, in some cases, required public

involvement in the planning process; e.g., National

Environmental Protection Act of 1969, the National Forest

Management Act of 1976.

Statutory action is only one way that changes in land and

resource management practices are made. Social trends have

become bellwethers of change, too. People want to know

who has the authority to make decisions that affect

America’s natural resources; and their questions have raised

the political stake of ecosystem management considerably.

While Federal resource managers who have decision-making

responsibilities represent all Americans, a growing number

of citizens, special-interest groups, and others want a say in

how our public lands and resources are managed. This

power shift is evident to both agency managers and the

constituent groups they serve.

External Social Factors

The need for human dimensions information has resulted

from a growing diversity of values relevant to natural

resource management. While inherently social, all such

values represent widely divergent interests in management

outcomes. Stankey and Clark (1992) identify several such

interests. In the past, management of ecosystem components

focused on forest and rangeland commodities; i.e., the value

of timber, range, and minerals. With their role in market

exchanges, commodity values were easily measured—

monetarily. The public now is placing more importance on

those values not so easily measured, including:

• Amenities found in lifestyle, scenery, wildlife, and nature

• Air and water quality

• Habitat conservation, sustainability, threatened and

endangered species protection, and biodiversity

• Public uses such as subsistence, recreation, and tourism

• Spiritual renewal

In response to the vast amount of information now available

about the finite and fragile nature of the global resource base,

the public is increasingly attentive to management issues.

Their concern, combined with the increasing importance of

noncommodity values, has fostered both a desire and an

expectation of greater public participation in natural resource

management. In turn, greater public participation has

spawned a proliferation of interest groups, each with its own

vision of appropriate uses of the world’s natural resources.

Such increased public attention has fostered a reluctance to

accept ecosystem management expertise. While scientists

and managers know how to grow trees, manage fish and

wildlife populations, fight forest fires, and stabilize

watersheds, they have less experience in and knowledge of

managing human constituencies. A growing number of

lawsuits about management practices challenge the manageras-expert paradigm that drove the machinery of

policymaking for nearly a century.

An overriding social trend inextricably linking humans to the

natural resources on which they depend has heightened

public interest in ecosystem management—more clearly now

than in many generations. For most of the 20th century, the

natural resource professions seemed to place humans outside

of and apart from natural ecosystems. Our species was seen

either as accidental victim or beneficiary of the natural or

preordained rule of the natural world.

Internal Social Factors

While external factors have had significant effects on the

dynamics of natural systems, changing attitudes within the

land management agencies also has fueled the engine of

change. For example, some employees within the Forest

Service have begun to challenge traditional resource

management. In surveys by the Association of Forest Service

Employees for Environmental Ethics, a natural resource

philosophy that emphasizes ecosystem protection over

commodity production has become increasingly prominent

(Brown and Harris 1992).

In a survey of 54 natural resource professionals, Schlager

and Freimund (1997) identified barriers to implementing

ecosystem management. The most common one was

confusion about the meaning of ecosystem management

(noted by more than 60 percent of the respondents). Nearly

half (46 percent) cited fears of violating the Federal

Advisory Committee Act; fears that often result in

cancellation of public participation meetings to avoid such

violations. Other barriers included the difficulty of

interorganizational coordination and artificial political

boundaries, perceived threats to private interests, and

institutional culture, attitudes, and structure. Cortner and

others (1996) identified additional institutional barriers to

ecosystem management within Federal land management

agencies, including the Forest Service: (a) the constraining

nature of existing laws, policies, and regulations in

implementation of ecosystem management practices; (b) the
12

unknown nature and effects of institutional mechanisms for

managing across jurisdictions; (c) the potential necessity for

both internal organizational change and new relations among

resource management agencies and the public (whose

support for ecosystem management is, as yet, relatively

unknown); (d) the need to reexamine the theories underlying

ecosystem management; and (e) the inadequacy of current

research methodologies for examining institutional questions

about ecosystem management goals and objectives.

These barriers, both within the Forest Service and among its

constituents, have led to the growing perception that formal

consideration of a social or human dimension to natural

resource management is appropriate. The public is

demanding information about and participation in the

decision-making process.

What is Meant by Human Dimensions

Information

The use of human dimensions information in resource

management is not new. Managers’ personal encounters with

forest visitors or at public meetings and open houses, as well

as the information available in any Forest Service office, all

contribute to the information pool. Nonetheless, the linkage

of human needs, desires, and appetites to natural resource

decisions has generally been thought too inexact to be used

in making science-based decision-making. There is a

growing emphasis on the science of human participation in

ecosystem processes. Integrating social science information

into the decision-making process and weighing it equally

with information from the biological and physical sciences

produce balanced solutions. Human dimensions inquiry has

been described as seeking to understand the human demands

on, values and perceptions of, and interactions with

ecosystems; and a means of integrating those into

ecosystem-related policy, programs, and management

(USDA Forest Service 1994).

Information about the human dimensions of ecosystem

management considers people as a part of ecosystems.

Human needs, perceptions, beliefs, values, and behaviors

have important influences and will continue to have

influences well into the future.

Several kinds of human dimensions information are relevant

to ecosystem management. Prominent among them are

demands—consumptive and nonconsumptive; onsite and

offsite; individual, collective, and global community; and

those that serve current and future human needs for raw

materials, experiences, employment, and ecosystem

conditions. We express our demands through both market

and nonmarket institutions and by monetary and

nonmonetary means. Our needs stem from individuals,

communities, and societies. As well as making these

demands of the resources that sustain us, we also assign

them human values and perceptions—our attitudes, moral

beliefs, interpretations, and political positions are based on

and form the foundation of human culture. The natural

environment affects a society’s belief system and world

view, which in turn affect individual and community

management of the environment. In addition to demands,

values, and perceptions, we also bring to the natural world a

complex of interactions—we affect ecosystems, and

ecosystems affect us. Our harvesting, grazing, mining,

development, road building, and many other human

activities bring tangible effects. Floods, hurricanes,

droughts, earthquakes, famines, and other catastrophic

natural phenomena may result in part from human activity.

Benefits of Collecting Social Information

It has become apparent that the biological and physical

sciences are not capable of addressing all natural resource

management issues. Using social science in managing

ecosystems can provide several benefits (Decker and others

1996, Manfredo and others 1996). For example, a systematic

collection of social information can help describe the social

environment in which natural resource management actions

occur. Social information may be used to identify the needs,

interests, and expectations of the publics we serve. In turn,

social information can enhance communications, allowing us

to be more responsive to human needs.

The information social science provides also can enhance

our ability to anticipate and understand conflicting interests

and controversies. Our recognition of human dimensions in

ecosystem management can help ensure fairness and balance

in decision-making by having us attend to the rigors of

scientific inquiry; i.e., reliability, validity, representativeness,

and generalizability. Social information can reveal the values

and potential biases of natural resource managers, which

may influence their decision-making. Finally, gathering

human dimensions information can be a cost-effective means

of reducing potential controversy. Failure to do so may

increase management costs over the long term and also

increase cynicism, heighten frustrations and distrust, and

increase public reliance on lawsuits and legislation (Forest

Ecosystem Management Team 1993). Generally, the

overriding benefits of systematically collecting social data

are improved ecosystem management and policymaking.

Integrating Social Information into Ecosystem

Management

Collecting the information necessary for a comprehensive

social assessment is only one step toward sustainable

ecosystem management. Resource managers everywhere are

asking how they should integrate social information into
13

plans for managing biophysical systems. Demand for natural

resources, widely diverse values and expectations, as well as

differences of opinion on appropriate use, have led to

innumerable conflicts. The fragmented nature of land

management jurisdictions, together with the many complex

and often ambiguous regulations, often has served only to

exacerbate such conflicts. The integration and use of social

data in planning and decisionmaking are increasingly seen as

valuable means of resolving conflicts before they are taken

to the judicial or legislative arena.

While the integration of scientific findings to accomplish

ecosystem management is not altogether new, practitioners

have focused primarily on the interdisciplinary work of

biological and physical scientists; e.g., foresters, wildlife

biologists, and aquatic professionals. When considered

seriously, social data usually were only used in the economic

analysis of management alternatives.

There are several possible explanations for our failure to use

social data to the fullest extent. The most obvious is a lack

of recognition that the social sciences can play a critically

important role in forest planning. Indeed, many maintain that

ecosystem management is primarily within the domain of

biological and physical scientists. A second reason, and one

that may further explain its lack of acceptance, is that social

science concepts are considered fundamentally theoretical

and not useful to the same extent as results produced by

more tangible scientific inquiry.

A broadly accepted set of guidelines and procedures, within

a grounded conceptual framework, has not been developed

and extensively tested. In addition, on the rare occasion

when social data successfully have been integrated into

management strategies, there was little communication

across forest regions about how the methods could be more

generally applied. Conferences and scientific journals are

now addressing the need to incorporate social science

methods into the planning process. Regrettably, those

responding most often have been other social scientists and

academicians who can only try to transfer information and

technology to ecosystem managers. Progress on developing

an HDF has been slow.

The overriding concern of policymakers, managers,

researchers, and citizens has been for finding appropriate

ways to identify, measure, evaluate, understand, and

incorporate into decision-making the diverse values,

interests, and uses that society has for forest resources (Clark

and others 1999).

Integrated Planning and Land Management

Ecosystem management must focus on sharing and

coordinating the values and inputs of agencies, publics, and

other interests when conceiving, designing, and

implementing policies, programs, or projects (Mitchell

1986). Successful integration invites diverse perspectives on

an issue, perspectives that rely on information from

scientists, managers, and citizens across a variety of spatial

and temporal scales.

In describing integrated approaches to resource planning and

management, Lang (1986) envisioned two dimensions. First,

integrative management must be strategic. It is a dynamic

process, not an end, which recognizes the ecosystem as a

complex and ever-changing whole. It focuses on action by

addressing the needs of forest policy implementation at each

stage of planning and includes in the planning process all

who have a stake in the health and sustainability of the

ecosystem. It focuses on specific issues and concerns rather

than generalities, and it is adaptable. Integration is ongoing.

Finally, strategic integration helps build constituencies who

understand their stake in the ecosystem and the integral part

they play in the management process.

The second dimension of integrative management (Lang

1986) is the interactive nature of implementation. All

stakeholders have an opportunity to participate in the

decision-making process, all have access to relevant

information, and each participant is recognized for his or her

contribution. The process invites individuals and

communities of interest to consider how competing values

foster conflict in natural resource management. Interactivity

lends legitimacy to the process of mutual understanding and

makes possible the necessary changes among stakeholders

and user groups.

Integrated management also must provide a broadened view

of the problem or issue under consideration. The biophysical

and social aspects must be given appropriate weight.

Recognizing interconnectedness enhances the interpretation

of data.

How Can Integration be Achieved

Integrating social and biophysical information is a process of

considering multiple perspectives; e.g., the organizational,

political, and personal, which are drawn from all

stakeholders. Achieving integration always will require

sincere and considerate activity, even though certain barriers

to understanding may remain. For example, many planners

have used a technical model of planning, rather than a

strategic one (Lang 1986). Very few managers are educated

in either integrative planning or the social sciences, even

fewer in both.

Despite these obstacles, successful integration of social

science data with ecosystem management practices is

possible. It will be a deliberate process fostered by a desire
14

to incorporate both social and biophysical information, a

synthesis of input begun with a systematic process for

identifying and collecting social information.

Using Stakeholder Input into Ecosystem

Management

Planning ecosystem management from multiple perspectives

requires the participation of scientists and planners

representing various disciplines. The National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 requires an interaction of

individuals from multiple disciplines for the purpose of

ensuring integration of natural and social sciences in

decision-making. This requirement has led to the creation of

ad hoc interdisciplinary teams (IDTs) to ensure that

individuals from a variety of disciplines contribute

knowledge from their respective fields; e.g., wildlife biology,

forestry, and economics. An IDT considers tradeoffs that

will be necessary to achieve multiple goals and the effects

that management activities would have on sustainability.

Whereas IDTs strive to integrate and apply natural resource

and social science information, Clark and others (1999)

identified a number of problems they may encounter along

the way. First, scientists may seem sometimes to be

advocating only their own disciplinary interest. Such

provinciality, while not always inappropriate, may hinder

understanding and the necessary consideration of other

points of view. Second, one person may not adequately

represent the theoretical and methodological perspectives of

a given discipline. For example, one social scientist probably

will not have expertise in all the social sciences; many may

be necessary. Third, unless an IDT has set procedures by

which its members can successfully interact, as well as

common themes that will encourage goal-oriented

interaction, problem solving may not represent all relevant

perspectives. For example, one group may perceive a

problem as purely biophysical while others perceive it as

social, temporal, or spatial. Finally, an IDT may suffer

internal problems such as those that occur when one group

holds a disproportionate amount of power and influence in

the decision-making process.

Although organizing diverse stakeholders through IDTs may

be difficult, problems usually result from failures in

leadership rather than the team process. Up-front steps to

recognize and avoid such problems will always be necessary.

Clark and others (1999) looked at previous approaches to

interdisciplinary teamwork to determine what successful

integration of social and biophysical information may look

like. Their research highlighted coordination, environmental

modeling, and collaboration.

Coordination requires more than simply engaging several

individuals or groups in work on a particular problem. The

IDT members may require only periodic interaction with

other participants. Individuals from diverse disciplines must

make deliberate efforts to apprize other team members of

how implementation of their ideas might affect other

ecosystem components. Social and biophysical components

are within the province of each team member.

Environmental modeling, or simulation, allows an IDT to

more easily hypothesize how various social and biophysical

components interact and how they are influenced. Modeling

social and biophysical relationships allows team members to

view an ecosystem management problem through the lens of

cross-discipline complexity.

Finally, through collaboration, two or more stakeholders

work together synergistically. They use both social and

biophysical sciences to address and respond to ecosystem

management challenges.

In summary, successful integration of the social and

biophysical sciences will require all participants to

understand the challenges and follow the IDT process. The

team leader will facilitate shared perspectives and emphasize

the need to understand how social and biophysical

information must both be used to solve ecosystem

management problems. Such understanding will be enhanced

by technologies for simulation and modeling; e.g., GIS.

Collaboration among IDT members with expertise in both

social and biophysical sciences can improve planning when

the issues are complex and also enhance understanding

among diverse stakeholder groups with interests in

management outcomes (Clark and others 1999).
15

A number of human dimensions processes are relevant to

ecosystem management planning. These include public

involvement, environmental justice analyses, social impact

assessment, economic impact assessment, supply and

demand analyses, and input/output modeling. Although the

HDF described in chapter 3 identifies social concepts and

indicators appropriate for a variety of human dimensions

processes, here we focus on social assessment.

The Nature of Social Assessments

The social assessment is an essential component of

ecosystem management. Biophysical assessments explore

ecological conditions, current and desired, as well as an

area’s particular needs. Similarly, a special assessment

should explore social conditions in a region—current and

desired—as well as the particular needs of residents and

visitors.

Social Assessment

The social assessment process can take many forms and help

managers achieve a number of goals and objectives. The

guidelines presented here describe ways that forest planners

can collect and use social information at a variety of scales.

Social assessment is a means of collecting data and

performing analysis to generate information about (1) social

structure, (2) social processes, and (3) social changes in a

given social structure and process (Bitterroot Social

Research Institute 1994).

The primary purpose of a social assessment is to provide the

basis for identifying and forecasting consequences of

possible projects or policies. Human communities interact in

complex ways with ecosystems and their management. By

understanding historical and contemporary society, we can

better understand the connection between humans and the

natural environment. Generally, social assessments examine

the social, political, economic, and cultural conditions at

various geographic and temporal scales.

Although a social assessment does not constitute a specific

decision, it can provide data that are useful in the decisionmaking process. Nonetheless, it is important to distinguish

between social assessment and social impact analysis (SIA).

An SIA forecasts social impacts that may result from

implementation of a forest planning alternative or a more

specific project. It has been described as a component of the

environmental analysis process in which social science

information and methodologies are used to evaluate or

project how current programs or proposed actions may affect

humans (FSH 1909.17).

An SIA is conducted in compliance with such laws as the

National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and is well

grounded in literature (Burdge 1994, Finsterbusch and

others 1983). Whereas an SIA focuses on the possible

effects of specific management actions, a social assessment

considers the social environment and provides a variety of

information for more general purposes:

1. To identify social trends or patterns related to changes

in population and other demographics, resource uses,

recreation, and tourism

2. To locate and describe subcultures within a region

3. To understand the capacities and organization of a

community, including its cohesion (unity and

cooperation), how members of the community respond

to problems (collectively and as individuals), and

infrastructure flexibility

4. To identify regulatory and societal norms of behavior

within a community

5. To recognize perceptions of key ecosystem issues

6. To acknowledge public opinion regarding management

options

7. To identify and understand the nature of stakeholder

groups and other interested publics

8. To develop methods of communication among

stakeholders and other interested publics

9. To identify opinion leaders within a community

10. To use key economic indicators, including the region’s

economic diversity, employment rates and types,

income levels, and resiliency

11. To understand how change, over time, is reflected in

the indicators used to monitor social conditions

Such information can provide a more thorough

understanding of a geographic region, which will be useful

in forest planning; and it will furnish baseline information

for assessing the possible effects of alternative policies.

Collaborative social assessments recognize that the need for

information and data can be met by using a variety of

knowledge sources, methods, and processes. Although

systematic, consistent guidance for conducting social

assessments across regions has not been developed, there is

a growing interest in ways to organize assessments

consistently across agencies and regions.

Chapter 2

The Role of Social Assessment in Integrating Human Dimensions Information
16

The Role of Social Assessment in Integration

The use of social assessment in policymaking and planning

efforts can underscore the importance of integrating social

and biophysical sciences. A social assessment will provide

baseline information that forest planners can use to connect

social conditions to specific ecosystem management issues.

Current and historical analyses of the social environment

allow planners to better understand how people relate to the

natural world. More specifically, understanding historical

and current social conditions fosters multiple perspectives,

which are key to ecosystem management. Resource planning

traditionally has been seen as technical rationality. Lang

(1986) suggested that a technical perspective:

1. Assumes there are specific technical solutions to

identified problems

2. Assumes that problems, though complex, can be

separated and solved as smaller problems, which, when

recombined, can be used to resolve the larger issue

3. Relies on data and system models for inquiry

4. Focuses on cause-and-effect relationships

5. Assumes that the analyst can be unbiased by personal

values when considering facts

6. Focuses on quantification of information while assuming

that the objectivity of numbers reflects reality and is

required for rational dialogue

7. Attempts to provide optimum solutions to problems

8. Disregards individual needs and preferences

A technical perspective is useful when looking at ecosystem

management issues. However, integrative management must

consider multiple perspectives. The social assessment makes

it possible to consider other perspectives and incorporate

other participants into the planning process. Such

perspectives may offer organizational, political, or personal

points of view.

The organizational perspective considers reciprocal

relationships among agency officials, the ecosystem

management process itself, and other key players who have a

stake or interest in management outcomes. The

organization’s point of view is important because key

players use social power to influence ecosystem

management policy and practices, as well as the perceptions

and behaviors of others.

The political perspective focuses on a total complex of

human relations and how they affect the allocation of

resources. More specifically, it considers the views of

elected officials and political appointees. The public interest

is a focus of genuine concern, rather than some abstraction

worthy of only passing interest. The time horizon

surrounding a political perspective is relatively short—

typically tied to the time elected officials and appointees

serve. From a political point of view, ecosystem

management may be only a tool for short-term solutions that

will benefit stakeholders who currently have political

influence. Intuition as much as hard data is key to political

viability.

The personal perspective considers attitudes, beliefs,

knowledge, and values of individuals within the larger social

fabric. Personal points of view are within the province not

only of the general public, but also of the leadership

community.

Although technical, organizational, political, and personal

perspectives share some points of view, and oftentimes

conflict, all are necessary when integrating social

information into ecosystem management processes. They

represent a broad constituency of stakeholders and others. A

holistic approach to ecosystem management invites the

understanding of all fundamental ecosystem components,

both human and biophysical. Entire ecosystems depend for

their survival and productivity on society’s ability to address

individual ecosystem management problems and issues

(Clark and others 1999).

The social assessment facilitates an integration of

biophysical and social information into ecosystem

management policies and practices. It can enable managers

to better understand and evaluate human activities or

indifferences, not only on an ecological level but also from

cultural, social, economic, organizational, political, and

personal perspectives. It can help bridge the gap between

social scientists and resource managers by helping connect

social theories with real-world needs. By collaborating with

a variety of stakeholders, managers who use social

assessments can promote dialogue among those directly

responsible for managing the ecosystem and the individuals

and organizations with a stake in how they are managed

(Jensen and others 1999). Such dialogue can lead to an

exchange of information about values, an opportunity to

resolve conflicts, and a robust understanding of alternative

management proposals.

The Importance of Scale in Social Assessment

An important consideration in conducting social assessments

is the scale at which information is collected. The HDF

addresses scale in three ways: spatial, social, and temporal.

The Spatial Scale of Analysis; Focusing on Place

Typically, when issues of scale are raised during ecosystem

analysis, spatial scale is the first mentioned. The researcher

begins by identifying the specific ecological unit to which

the ecosystem management issues and problems pertain.

According to ECOMAP (Cleland and others 1997), a
17

Federal interagency team charged with identifying a

hierarchy of ecological units, “[T]he primary purpose for

delineating ecological units is to identify land and water

areas at different levels of resolution that have similar

capabilities and potentials for management.” Below is one

list of planning and analysis scales (Driver and others 1996,

Stankey and Clark 1992):

1. Land unit—where project and other management-area

planning and analysis occur. Measured in units up to

thousands of acres, analysis at this scale may first

consider sites, stands, and drainages. For each, questions

of management effects are posed.

a. Site—a relatively small area of only a few square

yards or a few trees. How will site changes; e.g.,

increased downed woody material, affect present or

future recreational uses?

b. Stands—relatively small units of land, around 100

acres, which include a variety of species and

maintain natural levels of production and resilience

to stress; typically defined by foresters, are these

units of analysis relevant to the public?

c. Drainages—will range from hundreds to thousands

of acres; drainage boundaries are defined by

topography; drainage functions have significant

potential effects on human behavior; and what are the

cumulative effects of changes in drainages on

recreation and resource-dependent communities?

2. Landscape—a level of analysis generally defined by

forest- or area-wide planning. Landscape is often defined

by watershed boundaries and multiple drainages. It

ranges from 100 to 100,000 acres, containing many

stands and sites. What mix of forest attributes and

conditions is acceptable to the human community at the

landscape level?

3. Ecoregion—the largest geographic level of ecosystem

management planning, the analysis of which may first

consider three hierarchical levels; regional, continental,

and global. The potential need for international planning

is inherent at the ecoregion scale. Ecoregions are

measured in ten-thousand- to hundred-thousand-square

miles.

a. Regional—large-scale areas (several thousand

square miles) that may involve multiple political and

administrative jurisdictions, as well as varying

ecological conditions; how do changes at the

ecoregional level influence the range of social and

environmental diversity sought by local

communities, regional populations, and tourists?

b. Continental—includes large areas that may cross

one or more national boundaries; several

environmental, political, and cultural systems may be

included, as well as several ecoregions; what are the

physical, social, and economic factors that contribute

to advantages that one region may hold over another?

c. Global—the largest level of analysis, the global

extends beyond all political boundaries to encompass

a variety of legal, economic, and cultural systems;

what different systems of stewardship and property

rights traditional to each culture may be appropriate

when managing natural resources in the U.S.?

Whereas each of these levels of planning and analysis are

defined by ecological or physical boundaries and were

developed primarily for biophysical assessments, they also

have usefulness in social assessment. A special Forest

Service task force reached several conclusions regarding the

use of social information in ecosystem management (Driver

and others 1996). First, it found that a corresponding, though

not necessarily equal, hierarchical classification would be

necessary for social analysis to be relevant. Second, while

information about biophysically defined units may be

relevant to the assessment of some social conditions, the

converse is not always true. Most social variables do not

relate directly to biophysical units. This is due to human

mobility and production capabilities, as well as the diverse

values humans hold toward land areas other than those

nearest them. Finally, the social variables necessary for an

assessment may vary across levels of analysis. For example,

interactions among stakeholder groups at a landscape scale

may differ significantly from those at a regional scale.

For these reasons, we cannot expect a geographic scale for

conducting social assessments to coincide with an

ecological-unit scale. When relevant social variables can be

analyzed using ecological units, that scale is applicable; but

when ecological units are not applicable, a hierarchy for

social analysis that parallels the hierarchy for ecological

units can be devised. Driver and others (1996) suggested

four levels of social analysis for ecosystem management:

1. Small/Local—site, project, and local community

2. Medium/Multicommunity—medium-sized natural

ecosystem; national forest

3. Large/Regional—ecoregion, large natural ecosystem;

may include all or parts of several national forests

4. Very Large/National—several regions, may cross

political boundaries to include international or global

management issues.

These levels are not mutually exclusive; in many cases, social

analyses should be conducted at more than one level, given

the scope of an ecosystem management issue or problem.

The Social Scale

Human society is organized by patterns of attitude, behavior,

knowledge, motivation, belief, expectation, and preference.

Much of the information necessary for social-scale analysis

could be grouped into a common, hierarchical arrangement

of societal elements (Clark and others 1999, Stankey and

Clark 1992):
18

1. Individuals—the basic unit of social analysis, often

representing general citizens, the family, and members of

organizations; what is the range of knowledge about

ecological processes that individuals hold, and what are

the values and attitudes that influence and are influenced

by that knowledge? How are individuals influenced by

ecosystem management decisions?

2. Groups—informal associations of individuals other than

families that form around social networks and shared

interests; how do ecosystem management programs unite

or divide groups with various interests in natural areas?

3. Organizations—groups connected formally by work

and professional relationships as well as political

interests; these groups often form as a result of common

concerns related to specific issues, creating communities

of interest; how do activities of ecosystem managers

produce coalitions among different organizations, and

how does this affect the nature of social and political

power that ultimately influences ecosystem management

decisions?

4. Communities—urban, suburban, and rural communities

of people; the concept of community may transcend

individuals and groups to include a complex social

system and a sense of shared identity among community

members; how do ecosystem management activities

influence social structures and the variety of institutions

that provide a sense of order in a community; e.g., the

effects of declining harvest levels on social services in

forest-dependent communities?

5. Populations—an aggregate of communities,

organizations, groups, and individuals that may include a

diversity of social, economic, and political structures; the

demographic and socioeconomic structure of populations

and projected changes in such structures raise important

questions about desired uses (and nonuses) of natural

areas, as well as the values that drive decisions about

those uses; what are the trends in population structure

variables such as age, education, and residence and how

are such trends connected to resource values and

preferred uses?

The Temporal Scale

The third scale of social analysis is temporal. Human society

is dynamic, as are the individuals, groups, organizations,

communities, and populations of which it is composed. The

effects of ecosystem management decisions on society as a

whole are therefore also subject to changing attitudes,

values, preferences, and dependence on the resources that

support it. Historical data are useful in describing the current

social environment of a region. By analyzing past and

present, the social scientist may begin identifying potential

trends or changes in a region’s social environment.

Interrelationships among Scale Types

Stankey and Clark (1992) and Clark and others (1999)

discuss links between places and people by connecting them

with the ecological processes and activities/institutions that

affect them. Figure 1 (adapted from Stankey and Clark

1992) illustrates the interactions of people, places, and

processes over time.

This illustration emphasizes relationships forged within an

ecosystem management context represented by the

overlapping sections of people, places, and processes. Social

and ecological processes connect people to the ecosystem.

For example, resource allocation, planning, and management

activities (prescriptive processes); collection and

dissemination of information through education, marketing,

research and development, as well as monitoring and

evaluation (information processes); policy formation,

judicial and political activity, and mediation (conflict

resolution); the nature and evolution of values, attitudes, and

perceptions of stakeholders (social and psychological

processes); and succession, disturbance, and migration

(ecological processes) (Stankey and Clarke 1992).

The Process of Conducting Social Assessments

Whereas much has been written about the process of

conducting a social assessment, there are, in general, six

steps:

Step 1. Establish the Purpose and Scope of the Social

Assessment

Before considering research design, sampling, and data

collection, the social scientist first must establish purpose

and scope. This step drives social assessment planning by

identifying relevant issues and the population affected by the

issues. Purpose and scope govern decisions that will be

made in all subsequent steps.

Step 2. Determine Relevant Characteristics of the Social

Environment

The objective of this step is to identify information that is

relevant to the assessment’s purpose and scope. Relevancy

will depend on what ecosystem management issues are

identified in step 1, as well as specific questions regarding

those issues.

Step 3. Determine Appropriate Methods for

Conducting the Social Assessment

The approach taken when collecting social information

depends largely on the type of data needed. Distinctions

among data types can take two forms (Cordell and others

1999). First, data may be categorized by source, as either
19

primary or secondary. Primary data are generated and

compiled over the course of an original study. This type of

data is useful in addressing a specific issue or responding to

an identified information need. Secondary data come from

established sources and probably were collected for other

purposes. They will, however, provide information relevant

to a proposed project. Social assessments often include both

primary and secondary data.

Second, social data can be categorized by the method used

to record it; i.e., quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative data

are gathered along continuous numerical scales that may be

analyzed using descriptive or inferential statistical

techniques. Such data may include number of recreation

trips per year or percent of people holding particular

attitudes toward an ecosystem management policy.

Qualitative data are usually verbal responses to issue

statements. The latter are not statistically analyzed; rather,

they are summarized and interpreted by the researcher.

Primary and secondary data can be either quantitative or

qualitative. The following are research methods common to

primary and secondary data collection. Although not an

exhaustive list, it represents those methods most useful when

doing a social assessment of a region or community.

Outline of common research methods and techniques for

collecting primary and secondary data applicable to a social

assessment follows:

Source Methods

Primary 1. Survey research

a. Self-administered questionnaire

b. Telephone survey

c. Personal interview

2. Group interviews

a. Brainstorming

b. Nominal group technique

c. Delphi technique

d. Natural and formal field

interviews

Secondary 3. Statistical and nonstatistical

documentary data

4. Historical analysis

5. Literature search for previous

research

Note: Each of these data-collection techniques may be used

to collect either quantitative or qualitative data. However,

quantitative data usually are gathered by self-administered

questionnaires and telephone surveys, whereas qualitative

data usually are gathered through individual and group

interviews.

Step 4. Select a Sample from the Human Population of

Interest

The focus of a social assessment is on human populations

and geographical settings. As we noted in the preceding

chapter, four levels of social analysis may be used in

ecosystem management planning: small/local, medium/

multi-community, large/regional, and very large/national

(Driver and others 1996). The local includes an individual

community and the rural area surrounding it. A local area

probably will be smaller than a county. The multicommunity includes two or more communities and may span

more than one county. The regional may include significant

parts of a State or, possibly, several States. The national will

include several States, span more than one region, or may

encompass all regions and States. Social assessments at a

variety of geographic scales may be needed; and to

determine the appropriate level a researcher must consider

both population scope and assessment objective(s).

When the social scientist has determined the population(s) of

interest and social assessment objectives, he or she must

then choose an appropriate unit of analysis by discerning

how stakeholders and other interested publics organize

themselves; i.e., in terms of individual, group, organization,

community, or population. The individual is an especially

important consideration because a person’s values and

attitudes toward ecosystem management are affected by

management decisions. The individual unit of analysis may

also include households. The group includes informal

associations of individuals that are built around social

networks and shared interests. The organization includes

groups that are formally connected by work or professional

relationships as well as by political interests. Groups

represent reciprocal human relationships with ecosystems,

the social and political power influencing those

relationships, and ultimately the decision we make in

managing ecosystems. The community includes urban,

suburban, and rural peoples; and a population includes a

broad collection of communities, organizations, groups, and

individuals, as well as a diversity of social, economic, and

political structures. Any or all of these units of analysis may

be relevant to a social assessment. For example, examining

the role that natural resource policy plays in the economy of

a community will require more than the identification of

specific attitudes and behaviors.

Sampling a population of interest involves the selection of

individuals or households when the information is to be

obtained from primary data sources. The kind of sample will

depend on the goals and objectives of the social assessment.

For example, some probability sampling techniques have

been designed to draw samples that are representative of a

given population of interest. Generally, such techniques are

used when the data to be collected are of a quantitative

nature, and the assessment goals are to draw inferences

about the population of interest. Purposive samples (samples
20

designed to identify specific types of respondents) are used

when qualitative data are gathered from individual and

group interviews.

Step 5. Collect Data Needed to Describe the Social

Characteristics from Step 2

Once the purpose of an assessment is clear, data collection

methods can be identified and developed; and when

collection of primary data is necessary, the social scientist

selects a sample and begins the collection process. The

researcher must take appropriate steps to eliminate any

suggestion of bias or invalid results. Several texts that

specifically describe the process necessary for each

methodology may be consulted when collecting primary

data. The researcher also may consider using consultants

who have experience with survey techniques. However, the

use of consultants should not preclude the manager’s need to

understand the collection process. The more a manager

understands the appropriate processes, the more involved he

or she can be. Specific knowledge about the study area and

the issues are likely to enhance the assessment’s quality.

Step 6. Analyze the Information, Adequately Document

the Work Done, Describe Implications, and

Prepare Appropriate Reports

Generally, analysis of data will require the time of an

individual familiar with statistical techniques and analysis,

as well as interpretation of qualitative data. However, a

Forest Service manager familiar with the development and

administration of the assessment will be able to contribute

that expertise to accurate analysis and interpretation of the

data. Data analysis should be tied to the overall goals and

objectives of the assessment. A variety of statistical software

packages are available to simplify quantitative data analysis.
21

This chapter presents the HDF and a description of steps

taken to conduct a social assessment. It also identifies

relevant characteristics of the social environment that are to

be studied in the assessment process.

The Human Dimensions Framework

The HDF is a question-based tool that uses social

assessment questions, social data that are collected to answer

those questions, and appropriate methods of data collection.

Eight questions address primary issues that the social

scientist must consider:

1. What are the human uses of natural resources in the

assessment area?

2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment

area?

3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the

geographic region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users,

stakeholders, and managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships among nearby

communities, the forest or other ecosystem, and the

larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions

related to ecosystem management issues driving the

social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the

natural environment, natural resources of that

environment, and the uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends in the affected

regions are relevant to management of the ecosystem?

We identified five dimensions of social data that are relevant

to the assessment process: historical background, population

characteristics, community resources, social organizational

structures and processes, and public perceptions and wellbeing. Several concepts pertinent to those dimensions are

used as indicators of responses to the social assessment

questions. Together, they form a matrix, which we identify as

the HDF.

Using the Human Dimensions Framework

From the user’s point of view the HDF is driven by the

preceding eight social assessment questions. As referred to

her, users are those charged who conduct the social

assessment; e.g., forest planners. Although users may

examine concepts and indicators relative to those questions,

the HDF described on the next several pages begins with

social assessment questions. Ideally, using the HDF involves

the following steps:

1. Identify pertinent social assessment question(s) from the

(list 1 through 8) matrix.

2. Identify the concepts and indicators that will provide

information about the social assessment question

(represented by * within the matrix).

3. Go to the appendix page noted within the matrix. Each

appendix page provides a description of an indicator, the

concept it represents, and the method of measuring the

indicator.

4. Consult chapters 4 through 7 for more specific

discussion of how to use each data collection method.

Chapter 3

The Human Dimensions Framework:

Determining Relevant Characteristics of the Social Environment
22

The Human Dimensions Framework for Guiding Assessments

Dimension I. Historical Background

Social Assessment Questions Appendix

Concepts and Indicators Page A B C D E F G H

Concept Ia. Historical Experience

Community origin 90 * ** *

Recent or current experience with

ecosystem management issues 90 * ** **

Names and characteristics of influential

persons, groups, or families 91 * *

Distinctive characteristics of the

community that are strongly valued

locally 91 * *

Prominent stakeholder groups with a

history in the area 92 * **

Dimension II. Population Characteristics

Concept IIa. Cultural Characteristics

Ethnicity/race 92 ** *

Language diversity 92 ** *

Religious affiliations and practices 93 **** *

Property ownership 93 **** *

Length of residence 93 * *

Cultural-based values 94 * **** *

Concept IIb. Population and Demographics

Total population 94 * *

Changes in population size 95 * *

Residential distribution 95 **** *

Age distribution 95 * *

Gender distribution 95 * *

Education 96 * *

Household composition 96 * *

Population and demographics by

ethnicity 96 ** *

Concept IIc. Economic and Employment Characteristics

Employment levels 97 * *

Occupational diversity 97 ** * *

Distribution of employment by sector 97 ** * *

Labor force participation by groups 98 ** * *

Household income 98 * *

Poverty 98 * *

Wealth 99 * *

Public assistance and welfare 99 * *

Economic and employment

characteristics by ethnicity 99 * *
23

Dimension III. Community Resources

Social Assessment Questions Appendix

Concepts and Indicators Page A B C D E F G H

Concept IIIa. Facilities and Services

Current levels of public facilities and

service 100 * *

Current levels of private facilities and

service 100 * *

Concept IIIb. Spatial Relationships and Ecosystem Dependency

Ecosystem classifications 101 * *

Water resources 101 * *

Energy and mineral resources 101 * *

Wildlife abundance 101 * *

Recreation resources 102 * *

Public land classifications 102 * *

Private land classifications 102 * *

Resource uses 103 * *

Population density 103 * *

Migration 103 * *

Settlement patterns 104 * *

Land tenure 104 * *

Dimension IV. Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVa. Economic Organization

Economic diversity 105 ***** *

Export dependency 105 * *

Small businesses 105 * *

Shopping patterns 106 * *

House values 106 * *

Land values 106 * *

Retail sales 107 * *

Concept IVb. Governmental Structure

Local government positions 107 *

Formalization of planning department 107 *

Connections to outside agencies 108 *

Relationships among local jurisdictions 108 *

Concept IVc. Social Diversity

Gender distribution 108 * *

Ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity 109 * * *

Residential stability 109 * * *

Voluntary organizations and membership 109 * * * *

Factions and special interest groups 110 * * * *
24

Dimension IV. Social Organization Structures and Processes (continued)

Social Assessment Questions Appendix

Concepts and Indicators Page A B C D E F G H

Concept IVc. Social Diversity (cont.)

Values and beliefs related to natural

resources issues 110 * *

Attitudes toward natural resources 110 * *

Transient populations 111 * *

Civil rights 111 * *

Concept IVd. Outside Linkages

Local ties to State and Federal

governments 112 * *

Previous Federal/State grants and

other programs 112 * *

The presence of regional, national, or

international businesses or agencies 113 * *

Newcomers to the area 113 *

Concept IVe. Distribution of Resources and Power

Economic equity 113 *

Environmental justice 114 * * *

Size and structure of local government 117 *

Presence of stakeholder groups 117 * * * *

Legal constraints 118 *

Concept IVf. Community Resilience

Coordination in current projects 118 *

Coordinative mechanisms 118 *

Persistent conflicts or issues 119 *

Dimension V. Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Va. Perceptions of Natural Resources

Values and beliefs related to natural

resource issues 119 ****

Attitudes toward natural resource issues 120  

Stakeholder views and beliefs 120 ** **

Attitudes toward natural resource issues 121 ****

Concept Vb. Connection to Natural Resources

Tourism and recreational uses 121 * * * * *

Resource-based employment 122 * * * * *

Traditional uses 122 * * * * *

Sense of place 123 * * * * *
25

Dimension V. Public Perceptions and Well-Being (continued)

Social Assessment Questions Appendix

Concepts and Indicators Page A B C D E F G H

Concept Vc. Perception of Well-Being

Behavioral and situational conditions 123 * * *

Access to facilities, services, and

resources 124 * * *

Community satisfaction 124 * * *

Note: A more specific description of dimension, concept, and indicator can be found on the page of the appendix indicated.

* Indicates that the relevant indicator is connected to the social assessment question.

Indicators of Social Dimensions and Concepts

in Social Assessment

The second step of the social assessment—determine

relevant characteristics of the social environment—identifies

what information is necessary. Relevancy is determined by

issues raised during establishment of purpose and scope

(step 1). This chapter describes the dimensions, concepts,

and indicators of an HDF (see appendix).

The HDF is a guide for identifying paths of information and

gathering data relevant to ecosystem management. Human

dimensions represent key components of, and relationships

with, the human ecosystem that affect, or are affected by, an

ecological system. They are an amalgamation of concepts

identified by a variety of social science disciplines. Social

life is multidimensional, and the dimensions are

interdependent. For example, the economic, social, and

cultural conditions of a community are dependent on actions

of the decisionmakers within a community (affiliated with

private institutions, special interest groups, public

authorities, and other organizations), which in turn are

influenced by government mandates, informal regulations,

laws, and policies.

Social Indicators and Their Role in Ecosystem

Management

An important tool for assessing the social environment

within a geographic region is the kind of information social

scientists call social indicators. Social indicators are

statistics, statistical series, and other forms of data

conciliation and evidence that enable policy and

decisionmakers to assess various social aspects of a society,

evaluate specific programs, and determine the impact of

those programs (Miller 1983).

Social indicators can be used to effect successful ecosystem

management. An integrated set of social, economic, and

ecological measures available to be collected over time and

primarily derived from available data sources, social

indicators are grounded in theory and useful to ecosystem

management and decisionmaking. They represent an

integration of statistical measures rather than a simple

collection of facts (Force and Machlis 1997). In addition, the

principal sources of social indicators can be found in such

databases as are kept by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Information about social indicators should be collected

repeatedly over time, allowing the manager to recognize

changes in a region’s social environment and facilitate

ongoing historical analysis. The identification of social

indicators is grounded in theory; they almost always will

reflect a multidisciplinary perspective. They concern

people’s attitudes about the social, economic, and

institutional nature of a geographic region. Finally, social

indicators provide practical information for monitoring

current and changing situations, making decisions about

appropriate management strategies, analyzing policy, and

applying social research to ecosystem management planning

and practices.

Criteria for the Appropriate Use of Social

Indicators

Regardless of scale (national, State, regional, county, or

community), social indicators should meet certain criteria in

order to maximize their relevance (Clark 1973). First, they

should be measurable. This does not suggest that there is a

need to quantify all social indicators; rather, it suggests that

information about a social indicator should be obtainable

without relying on guesswork or risking misinterpretation or

inaccuracy or both. Second, social indicators should

consider social importance and shared goals; i.e., they
26

should be relevant to issues generally considered important

to public land managers, stakeholders, and other interested

publics. Third, social indicators should have policy

relevance. Even though a resource management issue might

be socially important, and there may be reasonable

consensus on the actions to be taken, the best policies may

not be politically feasible. For example, protection of an

area within a watershed may require the cessation of all

activity within a national forest. Such a policy very likely

would be unacceptable to many residents and potential

users.

Priority should be given to indicators relevant to feasible

policies and have some consistency with land management

goals and objectives. Stewart, Jakes, and Monson (1997)

provide two compelling, albeit opposing, arguments

regarding whether one should conduct a full social

assessment for forest plan revision or limit the assessment

only to indicators relevant to the policy at hand; e.g., those

that may be affected by proposed actions. Finally, social

indicators should fit into an integrative model that

recognizes the interrelatedness of indicators and broader

concepts.

Perceptual Indicators and Their Role in

Ecosystem Management

Quantitative social indicators can provide a lot of

information about the social environment, although a

significant amount of social information must be

quantitative. A social assessment must examine the

perceptions of individuals and groups. Perceptual indicators

may be quite diverse, even within a population that appears

relatively homogeneous ethnically, educationally, and

economically. Within the constructs of our HDF, perceptual

indicators are in three groups: attitudes, beliefs, and

behaviors.

Attitudes

Attitudes describe the extent to which individuals or groups

find an object or behavior desirable. They are evaluated; i.e.,

good or bad, positive or negative, beneficial or harmful.

Attitudes may describe the extent to which individuals favor

or oppose specific management policies. They may serve to

determine the public’s perceived quality of life or wellbeing, provide a measure of the public’s view of a land

management agency’s actions, or reflect a group’s or

organization’s responses to another group or organization

and the ecosystem management issues they share.

Beliefs

Within the context of social assessment, beliefs are reflected

in our attitudes towards objects or behaviors. They can occur

in response to specific management actions; e.g., road

closure. On the other hand, they may involve more valuebased perceptions. For example, what general environmental

values do people hold, and how might they influence

attitudes regarding identified ecosystem management

policies or practices? If beliefs represent what people

perceive to be true or false, they are not explicitly evaluated;

nonetheless, we can infer what an evaluative attitude might

be by examining and interpreting the expression of the belief

about identified issues.

Behavior

Behavior is a person’s or a group’s response to perceptions

and beliefs. We can make inferences about attitudes and

perceptions based on observed behaviors. In fact, behaviors

identified by responses to a self-report questionnaire reflect

beliefs about behavior, rather than the behavior itself

(Dillman 1978). Nonetheless, asking people about their

behavior is not the same as asking about their beliefs.

Identification of behavior as a factor separate from belief is

warranted. Behavioral questions address what people have

done, are currently doing, or intend to do. For example, what

has been the historical recreational use of a primitive natural

area? What types of recreation behavior are pursued in

particular parts of the ecosystem? What are the trends in

recreational behaviors; and what do these trends say about

future use?

Specifying the Information: Identifying and

Measuring Human Dimensions Framework

(Dimensions, Concepts, and Indicators)

The second and third steps of the social assessment process

call for identifying information required and making

decisions about which data to collect. This section describes

concepts and indicators in the HDF and discusses how the

data for each indicator should be collected. More specific

descriptions of data collection methods are provided in

chapters 4 through 7. The following descriptions of datacollection bases are provided to familiarize the reader with

issues relevant to each. In all cases, the planner or manager

conducting a social assessment should strongly consider

contacting a social scientist.

Concepts and indicators in the HDF are organized into five

dimensions: historical background, population

characteristics, community resources, social organizational

structures and processes, and public perceptions and wellbeing. Although presented separately, these five dimensions

are interrelated. Therefore, information about the concepts

obtained by social assessment should be evaluated within the

context of other social concepts.
27

Dimension I—Historical Background

Historical Experience

Indicators—When evaluating the social environment of a

community, the planner or manager should understand the

historical context of community life and its organic ties to

the ecosystem. The nature of a community’s historical

dependence on natural resources is pertinent to consideration

of current issues. Understanding the evolution of a

community helps the planner identify causes of important

social attitudes and community structure. Furthermore,

information about how residents have reacted to important

issues will provide important clues about problems and

opportunities. In short, an historical review of a community’s

social environment relative to natural resources should

include an analysis of specific indicators, including:

1. Community origin (the social and economic history of

the community)

2. Recent or current responses to ecosystem management

issues

3. Names and characteristics of influential persons, groups,

or families within the community

4. Distinctive characteristics of the community that are

highly valued locally

5. Prominent stakeholder groups with a standing history in

the area

Methods for Collecting Data

Local histories may be helpful in assessing a community’s

connections with its natural resource base. Often, such

histories have been published; although they may seem rich

with information, such publications may reflect only the

author’s opinion or point of view. Local histories also may

be found in public and university libraries, local newspapers,

historical societies’ records, and through interviews with

longtime local residents. In addition, records of recent public

meetings, scoping sessions, and published or otherwiseposted public comments, as well as other agency plans or

data on the community or region, may be available. All such

sources may provide important historical information.

Dimension II—Population Characteristics

The most basic social assessment dimension describes

population in terms of three distinct concepts: culture,

demographics, and economics.

Cultural Characteristics and Social Groups

Indicators—A detailed analysis of cultural characteristics is

warranted when the study area includes diverse racial,

ethnic, religious, or occupation-based populations. Where

there is such diversity, it is important to recognize how

groups may hold different values with regard to the issues. If

some groups seem potentially to be more affected by

ecosystem management decisions, the planner should seek to

understand the groups’ unique character and how they relate

to management decisions.

Often it is not easy to identify distinct social groups. On the

one hand, such groups as seasonal agricultural workers are

composed of clearly distinctive and relatively easy to

identify ethnicity; but, on the other hand, a group like the

League of Women Voters may be practically invisible to all

but its members. Community histories can provide

significant information about the attributes that set a social

group apart, its evolution, and patterns of interaction among

different social groups. The current social organization of a

community may well be outlined in such histories. Factors

that may help describe cultural social groups include:

1. Ethnicity/race

2. Language diversity

3. Religious affiliations and practices

4. Property ownership

5. Length of residence

6. Cultural based values

Methods of collecting data—Information about unique

cultural groups can be found in local, State, and university

libraries. More up-to-date and situation-specific information

is available through interviews with community residents

and members of particular cultural groups. Local histories

(available in local and regional libraries or from interviews

with long-term local residents) and newspapers can also

provide information about the more salient groups in the

community.

Population and Demographics

Indicators—Information about population and

demographics can contribute to an essential description of a

community’s makeup. It will allow the forest planner or

manager to see more clearly how population trends may

influence or be influenced by ecosystem management and

policy. Further, analysis of trends will illustrate population

changes by age, gender, education level, or ethnicity. Such

changes may influence relationships among social groups

within the community. Demographic characteristics that are

important in understanding the social environment of a

community include:

1. Total population size

2. Changes in population size

3. Residential distribution

4. Age distribution

5. Gender distribution

6. Education
28

7. Household composition

8. Population and demographics by ethnicity

Methods of collecting data—The primary source of data

about population and demographics is the U.S. Census of

Population and Housing, which is published every 10 years.

In most cases, decennial census data provide an adequate

description of the population and its demographics.

Intercensus population and demographic data also may be

helpful, especially if significant changes in population

demographics have occurred since the last census.

Economic and Employment Characteristics

Indicators–This concept considers the extent to which a

local population depends on natural resources. Current

levels of employment in each economic sector identify the

number of people in forestry, farming, or tourism

occupations; and workforce composition in terms of women,

youth, or ethnic groups is informative in describing local

employment. A social assessment should address how

management of local ecosystems affects a region’s economy.

Specific indicators include:

1. Employment levels

2. Occupational diversity

3. Distribution of employment by sector

4. Labor force participation by groups

5. Household income

6. Poverty

7. Wealth

8. Public assistance and welfare

9. Economic and employment characteristics by ethnicity

Methods of collecting data—Information is available from

the decennial U.S. Census, which includes data about population (every 10 years), housing (every 10 years), agriculture

(every 5 years), and business and industry (every 5 years).

Dimension III—Community Resources

Community resources are the services, facilities, and access

to opportunities available to a local population. Analyzing

this dimension will consider access by the population as a

whole, as well as by specific groups. These resources, as

well as spatial relationship and dependence on the

ecosystem, serve as a useful concept when conducting a

social assessment.

Facilities and Services

Indicators—Demand for facilities and services is not only

proportional to changes in a population, but also to changes

in resource suppliers, economic activity, and income.

Overall, the cost, quality, and availability of public and

private services are connected to a community’s sense of

being (Branch and others 1984). Factors that describe this

component include:

1. Current levels of public facilities and service

2. Current levels of private facilities and service

Methods of collecting data–The most common sources of

information are the service providers. Such agencies or

private organizations can provide data on current supply and

demand, as well as the impacts wrought by those market

forces. Public attitudes and expectations regarding service

levels are also valuable measures of community satisfaction.

Leaders and the citizens they serve are often polled by

telephone survey, mail questionnaire, and personal or group

interviews.

Spatial Relationships and Ecosystem Dependency

Indicators—Generally spatial relationships and dependency

refer to human demands for and uses of natural resources.

People’s dependence on, demand for, and use of ecological

resources vary considerably. Land use and settlement

patterns can be traced along a continuum from undeveloped

to developed (Manley and others 1995). Evidence from

recent assessments; e.g., in the Pacific Northwest and

Southern Appalachians, demonstrates how communities

heavily dependent on traditional extractive uses of forests

have experienced or will experience significant changes in

the distribution of economic and noneconomic activities in

the near term. Examination of the type and extent of such

evidence can provide the forest planner or manager with

important information for managing sustainable ecosystems,

identifying and promoting alternative economic strategies,

employment retraining, and community education. In this

dimension, the economic health of a region—in terms of

local, national, and international demand for forest, water,

wildlife, energy, and mineral resources—is an important

factor of long-term sustainability. Indicators of spatial

relationships and ecosystem dependency include:

1. Ecosystem classifications

2. Water resources (existence of and demand for)

3. Energy and mineral resources (existence of and

demand for)

4. Wildlife resources (existence of and demand for)

5. Recreation resources (existence of and demand for)

6. Public land classifications

7. Private land classifications

8. Resource uses

9. Population density

10. In- and out-migration

11. Settlement patterns

12. Land tenure
29

Methods of data collection—Secondary sources, such as

social and economic data already collected in previous social

assessments or other data-collection exercises, provide

information relevant to spatial relationships and economic

dependence on natural resources. A significant amount of

economic data about demand for various commodity and

recreation resources is appropriate in a social assessment.

The land manager or planner would be well advised to

consult a social scientist trained in economic analyses.

Dimension IV—Social Organization Structures

and Processes

This dimension describes social interaction within a

community. Such interactions evolve over time and usually

are unique to each community. To understand a community

and its relevance to ecosystem management planning and

practices, the planner and manager must consider its social

structures and processes. These include economic

organization, government structure, social diversity, external

linkages, distribution of resources and power, and

community resilience.

Economic Organization

Indicators—Job creation significantly affects the economic

health of a community and the purchasing power of its

citizens. In turn, economics determine the number and types

of services provided. Diversity of opportunity is important in

maintaining a community’s economic health. In small

communities that depend on a single industry, economic

growth often is stagnant, and prospects for sustainability are

few. This is especially true of rural communities that are

within commuting distance of relatively aggressive regional

population centers. A local area’s ability to compete with the

larger, more diverse regional center will depend on the

availability of financial and service-related resources, as

well as the community’s ability to make economic linkages

by exporting goods. Factors to consider when examining the

economic diversity and complexity of a region include:

1. Export dependency

2. Small businesses

3. Shopping patterns

4. House values

5. Land values

6. Retail sales

Methods of Data Collection—The U.S. Bureau of the

Census measures the diversity of industry and commerce;

and it is possible to tap important databases listed in the

classified section of telephone directories, as well as

databases maintained by chambers of commerce. Certainly,

interviews with community and business leaders will provide

insight into the economic diversity of a region.

Governmental Structure

Indicators—Changes in population size and diversity, as

well as the region’s economic structure, influence the nature

of local government. In many small communities, officials

who serve without pay and whose main employment is

outside of government do administrative tasks. An increase

in the complexity of local government and the tasks and

responsibilities such officials carry out will often lead to a

need for paid officials and the hiring of professional staff.

Among the tasks that accompany this trend are transactions

that involve corporations, State and Federal agencies, and

interstate or international commerce organizations.

Responding to the requests and dealing with a spectrum of

regulations may necessitate establishment of a formal and

structured government. Such a process can be difficult and

may not reflect the wishes of those who would be governed.

Factors relevant to diversification of governance are useful

in a social assessment. Of particular interest are the roles and

responsibility of the current local government, including:

1. Local government positions

2. Planning capabilities

3. Connections with outside agencies

4. Relationships between local government jurisdictions

Methods of collection–Information about local government

is available through personal interviews with local officials

and residents, or in government employee rosters and

newspaper reportage.

Social Diversity

Indicators—Another common outcome of increases in

population and economic diversity is change in social

complexity. Increased diversity in ethnicity, culture, religion,

and other demographics is one certain outcome. Social

complexities actually may change accepted norms of

behavior within a population. Long-time residents,

particularly in rural areas, often will express a sense of loss

of community and shared values. For example, an increase

in natural resource-based tourism will increase the number

of visitors to an area but also may bring transient

populations, especially in areas where tourism opportunities

are seasonal. Changes may result from the decline of

resource-based industries. An area then might experience

out-migration of even long-term residents. Important factors

when assessing social diversity and complexity include:

1. Gender distribution

2. Ethnic and religious/cultural diversity

3. Residential stability

4. Voluntary organizations and membership

5. Factions and special interests

6. Values and beliefs related to natural resources

7. Attitudes toward natural resource issues
30

8. Transient populations

9. Civil rights

Methods of data collection—Information about community

population, age, gender, and education is available from the

decennial U.S. Census. Law enforcement officials and

school personnel often are sources of information about

changes in demographics, including the growth of transient

populations. Chambers of commerce often keep data on

voluntary organizations like churches and service or social

organizations. Telephone directories will list such

organizations. Attitudes toward transient populations and

civil rights may be available through more systematic

quantitative and qualitative telephone surveys, mail-back

questionnaires, or individual and group interviews.

Outside Linkages

Indicators—Whether decisions about community

investment, resource distribution, and new projects are made

by people within the community or by others is useful

information when preparing a social assessment. The extent

to which such decisions are linked to outside interests and

how those decisions influence community autonomy will say

a lot about the social and natural resource management

environment.

Linkages may bring both positive and negative effects

(Branch and others 1984). Ties to State, regional, national,

and international groups can enhance a community’s ability

to get financial and informational assistance in the form of

government grants, loans, and political support. For

example, in the Western States, communities or regions

often are strongly affected by management of Federal lands.

Strong links of the community to appropriate agencies and

political power bases can help forestall potential problems.

As the population of a rural community or region grows,

there usually follows a demand for development. The

community leaders’ ability to establish effective links to

outside organizations enhances their capacity to draw in

outside resources. However, too many links may bring

overdevelopment and limit the local residents’ ability to

make decisions regarding their governance and livelihood.

Factors important to assessing the nature of outside linkages

include:

1. Local ties to the State and Federal Governments

2. Previous Federal/State grants and other programs

3. Nature of regional, national, or international businesses/

agencies in the area

4. Proportion of local residents who are relative newcomers

to the area

Methods of data collection—Because outside linkages can

be formal or informal, positive or negative, assessing and

interpreting their beneficence can be difficult. The type and

number of businesses, agencies, and organizations

representing outside interests are available in the classified

section of most telephone directories. Information about

individual and group ties to outside agencies and interests

may be available through personal interviews with

community leaders. Local government officials may have

experience with gathering financial and informational

assistance from outside agencies.

Distribution of Resources and Power

Indicators—Resources and power usually are distributed

among various stakeholders. For the purposes of identifying

such individuals, agencies, and organizations, the term

stakeholder means any individual or group whose

environment, economy, or social organization is connected

to ecosystem management processes or outcomes, and those

who could be affected by ecosystem management decisions

(Branch and others 1984). It is important to identify all

stakeholders. Some individuals or groups may be unprepared

to speak for their specific interest, and some may be unaware

that they have a stake. Nonetheless, the manager or planner

must ensure equitable treatment of all. Economic equity,

especially in employment opportunities and environmental

justice, are important considerations. In some areas, unique

cultural groups may be affected by environmental

development, or even hazards, to a greater degree than

others. Such environmental injustice not only is unfair; it

also may adversely affect the very fabric of life within an

entire community. A social assessment that discovers such

social inequities must present evidence of environmental

injustice in as unbiased a manner as possible. Other factors,

including the size and structure of local government, the

presence of private organizations and stakeholder groups,

and the community’s behavioral norms, can also provide

significant clues about how resources are distributed and

who influences their distribution. Factors useful in assessing

resource distribution and power include:

1. Equity

2. Environmental justice

3. Size and structure of local government

4. Presence of stakeholder groups

5. Norms

Methods of Data Collection—Data about economic,

employment, and housing equity are available in U.S.

Census Bureau statistics. Such data consider income,

occupation, and housing characteristics for the whole

population and for major ethnic groups. Similar information

is available in other public files. Driving through a

geographic area can provide insights about resource

distribution; but, one must keep in mind potential problems

with such subjective assessment. Personal interviews with

service providers can help identify the extent to which

various groups use resources. Planning and zoning laws are
31

available at government offices. Identification of formal

stakeholder groups should be relatively easy because their

ties are directly with the natural resource base. Identification

of informal stakeholder groups, whose ties to the natural

resource are more personal and less obvious, may be more

difficult. Interviews with key personnel in the community,

reviews of local newspapers, and intuition may be the most

helpful ways to identify persons who are connected

informally to natural resource management. Focus groups

with persons of color, or personal interviews with the

potentially disenfranchised can be particularly useful in

examining perceived inequity.

Community Resilience

Indicators—Resilience is the ability to adapt to change.

Termed coordination and cooperation by Branch and others

(1984), community resilience is a population’s ability to

coordinate efforts and resources in a way that establishes

cooperation among individuals, stakeholders, and

government officials. It is a particularly important

component of social assessment because it can be used to

measure the possible special effects of proposed specific

management actions. A community’s ability to coordinate its

efforts and resources depends on its social, economic, and

governmental complexity; the character of its community

leaders; the extent of its outside linkages; and characteristics

of the issue(s) at hand. Factors to consider when assessing

community resilience include:

1. Coordination in recently initiated projects

2. Existing coordinative mechanisms

3. Persistent conflicts or issues

Methods of data collection—Information about a

community’s coordinative mechanisms and cooperative

processes can come from personal and group interviews with

citizens and their leaders. Those individuals who are active

in community affairs and decision making at various levels

are important sources of such information. Previous

community response to projects will help identify general

patterns. It is especially important to ensure that information

is gathered from a broad cross-section of people.

Dimension V—Public Perceptions and WellBeing

An important part of social assessment is the examination of

public attitudes towards the issues and the public’s

connection to the affected resources. In addition, concepts

related to general perceptions of the community and its

quality of life are important components of a community’s

sense of well being. Important concepts in this dimension

include perceptions of natural resources, connection to

natural resources, and perception of well being.

Perceptions of Natural Resources

Indicators—The ways community residents perceive their

relationship to the natural world is an important aspect of the

social environment. The manager or planner can measure

perceptions of management issues and agency credibility.

Measurements will illustrate attitudes toward specific issues,

support for policies, and actual behavior. Information about

perceptions towards ecosystem management issues should

come from individuals or groups other than opinion leaders

or important stakeholder groups. Efforts should be made to

hear from all affected publics. The forest planner or manager

must decide how to weigh the perceptions of different

groups or influential individuals, and to consider the

positions not only of individuals but also of organizations

supported by stakeholder groups. Citizen groups often will

have well-formed opinions on ecosystem management

issues. Whether they are formally organized or not, a group’s

opinions may be highly influential within a community.

General perceptions about ecosystem management issues

can be inferred from measures of attitudes and the reasons

for those attitudes (related to both cognitive beliefs and

emotions) and issue-related behaviors, as well as personally

held values relevant to natural resources. These factors

include:

1. Values and beliefs related to natural resources

2. Attitudes towards natural resource issues

3. Values and beliefs related to natural resources supported

by stakeholder groups

4. Attitudes towards natural resource issues supported by

stakeholder groups

Methods of data collection—A variety of methods may be

used to collect information about attitudes; but primary data

collection methods are the most prominent. When attitudes

representative of a larger population are important to the

assessment, quantitative techniques such as telephone

surveys and mail-back questionnaires are effective. These

tools are especially useful when significant policy decisions

may be at stake and public opinion is particularly important,

as well as when issues of interest are particularly contentious

or controversial. In those instances, the researcher will want

to hear from less-vocal segments of the population.

Qualitative methods, although often sacrificing the

representative nature of attitudes, allow the researcher to

obtain rich, in-depth information about issues. Individual

interviews or focus groups will provide a variety of

information about the individual’s or stakeholder’s values

and opinions. When possible, the researcher should use

multiple sources of attitudinal data to ensure the reliability

and validity of the information.

Connection to Natural Resources

Indicators—A community’s connection to natural resources

is based on public perceptions, attitudes, and values. It
32

reflects the individual’s feelings about the natural world, as

well as the community’s. Those feelings will be derived from

participation in outdoor activities, pursuit of income, and

resource uses that support community and family traditions.

Factors to consider in assessing personal connections to

natural resources include:

1. Importance to recreation and tourism

2. Importance to livelihood

3. Importance to customs and traditions

4. Sense of place

Methods of data collection—Quantitative and qualitative

data collection methods both can be used to collect

information about an individual’s connection to the

resources. Telephone surveys and mail-back questionnaires

will provide general, representative information. More indepth information will require open-ended personal or group

interviews.

Perception of Well-Being

Indicators—Analyzing the sense of well-being in

communities is an important part of the social assessment;

and the social scientist must look at both behavioral and

situational conditions. Quality-of-life perceptions are

reflected in crime and divorce rates, unemployment, and

similar data. The perceived quality of and access to

community facilities and services also are important. Finally,

an assessment of community satisfaction should be obtained

by examining aspects of the community that are most

important in contributing to such satisfaction; e.g.,

satisfaction with community services, interrelationships

among residents of the communities, satisfaction with

schools. Factors to consider in assessing perceptions of

community well being include:

1. Behavioral and situational conditions

2. Perception of access to facilities, services, and resources

3. Community satisfaction

Methods of data collection—Behavioral and situational

conditions can be assessed by a variety of methods. Crime

rates are available in community, county, and State records.

A first step in assessing this component is to conduct

personal interviews with local law enforcement officials.

Information about divorces and suicide are available from

U.S. Vital Statistics and from similar compilations of data at

the State level. Information about public assistance and

welfare is available at local service agencies and the State’s

Department of Social Services. Perceptions of access to

facilities, services, and resources (see Dimension III), as

well as assessments of community satisfaction; i.e.,

individual perceptions of well being within the community,

are attitudinal components. These may be assessed using a

variety of quantitative and qualitative data collection

techniques, including telephone surveys, mail-back

questionnaires, and personal interviews with citizens and

community leaders.
33

Part II

Data Collection
34
35

Chapter 4

Collection and Use of Secondary Documentary and Historical Data

Prior to developing and administering studies to collect

primary data, the researcher should determine whether

additional information collection is necessary. Data that

already have been collected are called secondary. Secondary

data can be used to complement and validate primary data

and to cover topics about which it is not possible to collect

primary data. Secondary data also may reduce or eliminate

the need to collect primary data. This chapter discusses the

nature of three types of secondary data: (1) statistical and

nonstatistical documentary data, (2) historical data, and (3)

literature from previous research. These types of data may

not be mutually exclusive. For example, statistical and

nonstatistical documentary data may be important

components of an historical analysis. Also, use of either

primary or secondary data will require literature search.

The Identification and Collection of Secondary

Documentary Data

Secondary documentary data may have been collected for a

purpose other than a social assessment; they may, however,

provide information that is highly relevant. Secondary

documentary data can be used descriptively and analytically

(Branch and others 1984). They may describe characteristics

of the social environment in terms of historical trends and

current conditions. For example, census data can identify

specific characteristics of a community and the stability or

variability of those over time (trends). Secondary

documentary data also can be used to determine what

information is likely to be important, what types of social

impacts are likely to occur, and what meanings such impacts

might have on citizens and the community.

Several sources of secondary documentary data will help the

social scientist to discern the social make-up of a community,

as well as its propensity for change. Such data sources will

help describe a community’s historical context, its economic

and demographic characteristics, its institutional structure,

and the level of infrastructure and services that support it.

Although secondary data sources do not provide direct

information about community attitudes and values, the social

scientist can make inferences through careful analysis.

Sources of Secondary Documentary Data

The range of potential secondary sources of social

assessment data is very broad and will differ from site to

site. Secondary documentary data are either statistical or

nonstatistical. Statistical data may come from documents

that provide numerical descriptive information about the

region, such as statistical reference books and voting

records—documents that lend themselves to quantitative

analysis. On the other hand, nonstatistical secondary data are

narrative and therefore not generally useful in quantitative

analysis. Nonstatistical data are found in autobiographies,

minutes of meetings, legal documents, newspapers, local

histories, maps of the area, telephone directories, and other

sources. Some of the most useful sources of secondary

documentary data are described below.

The U.S. Census

The United States has the most comprehensive recent and

historical data about its population in the world. Available in

the census and other secondary data sources are

demographics, employment, occupation, income, leisure,

health, migration, and many of other population and

individual characteristics. Information about income

distribution, employment by sector, education, and housing

type, and other social factors is available at the regional,

State, and county levels. Below is a description of some

statistical source books now available. These sources were

adapted from Cordell and others (1999) and Miller (1991).

For a more detailed discussion of the use of U.S. Census

information in research, see R.E. Barrett’s (1994) Using the

1990 U.S. Census for Research, published by Sage

Publications in Thousand Oaks, CA.

U.S. Bureau of the Census; Statistical Abstract of the United

States—Decennial data for the U.S. are arranged in over 30

sections that include information about population; vital

statistics, health and nutrition; immigration and

naturalization; education; law enforcement; area, geography,

and climate; public lands, parks, recreation, and travel; labor

force, employment, and earnings; social insurance and

welfare services; income, expenditures, and wealth;

communications and power; forest and forest products;

fisheries, mining, and mineral products; construction and

housing, and a variety of other categories. In addition, an

annual statistical abstract is available on CD-ROM. It is a

valuable statistical reference and guide to more than 250

government and private statistical publications.

In the 1980 census, the U.S. Census Bureau began

increasing the number of geographical areas covered.

Governmental units:

1. The United States, Puerto Rico, and outlying areas under

U.S. sovereignty or jurisdiction

2. States, counties, and county equivalents
36

3. Incorporated places such as cities and villages

4. Minor civil divisions (MCD) of counties such as

townships

5. Congressional districts and voting districts

6. American Indian reservations, associated trust lands, and

Alaska Native Regional Corporations

Statistical units:

1. Four U.S. census regions and nine census divisions, all

of which are groupings of States

2. Metropolitan areas census county divisions (where

MCD boundaries are not satisfactory)

3. Census designated places

4. Urbanized areas

5. Alaska Native village statistical areas

6. Tribal designated and jurisdictional statistical areas

7. Census tracts (statistical subdivisions of metropolitan

counties having an average population of about 4,000)

8. Block numbering areas (BNA; statistical subdivisions

of counties without census tracts having an average

population of about 4,000)

9. Block groups (groupings of census blocks within

census tracts and BNAs having an average population

of about 800)

10. Blocks (the smallest census geographic area normally

bounded by streets or other physical features having an

average population of fewer than 100)

U.S. Census of Population by States—Contains decennial

information about urban populations = 2,500. Includes

population size by gender, major occupation groups by

gender, family income, industry groups, ethnicity and racial

statistics, age of population, formal education completed,

and marital status.

U.S. Bureau of the Census; Historical Abstracts of the

United States: Colonial Times to 1970—This publication

provides historical information about data found in the U.S.

Bureau of the Census statistical abstracts.

The City and County Data Book—Lists information about

employment, income, elections, banking and finance,

business enterprises, and education for each county in the

United States and cities = 25,000. Published by the Bureau

of the Census, it is available on CD-ROM.

Other Federal Publications

In addition to census data, various Federal agencies and

bureaus provide useful information. The Department of

Housing and Urban Development, the Department of the

Interior, the Department of Education, the Environmental

Protection Agency, the Bureau of Labor, and the Department

of Energy all provide information that may be useful in

social assessment. Use of many of these information sources

will require active search processes, especially those not

published by the U.S. Government Printing Office. The best

approach is to contact any agency office and ask what

information they provide.

State Publications

State governments maintain a significant amount of

information about schools, taxes, and social services that are

important in a social assessment. Generally available at the

county level, some information is available in State offices.

A State’s annual vital statistics report, which provides

information on marriages, divorces, county population,

infant mortality, among other things, is a useful information

source. Counties often will provide crime statistics; and FBI

Uniform Crime Reports provide both State and national

information. The States often will release employment and

other economic data at various geographic scales.

Other Sources of Secondary Documentary Data

The Municipal Yearbook—This annual publication serves as

a reference to municipal governments. It provides facts

about the role of city governments in education, housing,

welfare, and health, among other things.

U.S.A. Counties—Available on CD-ROM, data in 33 major

socioeconomic categories are available for each county in

the U.S. This electronic format allows the user to summarize

in tabular form, export to spreadsheets, or map using

LandVIEW software.

Regional Economic Information System—Available on CDROM, this publication presents estimates of personal and per

capita income for metropolitan areas and counties. A twopage summary of economic information for each State,

metropolitan area, and county is updated in mid-May by the

Bureau of Economic Analysis and may be obtained by

contacting the Department of Commerce, Bureau of

Economic Analysis.

Where to Find Government Information

Most college and university libraries have census reports and

other up-to-date statistical information. In addition, many

public libraries carry the principal statistical reports relevant

to their communities. City planning offices, city government

libraries, mayor’s offices, chambers of commerce, and other

private and public agencies also often have relevant census

records and other reports. State and Federal offices have

information about where to find additional data. Order forms

for census materials may be obtained by writing to the

Publications Services Division, Social and Economic

Statistics Administration, Washington, DC 20233. A

description of products available from the U.S. Census
37

Bureau can be found in the Census Catalogue & Guide, which

is published annually by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

That document provides a comprehensive reference for

anyone using census data. Below are the regional offices of

the U.S. Census Bureau, as well as telephone numbers and

States covered (Salant and Dillman 1994).

Regional office and

telephone number Region covered

Boston, MA Maine, New Hampshire,

(617/565-7200) Vermont, New York (selected

counties), Massachusetts,

Connecticut, Rhode Island

New York, NY New York City, Nassau,

(212/264-4730) Orange, Rockland, Suffolk, and

Westchester counties, Puerto

Rico

Philadelphia, PA Pennsylvania, New Jersey,

(215/597-8313) Delaware, Maryland

Charlotte, NC District of Columbia, Virginia,

(704/371-6144) North Carolina, South Carolina,

Kentucky, Tennessee

Atlanta, GA Georgia, Alabama, Florida

(404/730-3833)

Kansas City, KS Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas,

(913/236-3728) Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota

Detroit, MI Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia

(313/226-7742)

Chicago, IL Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin

(312/353-0980)

Denver, CO North Dakota, South Dakota,

(303/969-7550 Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah,

Arizona, Colorado, New

Mexico

Los Angeles, CA California

(818/904-6393)

Seattle, WA Washington, Montana, Idaho,

(206/728-5314) Oregon, Nevada, Hawaii,

Alaska

Other Secondary Sources

In addition to statistical source books, a variety of other

relevant secondary data sources are available.

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment

(NSRE)—This is the most recent, up-to-date collection of

data on recreation participation, attitudes toward wildlife

and wilderness, preferences for selected management

options, recreationist demographics, and profiles of outdoor

recreational trips. For copies, contact the USDA Forest

Service, Recreation, Wilderness, and Urban/Wildland

Research, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA, 30602-2044, or go

to the Web site http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/trends.

National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation (NSFHWAR)—This publication provides

records of an ongoing Federal study about trends in fish- and

wildlife-based recreation. The last release was in 1996, and

it is updated every 5 years. It provides information about

participation, demographics, and a wide range of other

wildlife-oriented questions. Survey data are available on

CD-ROM from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

1995-96 National Private Land Ownership Survey—

Available from Forest Service offices in Athens, GA, or on

the Web site http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/trends, this publication

includes information from a survey of rural private

landowners. Surveyors asked participants about their reasons

for owning land, management practices they use,

recreational access their property provides, their posting and

leasing practices, and their attitudes about environmental

issues. They also recorded owner demographics. The USDA

Forest Service has developed descriptions of private

ownership for several regions of the country.

Previous primary data collection efforts—Primary data

collection within a region and about a population of interest

already has been conducted; and such data will preclude the

need for additional surveys. Sometimes surveys from

another geographic region can shed light on issues and

concerns that the researcher will need to address when

assessing his or her own region.

Records of Public Meetings, Scoping Sessions, Public

Comments, and Surface-Owner Consultations, Other

Bureau or Agency Plans or Data Sets on the Community

or Region

Comprehensive county plans—Many counties have comprehensive plans that provide valuable background information

about the area of interest, the institutional structure, and

forecasts for future development. These plans usually are

available in the local library or area planning board.

Environmental impact statements and socioeconomic

studies—State or Federal agencies or private companies may

have prepared environmental impact statements or other

socioeconomic studies within the geographic region that is

to be assessed. Such documentation may provide important

background information about an area’s social environment.

Local chambers of commerce also may have commissioned

socioeconomic studies. The National Forest System

routinely collects and analyzes data directly related to

recreational use within natural areas, which describe the

demographics, preferences, attitudes, values, and economic

impacts of recreation visits.
38

Local histories—Local authors often will have published

histories of a local area. While such publications may appear

rich with information about the area, the researcher must

carefully consider potential author biases.

Maps—A researcher should review accurate maps of towns

and counties in the area. Sources may include local highway

departments as well as atlases produced commercially.

Lists of public officials—Lists of locally elected and

appointed officials, agency directors, and their primary

duties provide important information about an area’s

institutional structure. State agencies, chambers of

commerce, or city and county administrators usually will be

helpful when compiling such a list.

Local newspapers—In their coverage of most major,

controversial issues, current editions of local newspapers can

help identify stakeholder groups, as well as related conflicts

among various groups and individuals, and how the

community deals with these issues. Past issues of

newspapers can provide corroborating information about

issues and events described in local histories.

Local telephone directories—A local calling radius often

defines the extent of a community. A directory’s divisions,

by community, often will identify the major settlement and

all of its satellite communities, which may not be listed in

other sources. It also will provide information about

businesses and services, especially in small towns.

Business credit ratings—Business credit ratings can provide

information about community power relations. For example,

Dun and Bradstreet reference books describe local

economies, using information about business types in the

region, the date of their establishment, tenure of their current

management, estimated financial strength, and business

credit rating. Such information is helpful in determining

predominant businesses types, whether they are locally

owned, and their relative stability.

Conducting an Historical Analysis

An historical analysis of a community or region constitutes

one type of secondary data. Such a history may be useful in

framing the context in which residents will experience or

react to ecosystem management policies and practices. The

analysis may broaden our understanding of the community

structure and social attitudes that have evolved over time,

relative to a given ecosystem management issue.

The Use of Historical Documents

Historical information usually includes secondary data that

describe human uses of natural resources in a geographic

region. Generally, historical analysis will explore community

origins, past and present responses to natural resource

planning issues, and the distinctive community

characteristics that directly or indirectly affect local

resources.

Steps in an Historical Analysis

Because an array of historical documents may be available,

it is appropriate to take several steps in pursuing historical

analysis:

1. Assess the availability of documents and select those

most relevant

2. Select sources, and read and analyze them closely

3. Identify data sources that may be controversial

4. Select documents that provide information useful in

social assessment

Step 1. Assess the availability of historical documents and

select those most relevant. Tasks might include:

1. List potential sources of useful documents

2. Identify readily available sources and identify specific

documents

3. Select sample documents from each source

4. Study documents for useful information

5. Develop a systematic process for analyzing the contents

of each record

6. Determine the data’s usefulness in social environment

7. Evaluate whether future analysis of each data source will

be necessary and worth additional time and effort

Step 2. Select sources and read and analyze them closely.

The researcher should consider what the documents reveal

about population groups, lifestyles, and leadership roles in

the area of study; the type of and interrelationships among

current social institutions; the interdependence of

socioeconomic and interest groups; and how the community

or individual citizens cope with problems and address issues.

Step 3. Identify data sources that may be controversial. What

is the best source of important information? What types of

statistical source books would have such information?

Would newspapers or interviews with longtime local

residents provide better historical information than other

sources?

Step 4. Select documents that provide information useful in

social assessment. The researcher must now identify or

choose a sample of items appropriate for further analysis.

Many historical documents might be incomplete, and the

researcher must take several factors into account when

selecting a historical document for review:

1. The availability of other comparable sources. Having

more than one source of the same information increases

its reliability
39

2. The records completeness

3. Cost and other practical considerations

Conducting a Literature Search from Previous

Research

It is unlikely that the social scientist will be addressing a

problem so unique that previous research has not been done.

Literature-search resources are extensive. They fall into four

basic categories (Miller 1991): (1) indices to periodical

literature, (2) computer-assisted reference services, (3)

microfilm-microfiche media, and (4) specialized indices.

Each is available in most university libraries. For a more

detailed discussion of these resources, see Miller (1991).

Indices to Periodical Literature

A variety of indices to social science periodicals are

available:

Social Sciences Index—This is a cumulative index to

English-language periodicals. It contains the latest

information available in anthropology, area studies,

economics, environmental sciences, geography, law and

criminology, medical sciences, political sciences,

psychology, public administration, sociology, and other

related subjects. It is published quarterly and contains author

and subject entries. For a list of periodicals indexed there,

see Miller (1991).

Sociological Abstracts—This author and subject index

briefly describes every research article published in 24

areas: methodology and research, sociology, social

psychology, group interactions, culture and social structure,

organization management, social change and economic

development, mass phenomena, political interactions, social

differentiation, rural sociology and agricultural economics,

urban structures and ecology, sociology of the arts,

sociology of education, sociology of religion, social control,

sociology of science, demography and human biology, the

family and socialization, sociology of health and medicine,

social problems and social welfare, sociology of knowledge,

community development, and planning, forecasting, and

speculation. In addition, abstracts of papers presented at

annual meetings of the American Sociological Association

are included each year as a supplement. This information is

available on CD-ROM as Sociofile.

Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)—This is a calendaryear index that covers items in more than one thousand

social science journals from around the world. The SSCI

provides specific information about where and by whom a

paper has been cited in the literature. It is also a helpful aid

in following particular articles and identifying researchers

working on special problems.

Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences—This is a

weekly listing of the contents of selected journals and some

books in the social and behavioral sciences. It includes an

index of authors and title key words.

Psychological Abstracts—Similar to Sociological Abstracts,

this journal contains subject and author indices of general

psychology, psychometrics, experimental psychology,

physiological psychology and intervention, communication

systems, developmental psychology, social processes and

issues, experimental psychology, and personality, among

others.

Resources in Education—This is a monthly abstract journal

published by the Educational Resources Information Center

(ERIC) of the National Institute of Education (NIE).

Catalogued by author, subject, and responsible institution, it

provides the educational community with research reports

and other nonjournal literature.

Computer Assisted Reference Services

Hundreds of university libraries in the U.S. provide online

search access to bibliographic citations. These are useful in

accessing many of the indices to periodical literature

discussed previously.

Microfilm-Microfiche Media

Such media include books, newspapers, magazines,

scientific journals, and doctoral dissertations on microfilm.

In addition, indices such as Sociological Abstracts are

available on microfiche.

Specialized Indices

Published indices provide descriptions of demographics of

interest across a variety of social dimensions. Such indices

include: (a) Population Index, which provides a bibliography

of demographic research; (b) Population Bibliography, the

world’s largest single computer data base for monographs,

journals, technical reports, etc., maintained at the University

of North Carolina Population Center; (c) International

Population Census Bibliography: Revision and Update,

which contains citations of reports from population censuses

from 1945 to 1977; (d) American Abstracts, which is a

comprehensive index of statistical publications from more

than 400 central or regional issuing agencies of the U.S.

Government; and (e) Statistical Reference Index, offering

information on State government publications, statistical

studies by universities, independent research organizations,

and business organizations.
40

Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary

Data

Like every source of data used by researchers doing social

assessments, secondary data have both advantages and

disadvantages:

Advantages Disadvantages

Data collection takes less It may be hard to identify

time, money, personnel, and biases in historical records.

travel than primary data

collection, especially when It is hard to determine the

data are gathered reliability and validity of

continuously. some secondary data.

Use of most documentation Interpretation of secondary

does not require author data, especially historical

permission. data, is often subjective, and

will differ from reviewer

It increases the researcher’s to reviewer.

familiarity with the study

area’s social climate. Secondary data records may

be incomplete or out-of-date.

It provides baseline data,

which give the researcher an

ability to analyze trends.

It may offer unique and

socially colorful information

that field research

methodologies cannot.

The diversity of secondary data sources and the likelihood

that study results are available give the reviewer an

opportunity to compile, review, prepare a bibliography, and

look for additional reports.

A World Wide Web Tool for Collecting

Secondary Information

We have developed a World Wide Web site to aid the forest

planner in collecting some important social assessment data.

The site also provides information about the development

and use of an HDF for conducting social assessments. It

allows retrieval of secondary social information through

direct and guided access to the Social, Economic,

Environmental, Leisure, and Attitudes (SEELA) data set

(Betz 1997). SEELA is a nationwide collection of social

information at the county level, providing both direct and

guided access. Direct access allows immediate, online

retrieval of any variable in the SEELA data set by economic,

social, and demographic categories. Guided access is

consistent with the HDF matrices presented in chapter 3. It

provides immediate online retrieval of variables in the

SEELA data set framed within and driven by the eight social

assessment and forest planning questions. Guided access is

useful to those unfamiliar with many of the social

dimensions, indicators, and variables used in the site.
41

Chapter 5

Developing and Administering Survey Research

This chapter describes methods of data collection using

survey methodologies. Three are discussed: selfadministered questionnaires, telephone surveys, and

personal interviews. Self-administered questionnaires and

telephone surveys primarily are used to collect quantitative

data, although it also may be possible to collect qualitative

data with them. Using personal interviews, it is possible to

collect both. We first examine general factors that influence

the decision on which survey methodology to use. We then

discuss each of the survey methodologies, considering the

advantages and disadvantages of each, and use several

factors to compare the three. We provide a bibliography of

publications about conducting self-administered, telephone,

and personal interview surveys.

Factors Affecting the Survey Method Decision

Decisions about which method to use will depend on a

number of variables that the researcher must consider

(Fowler 1995); e.g., sampling, type of population to be

surveyed, structure of the questions to be asked, content of

questions to be asked, survey organization, pretesting the

survey, desired response rates, cost, facilities available, and

length of time for data collection.

Sampling

How the researcher will draw a sample will depend on the

data that are available; e.g., if one is going to draw a sample

from a list of potential respondents, available information

about the respondents. If the list has no current addresses or

telephone numbers, data collection using a mail-back

questionnaire or a telephone survey would be impossible.

When the sample is based on a set of addresses, mail-back

procedures would appear to be the most logical method,

although personal interviews taken at those addresses may

provide better data. Telephone surveys may be made using

commercially published telephone directories that list

numbers by address rather than surname. If telephone

numbers are not available for all addresses, it may be

feasible to use another method of data collection too. When

using a list with street addresses, it is important to make sure

that apartment unit designations are available in order to

differentiate among residents of a multiunit dwelling. For a

more specific discussion of sampling techniques, see chapter

8. Also, there are now private companies that will provide

random and nonrandom samples of names, addresses, and

telephone numbers.

Type of Population

Two characteristics of a population will influence the choice

of data collection methods; the ability and the motivation to

complete a survey. When deciding which data collection

methods to use, it is important to consider abilities such as

the respondents’ reading and writing skills. Obviously, selfadministered approaches; e.g., mail-back and household

surveys, place a greater burden on respondents who may be

either relatively uneducated or, although they can speak

English, have low reading and writing skills. People who do

not see well probably would find a personal interview easier

than a self-administered survey.

Motivation to complete a survey is generally highest among

those who have an interest in the subject of study. For them,

the mail-back procedure is well suited. On the other hand,

low ability or low motivation suggests that a personal

interview technique would more effectively draw responses

from the interviewee.

Question Structure

The structure of questions asked will influence and be

influenced by the data-collection method used. The structure

may be open-ended, close-ended or fixed item, or partially

close-ended.

Open-Ended Questions

Open-ended questions invite respondents to express

themselves freely and in their own words. Generally, such

questions are used when the researcher expects a broad

range of responses to a question; they allow the researcher to

explore a broad base of information about an issue. They

also encourage respondents to explain their positions, giving

the researcher a more in-depth view of public opinion.

However, open-ended questions ask the respondent to

articulate his or her position, and communication skills vary

widely among the individuals surveyed. In addition, the

broad range of responses to open-ended questions makes

systematic analysis difficult.

Close-Ended Questions

Close-ended, or fixed-item questions are multiple-choice and

may be of two types: ordered or unordered. Ordered choices

are increasing or decreasing steps or grades of a concept;

and the response given will represent position along a

continuum. Examples include Likert (1967) scales, semantic
42

differential scales, ranking scales, and rating or selfassessment scales. Unordered choices typically are

checklists requiring categorical response(s).

Partially Close-Ended Questions

Partially close-ended questions provide fixed-responses

choices but invite respondents to answer for themselves or

provide additional information. Among the choices listed

with this type of question will be one allowing the

respondent to elaborate on his or her response to a question

or questions.

Question Structure and Data Collection Method

Self-administered questionnaires most commonly use the

close-ended question structure. Because there is no

interviewer present to probe the respondent who provides

incomplete answers, such questionnaires may not produce

data that are highly useful. However, open-ended questions

may be used on a self-administered questionnaire to

supplement responses to a variety of close-ended

questions.

Although close-ended questions may be used in telephone

or personal interviews, they are best used in selfadministered surveys. For example, when a large number of

questions are posed similarly or offer the same response

choices, it is easiest to have the respondent read them. This

is especially true of telephone interviews. In personal

interviews, the researcher can hand interviewees a card with

the response choices listed on them. If visual aids are

necessary, the self-administered or personal interview is

probably best. The connection between question type and

the most appropriate data collection method is largely an

issue of common sense.

Writing Questions

Previous research and researcher intuition are useful when

writing questions. Although wording will depend on the

issue being researched and the information desired, several

points should be considered carefully when building the

questionnaire.

Consideration Explanation

1. Use language the Use special terminology for

respondent will respondents with expertise in

understand. the subject issue(s); common

language for the general

public.

2. Use words with Slang or provincial language

common meanings. may not be understood in

the same way by all people.

3. Avoid long questions. Long questions may be

ambiguous and confusing.

4. Do not assume Respondents may not admit

respondents know or they don’t know something

have opinions about the researcher assumes they

the issue. do.

5. Avoid ambiguous Responses to ambiguous

wording. questions may not be

addressing the right issues.

6. When using a close- Suggesting only some of

ended question structure, the possible responses will

include only those reduce the quality of

questions for which you gathered information.

can list all possible

alternative responses.

7. Avoid biased or leading Biased questions suggest that

questions. only one is appropriate.

8. Phrase questions so Do not include personal or

they are value-neutral. incriminating questions.

9. Avoid the negative Questions in the negative

voice. voice may be confusing.

10. Frame questions about Combined questions are

a single idea. ambiguous.

11. Ask simple questions. Questions requiring extended

effort are often not answered.

12. Make sure answer Similar questions yield

choices are separate ambiguous data.

and distinct.

Question Content

The effectiveness of methods used to collect data about

sensitive subjects will vary. Fowler (1993) offered the

following generalizations about sensitive issues and data

collection methods:

1. The perception of anonymity probably makes selfadministered surveys at least as good as telephone and

personal interviews.

2. More than other survey methods, telephone interviews

may elicit socially biased responses; i.e., respondents are

likely to give answers they think are socially acceptable.

3. Regardless of data collection method used, personal

contact with the respondent prior to data collection

improves chances of getting his or her reaction to

sensitive issues.

Question content may also make it hard for the respondent to

provide information, particularly when such information is

about behaviors or other complex and long-term human

phenomena. Generally, self-administered questions work

better in this case because they give the respondent time to

contemplate his or her response.
43

Organizing the Survey

Survey organization is important. Often, little attention is

given to the order of questions. To assuage concerns that

respondents might not complete a survey, researchers

traditionally have begun by asking the easiest questions first.

Although that tradition is generally sound, there is more to

consider in ordering questions than ease of response. The

following list provides basic principles of ordering

questions.

Principles for Ordering Questions on a Survey

1. Questions about the respondent’s age, occupation,

education, income, or marital status may extinguish any

interest in completing a questionnaire.

2. Decide whether one or several questions are necessary to

obtain the needed information.

3. Questions should be presented in descending order of

importance to maintain respondent interest in completing

the questionnaire.

4. Questions about the same general subject should be

grouped.

5. Open- or close-ended questions about a subject should

be by question structure.

6. Potentially objectionable questions about a subject

should follow non-objectionable ones.

7. Open-ended questions about a subject, which require the

most thought and writing, should be placed at the end of

a questionnaire.

Pretesting the Survey

Pretesting is one of the most important elements of survey

developing, yet it seldom is done sufficiently. Pretesting

gives the researcher one more opportunity to improve a

questionnaire’s quality. Several questions should be posed

during pretesting: Is each of the questions measuring what it

is intended to measure? Are all the words understood? Do

all respondents interpret questions similarly? Does each

close-ended question have an answer that applies to the

respondent? Does the questionnaire create a positive

impression, one that motivates people to answer it? Are

questions answered correctly? (Are some not answered, and

do some elicit vague or peculiar answers?) Does any aspect

of the questionnaire suggest bias on the part of the

researcher (Dillman 1978)?

A pretest should be designed not only to examine the

questions, but also the entire survey. The latter is necessary

because a respondent’s general impressions will influence

his or her decision to complete the questionnaire. The pretest

should use a form of the survey that is as fully developed as

possible. It should be reviewed by three groups of people.

First, it should be seen by colleagues—individuals who will

understand the study purpose and be able to evaluate it on

that basis. Second, it should be given to those who might use

the data that are being collected. This group also should be

familiar with the issue(s) and capable of evaluating the

questionnaire for the usefulness of the data it will provide.

When these two groups have evaluated the questionnaire and

appropriate changes are made, it should be administered to a

representative sample of the population to be tested, using

the survey method that will be used in actual data collection

(self-administered, telephone, or personal interview). All in

this group should be encouraged to ask questions as they

complete the questionnaire. This portion of the pretest will

help identify areas that might be objectionable or cause

misunderstanding. Once all three groups have examined or

completed the pre-test instrument, the social scientist can

make the appropriate changes to the questionnaire and

prepare to administer it to the target population.

Desired Response Rates

Response rate is among the most important considerations

when choosing a data-collection method. Low response rates

introduce biases in the sample that provides the data. This

section describes who might not respond and why, and

suggests ways of reducing nonresponse rates for telephone

and personal interviews and mail-back questionnaires.

Who are Nonrespondents?

Three categories of people in a sample typically do not

respond to any survey method (Fowler 1993):

1. Those the data collection procedure does not reach

2. Those who are asked to respond but decline

3. Those who are asked to respond but cannot due to

language barriers, difficulty of questions, literacy, and

other reasons.

A social assessment that has low return rates may only be

getting information from one segment of the sample, in

which case the results probably will not be representative of

the population surveyed. Bias will be introduced when

participants include only those with a high interest in the

study’s subject or a higher education. Nonresponse to

telephone and personal interviews will introduce bias by

excluding hard-to-reach or handicapped persons. If

interviews are conducted only between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00

p.m., available respondents may only include domestic

spouses, the unemployed, and retired persons (Fowler 1993).

The handicapped often live in metropolitan areas, where

high-rise or multiple-dwelling residences predominate; and

such individuals may be hard to find or reside in

neighborhoods where interviewers are unwilling to go. Any

or all bias may be reduced by using a telephone interview

(Fowler 1993).
44

Reducing Nonresponse in Mail Surveys

In developing a mail-back questionnaire, the social scientist

tries to contact as many respondents as possible. Generally,

response rates will be low, often under 50 percent. However,

carefully developed questionnaires that are administered by

strict procedures, and which address issues of public

importance, often elicit significantly higher response rates.

Miller (1991) presented basic steps to improve response

rates.

Successive steps for achieving high response rates for mail

questionnaires

1. Prepare the questionnaire as a booklet, through photo

reduction and multilithing.

2. Make the cover page attractive and eye-catching.

3. Use straightforward, unambiguous questions, carefully

ordered and presented in a visually attractive manner.

Questions on the first pages should attract respondents’

interest and increase the likelihood that important

questions of limited interest and appeal will be answered.

4. Prepare a cover letter emphasizing the social usefulness

of the study and the importance of each individual

respondent to the success of the study.

5. Make full use of personalization procedures. Address

respondents by name—that is, do not use Dear Sir or

Dear Madam as a salutation—and sign your name.

6. Send questionnaires via first-class mail.

7. Use postcard follow-up 1 week later to remind

respondents to complete the questionnaire.

8. Prepare letters with replacement questionnaires and send

to nonrespondents after about 3 weeks, possibly

including a reminder postcard in the period between the

questionnaire mailings.

Reducing Nonresponse in Telephone and Personal

Survey Research

Two problems must be solved to increase participation in

telephone and personal interviews. Access to potential

respondents should be increased. The interviewer must

effectively enlist cooperation. In order to decrease

nonresponse due to availability, the researcher should:

1. Make several calls, including in the evening and on

weekends. It is common to make four or five callbacks to

a household.

2. Arrange interviews at the convenience of the respondent.

To enlist the cooperation of respondents once they are

contacted:

1. Send potential respondents a letter, expressing the desire

to interview them.

2. Effectively and accurately present the purpose and the

importance of the interview.

3. Work to ensure that respondents are comfortable with the

interviewer.

4. Make sure the interviewer understands the need for a

high response rate and has been sufficiently trained

(Fowler 1993).

A popular text that more specifically addresses procedures

for increasing response rates and explores other survey

administration issues is “Mail and Telephone Surveys: The

Total Design Method” by Donald A. Dillman (1978).

Costs of Survey Administration

Mail and telephone surveys usually will cost less than

personal interviews, but the professional expertise necessary

to effectively administer a survey is always money well

spent. The researcher may want to hire outside consultants

for survey planning, design, and administration. Other cost

factors include the geographic dispersion of respondents, the

availability of trained staff, and the cost of printing, mailing,

and telephone calls. Self-administered (especially mail) and

telephone surveys are relatively inexpensive.

Available Facilities

The availability of staff and facilities will help determine

which survey method to use. It is difficult and costly to hire

and adequately train an interview staff, and attrition among

interviewers usually will be high.

Length of Data Collection

The data collection timeframe will vary by survey method;

e.g., a mail-back survey will take about 2 to 3 months, a

telephone survey maybe only a few days. It is harder to

estimate the time needed to conduct personal interviews

because staff availability and desired sample size often vary

widely.

Description of Survey Methodologies

The Self-Administered Questionnaire

The self-administered questionnaire includes questions

designed to elicit information or opinions. It is given to

potential respondents who have been selected as

representative of a larger population. Respondents are asked

to complete it on his or her own, and either to mail it back to

the researcher or, if the situation warrants, return it in

person. This is a popular method because it can return a lot

of information quickly and at a relatively small expense.

Generally, it provides quantitative data, although qualitative
45

information also may be obtained. It allows the researcher to

analyze information from a representative sample. Because

the self-administered questionnaire is so commonly used,

social scientists must try to raise public interest in its

content. It is most helpful to make the purpose of the study

clear and relevant to the respondent, consider the time

necessary to complete it, and focus on visual appeal and

readability.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Self-Administered

Survey

The list below presents some of the potential advantages and

disadvantages of using a self-administered survey.

Advantages and disadvantages of using self-administered

surveys

Advantages Disadvantages

• Easier than telephone • Low response rate,

interviews when visual requiring intense followaids can be used to up efforts

clarify questions

• Good reading and writing

• Allows more time for skills are needed by the

considered answers respondent

• More uniformity in • Difficult to elicit thoughtquestions ful answers using openended questions

• Gives respondents a

greater sense of privacy • Respondent’s identity is

and confidentiality not confirmable

• Interviewer encouragement • Interviewer is not availabsent able to answer questions

• Minimal staff and facilities

are necessary

Self-administered surveys may be returned by mail or

retrieved by the interviewer. Some potential advantages and

disadvantages of using the mail-back procedures are:

Advantages and disadvantages of using mail-back

procedures

Advantages Disadvantages

• Mail surveys are • More difficult to enlist

inexpensive cooperation than methods

with personal contact

• Need minimal staff and

facilities • Good mailing addresses

are not assured

continued from previous column

• Opportunity for thoughtful

answers and to consult

records or other family

members

• Provides access to broad

samples and hard-to-reach

individuals

Advantages and disadvantages of using household

drop-off and pick-up

Advantages Disadvantages

• Interviewer can explain • Costs as much as personal

the study and answer interviews

questions

• A field staff is required

• Response rates are higher

than mail-back procedures

• Opportunity available to

give thoughtful answers

and consult records or

family members

The Telephone Survey

For several reasons, telephone interviewing is an

increasingly popular means of conducting many types of

survey research. Roughly 90 percent of the U.S. population

can be reached by telephone; and personal interviewing

costs about twice as much. Only 5 to 10 percent fewer

people respond to telephone surveys than to requests for

personal interviews. On average, response rates for

telephone surveys have been found to be more than 15

percent better than for mail-back questionnaires. Finally,

there are sampling techniques that simplify access to both

unlisted and published telephone numbers.

Often, researchers will assume that mail-back questionnaires

can be converted to telephone interviews by composing

verbal introductions, pulling names out of a directory, and

calling and asking questions. In fact, a good mail-back

questionnaire probably will not make a good telephone

questionnaire. Telephone interviews depend entirely on

verbal communication; where it is important to make a mailback questionnaire look good, a telephone interview must

sound good. The telephone interview must link the

respondent to carefully worded questions by means of his or

her voice and be able to clarify wording and meaning. The

telephone interview allows the researcher to gather data

quickly and ensure considerable consistency of question

delivery.
46

Advantages and disadvantages of the telephone interview

Advantages Disadvantages

• Lower costs than for a • Requires the use of

personal interview trained interviewers

• Sampling techniques, such • Eliminates people without

as random digit dialing a telephone from the

(RDD), make it easy to sampling frame

obtain published and

unpublished telephone • Limits on the types of

numbers questions that can be asked

• Ability to cover a broad • Visual aids not an option

geographic area

• Contact is time-dependent

• Data can be collected

quickly • Personal or sensitive

questions may not be

• Greater control over the appropriate

data-collection process

• Multiple attempts to reach

an individual are possible

• Response rate probably

better than mail-back

questionnaire

• Lower respondent literacy

required than for mail-back

questionnaires

The Personal Interview

A personal interview may be conducted virtually anywhere.

It may be highly structured with planned questions or

informal and based on only a few general topic areas.

Personal interviews give the social scientist an opportunity

to explore intensively any number of subjects. Certain skills,

talents, or technique are especially useful when conducting

an interview. The interviewer may have to rephrase

questions in a context that the interviewee can understand.

The interviewer also must be objective and empathic, not

judgmental or inordinately affected by any of the responses

given. At the same time, an interviewer must be both

persuasive and attentive. Generally, there are three types of

personal interviews; the structured interview; the focused

interview; and the unstructured or free-story interview.

The structured interview

A structured interview presents the respondent with a set of

carefully worded and arranged questions. Questions are

generally close-ended; open-ended questions are rarely used

in a structured format. A structured interview’s strengths

include: simple data analysis, ease of comparison among

respondents, and the ability to ask many questions in a

relatively short time. On the other hand, although personal

contact is made, the interviewee may find the process

impersonal and mechanistic. As with the mail-back

questionnaire, the structured interview’s questions always

are somewhat inflexible. Denzin and Lincoln (1994)

provided the following instructions to the interviewer:

1. Never provide long explanations of the study; use a

standard explanation for all interviewees.

2. Never deviate from the study introduction, sequence of

questions, or question wording.

3. Never let another person interrupt the interview; do not

let another person answer for the respondent or offer his

or her opinions.

4. Never suggest an answer or agree or disagree with an

answer; do not reveal your own personal values.

5. Never interpret the meaning of a question; simply repeat

the question and give standard instructions.

6. Never improvise by adding answer categories or making

wording changes.

The focused interview

Distinguishing characteristics of the focused interview are:

• The persons interviewed are familiar with issues about

which the questions are framed.

• The researcher has analyzed significant elements, patterns,

and processes surrounding the issue and developed a set

of hypotheses about what information the focused

interview will provide.

• On the basis of issue analysis, the researcher has

developed an interview guide, which describes major

topic areas and the hypotheses that will help determine the

relevance of collected data.

• The interview is focused on subjective experiences of

subjects who have been exposed to the pre-interview

situation.

The focused interview is designed to invite the respondent to

offer his or her opinions and perceptions. Prior to the

interview, the researcher will provide an outline of topics

and issues. In developing and using the interview guide, the

interviewer can calibrate the sequence and wording of

questions to fit the respondent’s frame of reference. Openended questions are the primary tool for this type of interview.

Strengths of this type of interview are that it provides

comprehensive data and a means of comparing responses.

Nonetheless, because the interviewer has less opportunity to

tailor the interview to individual respondents, important and

salient topics could be passed over. Four criteria must be met

when using the focused interview process:

1. Range—Questions should be structured to reach the

widest range of potential respondents.
47

2. Specificity—The questions should elicit very specific

reports of the respondent’s experience.

3. Depth—The interviewer should try to determine the

various ways a respondent might experience or interpret

issues.

4. Personal context—The interviewer should identify the

personal characteristics of potential respondents that will

shape their answers. A person’s responses may either be

based on highly personal and unique experiences or on a

role that person plays in society.

The unstructured interview

The unstructured, or free-story personal interview, is an

informal conversation that encourages the respondent to talk

freely about subjects to be explored in an assessment.

Interview questions emerge from the context of such

conversations; there are no predetermined question topics or

wording. Because questions are framed in the context of

informal conversation, they are likely to be highly salient.

The unstructured interview invites self-expression, although

the inherent variety of questions asked may yield disparate

information. Data organization is therefore harder than it is

in structured interviews, and at least some responses will be

irrelevant.

Advantages and disadvantages of the personal interview

Advantages Disadvantages

• High response rate likely • Tend to cost more due to

travel, training, and staff

• Can obtain a highly

representative sample of • Highly trained interviewers

the total population are necessary.

• Misinterpreted questions • Difficult in urban areas

can be clarified, resulting where crime is an

in more accurate data increasing problem

• Supplementary personal • Difficulty in scheduling

information aids in times with potential

interpreting results and respondents

evaluating the sample

• May take more time

• Can use visual materials

• Interviewers bias may be

• Spontaneous responses reflected in questions

possible

• Interviewer can control

who responds

• Allows respondent to

offer more information

continued from previous column

• Lends itself to delicate situations and sensitive questions

• Interview language

adaptable to individual

respondents

• Interview length does not

affect refusal rates

Comparing Self-Administered Surveys,

Telephone Surveys, and Personal Interviews

Although the self-administered survey, telephone survey, and

personal interview all have advantages and disadvantages,

the researcher must decide which will best address the social

assessment’s goals and objectives. A ranking of each method

on aspects of several factors is listed in table 1.

Table 1—Comparison of mail questionnaires, telephone

surveys, and personal interviewsa

Performance Mail Telephone Personal

characteristic questionnaire survey interview

Cost 1 2 4

Personnel

requirements—

interviewers NA 3 4

Personnel

requirements—

supervisors 2 4 3

Implementation time 4 1 4

Sample coverage 3 1 1

Response rate—

general public 4 2 2

Refusal rate Unknown 3 3

Noncontact/

nonaccessibility 2 2 3

Ability to obtain a

response from an elite 4 2 1

Control over who is

respondent within

household 4 2 2

Interviewer control

over data collection 4 1 3

Likelihood of socially

desired response 1 3 4

Item nonresponse 3 3 2

Length of questionnaire—

impact on response 3 2 1

(continued)
48

Table 1—Comparison of mail questionnaires, telephone

surveys, and personal interviewsa (continued)

Performance Mail Telephone Personal

characteristic questionnaire survey interview

Confidentiality/anonymity 4 4 4

Ability to ask sensitive

questions 2 2 1

Ability to probe 4 2 1

Ability to clarify 4 2 1

Complex questions 3 3 1

Open-ended questions 4 1 1

Visual aids 2 4 1

a Ranking: 1= major advantage; 2 = minor advantage; 3 = minor

disadvantage; 4 = major disadvantage.

Source: Frey (1983).

When deciding which method to use, the researcher may

want to refer to some or all of these comparisons. His or her

decision will require a subjective comparison of rating

elements pertinent to the study. For example, if the most

important parameter to consider is keeping costs down, a

self-administered mail questionnaire may be best. If getting

timely results is the most important, a telephone survey may

suffice. If significant and thoughtful information from key

stakeholders is important, a personal interview process will

work best.

Bibliography for Conducting Survey Research

Dillman, D.A. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: the total

design method. New York: John Wiley. 325 p.

This very popular publication focuses on how to conduct

mail and telephone surveys using Dillman’s Total Design

Method. It has generated a significant amount of research

on ways to increase response rates and eliminate all types

of errors associated with survey research.

Fowler, F.J.; Mangione, T.W. 1990. Standardized survey

interviewing. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 151 p.

This publication discusses recruiting, training, and

supervision of interviewers, rapport with respondents, and

questioning techniques. There is a strong focus on limiting

errors attributable to the interviewing process.

Frey, James H. 1989. Survey research by telephone.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 289 p.

This publication reviews telephone sampling, questionnaire construction, question writing, and interviewing. It

compares telephone, mail-back, face-to-face, and intercept

surveys by cost, response rate, and data quality.

Gorden, R.L. 1992. Basic interviewing skills. Itasca, IL:

Peacock. 236 p.

This publication reviews all stages of the interview

process—from designing relevant questions to

establishing a proper atmosphere for interviewing. It

explores ways of listening to the respondent, probing

responses, and recording information.

Merton, R.K.; Fiske, M.; Kendall, P.L. 1990. The focused

interview: a manual of problems and procedures. 2d

 ed. New

York: The Free Press. 200 p.

This publication is the second edition of a classic manual

on conducting focused interviews. Topics include the

purposes and criteria necessary, procedures for gathering

information of the appropriate range, depth, and

specificity, as well as the use of focused interview

techniques in group interviews.

Salant, P.; Dillman, D.A. 1994. How to conduct your own

survey. New York: John Wiley. 232 p.

This up-to-date reference describes the basics of

developing, planning, and conducting research using a

variety of survey methods.

Schuman, H.; Presser, S. 1996. Questions and answers in

attitude surveys: experiments on question form, wording,

and context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 392 p.

The authors use more than 30 national surveys conducted

over several years to experiment with the open- versus

closed-question formats, as well as strategies for wording

questions, ordering questions, and response-order

variations.

[Different editors for each volume]. The survey kit.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 9 vols.

This series of nine publications (available separately)

describes various aspects of planning, designing, and

administering surveys. Listed below are titles and authors

of each.

Volume number and title Author

1. The Survey Handbook Arlene Fink

2. How to Ask Survey Questions Arlene Fink

3. How to Conduct Self-Administered Linda Bourque and

and Mail Surveys Eve Fielder

4. How to Conduct Interviews by James Frey and

Telephone and in Person Sabine Oishi

5. How to Design Surveys Arlene Fink

6. How to Sample in Surveys Arlene Fink

7. How to Measure Survey Reliability Mark Litwin

and Validity

8. How to Analyze Survey Data Arlene Fink

9. How to Report on Surveys Arlene Fink
49

Chapter 6

Developing and Administering Group Interviews

The mail-back questionnaire, personal interview, and

telephone survey presume a sample or population of

individual responses will represent perceptions of the whole

group. An alternative to this approach is the group interview,

which is the systematic questioning of several individuals

simultaneously in formal or informal settings. This form of

interviewing, which can be implemented in a structured,

semi-structured, or unstructured format, is increasingly

popular among social scientists. Although the group

interview is not intended to replace individual interviewing

or surveying, in many situations it can be used to collect data

within any social context. Used in conjunction with or

instead of other field research techniques, the group

interview may provide the researcher with additional data or

a perspective not available through individual interviews.

Group interview techniques hold important implications for

ecoregional and forest social assessments.

Even though it is the most common type of group interview,

the focus-group interview is only one of several.

Brainstorming, consensus building, and natural and formal

field interviews are three other popular types. In this section

we will look at the first three, then provide a more detailed

discussion of the focus group.

Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a popular means of generating new ideas.

The interviewer presents an idea or thought, which group

members interactively and openly evaluate and consider.

The interviewer’s role is passive, and the questioning has no

structure; his or her role is to defer the group from focusing

on trivial matters. Some have found, however, that whereas

sometimes responses are insightful, they are often

superficial. It is best to use brainstorming during the initial

stages of a group interview.

Consensus-Building Techniques

Consensus-building techniques are structured methods for

reaching general agreement, including identification of

appropriate future direction. Here we look at the Nominal

Group and Delphi techniques.

The Nominal Group Technique

The nominal group technique includes all group members. A

six-step process for the nominal group technique follows

(Delbecq and others 1975):

1. Topic is introduced.

2. Participants write down responses on a card or sheet of

paper.

3. Responses are listed on a board that is visible to all.

4. Listed responses are clarified.

5. A vote is taken.

6. Votes are tabulated.

The Delphi Technique

The Delphi technique is used when participants are

separated geographically. It relies on the informed judgment

of knowledgeable persons assembled in a preselected panel.

The technique is done anonymously with controlled

feedback provided until a consensus is reached. This

technique is especially time-consuming. Its basic steps

include:

1. A panel of “experts” on the topic is selected.

2. An open-ended questionnaire is sent to the participants.

3. Responses are grouped and tabulated.

4. A second questionnaire asks the panel to rate the

importance of initial responses.

5. The second questionnaire is tabulated and a third

questionnaire is sent for additional rankings.

6. This is repeated until a consensus is reached on the issue.

Natural and Formal Field Interviews

Group interviews can take place in two different ways. First,

the interviewer may approach a group as it casually forms;

e.g., at a campground, a popular trailhead, or highly used

canoe-launch site. There, the interviewer may first just

observe individual and group behavior and interactions. The

interviewer can approach the group and pose questions. One

disadvantage of this technique is that the interviewer’s

entrance will alter the group dynamic. This method is

particularly useful when evaluating earlier data

interpretations and when trying to identify biases within

other studies (Frey and Fontana 1993).

Often the natural setting is not conducive to probing

interviews, although the interviewer may still gather valuable

information. He or she may arrange for group members to

meet in a nearby field setting that is free of distractions. For

instance, a group or groups of boaters who use a popular

boat dock might agree to meet at a campground later in the
50

day. A formal field interview will allow the researcher to

direct the group interview process and lend legitimacy to his

or her role in the field setting (Frey and Fontana 1993).

Focus-Group Interviews

The use of focus groups is increasingly common. Five

primary characteristics of this technique are the use of

multiple respondents, interaction among participants, the

presence of a moderator, the use of qualitative data, and the

predetermined nature of questions initiating the discussion.

The use of multiple respondents—First the focus group is

characterized by simultaneous involvement of multiple

respondents, generally ranging from 8 to 10 individuals.

Whereas the ideal number may vary from situation to

situation, the focus group should be small enough to allow

all participants an opportunity to share their insights, but

large enough to ensure diversity of perceptions. Some brief

guidelines about the composition of a focus group are:

1. Participants should be a reasonably homogeneous group.

Depending on the purpose of the study, respondents

should represent both genders and vary by age,

education, and occupation. Nonetheless, each participant

should have an interest or stake in the issue(s). If the

social scientist wants to hear from several different types

of individuals or groups, multiple focus-group sessions

should be considered.

2. Ideally, focus groups are composed of people who do not

know each other. Although such composition may be

difficult, it is appropriate for social assessments done at

relatively small geographic levels such as a community.

There, close friends and work colleagues should not be

included in the same group. Familiarity tends to inhibit

social interchange and often will allow an individual of

authority to take over the discussion.

Participant interaction—In many interview situations,

discussion among respondents may distort the purity of

responses. However, a focus group’s effectiveness depends

on participant interaction. It presents a natural environment

where participants influence—and are influenced by—

others.

Presence of a moderator—Focus-group sessions should be

moderated by a competent person who is able to manage the

process. He or she will help focus discussions and ensure

that the goals and objectives are met.

Use of qualitative data—The focus-group moderator

typically uses a questionnaire designed to elicit qualitative

data that reflect participant attitudes, perceptions, and

opinions. He or she presents results to the group which

encourage participants to respond in their own words.

Predetermined questions—Focus-group topics are logically

predetermined and sequenced to make them understandable.

The moderator asks open-ended questions that are prepared

before the meeting, although he or she should memorize and

ask them conversationally. Unlike the brainstorming,

nominal group, and Delphi techniques, the focus group is not

designed to achieve consensus but, rather, to understand the

participants’ thought processes as they consider the issues

discussed.

The basic philosophy behind the focus-group technique is

that group dynamics efficiently generate more useful, indepth information. People may feel more secure talking

about a subject when they are involved in a group

discussion; human interaction sometimes generates

information that might not come from a one-on-one

interview; and focus-group dynamics might give valuable

insight on the role of peer pressure in participant interaction

and acceptance of ideas (Greenbaum 1988).

Use of the Focus-Group Interview

Increasingly, social scientists are recognizing the value of

qualitative information provided by focus groups. The

researcher may use the focus-group technique to better

understand public thinking on the issue(s) and thereby

develop more effective surveys for gathering quantitative

data. Focus groups also may help sequence questions more

logically, identify additional response choices, and better

understand critical questions and relationships.

Focus groups also may be used while quantitative datacollection procedures are underway. Called triangulation,

two or more research methods are used simultaneously and

expanded to address the same issue(s) in both the breadth

and depth of information.

Nonetheless, focus groups often are used alone, particularly

when public insight, perception, and feedback are more

important than any numerical tally.

When to Use and Not to Use a Focus-Group

Interview

Depending on the interview’s purpose, the moderator usually

will decide how much process structure is necessary.

Moderator skills required include flexibility, objectivity,

empathy, persuasiveness, and an ability to listen. He or she

also must be able to discourage and prevent group domination

by individuals or smaller groups by inviting even the most

reserved to participate. Third, the interviewer must be able

to balance obtaining information with managing group

dynamics. The following situations illustrate appropriate and

inappropriate uses of the focus-group technique.
51

Focus groups should

be considered if: Explanation

1. Decision makers are An individual may be

thought to have encouraged to participate

disenfranchised the more openly.

publics they serve.

2. There is a communication Communication may be

gap between professionals constrained by language,

and their target audiences. education, culture, or

expertise.

3. There are complex atti- Quantitative methods

tudes, motivations, and describe human attitudes,

behavior to investigate. motivation and behavior

in the simplest terms. The

focus group will produce

qualitative data based on

points of view.

4. You need a research Forums that evenly

method that is respectful consider tensions and

and not condescending to mistrust provide valuable

the target audience. information about public

opinion.

Focus groups should not

be considered if:

5. The primary intent is The primary purpose of

something other than focus groups is to collect

research; e.g., to resolve qualitative data.

conflicts, increase

communication, obtain

consensus, or make

decisions.

6. Group discussion is not Focus groups that

appropriate. discourage any participants from voicing their

views are not appropriate.

7. The topic is not Focus group participants

appropriate for the must intelligently discuss

participants. the topic.

8. Statistical data are A focus group typically

required. will not be representative

of the population.

Source: Morgan, D.L. ed. 1993. Successful focus groups: advancing

the state of the art. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Preparing for a Focus-Group Interview

Greenbaum (1988) identified 10 key steps that should be

taken before conducting a focus-group interview. Although

all may not be necessary or possible in every situation, they

suggest the importance of preparation.

1. Define the situation.

2. Secure agreement to the research plan.

3. Select a moderator.

4. Get a detailed proposal from the moderator.

5. Brief the moderator.

6. Define parameters for starting the group.

7. Discuss preparation of the moderator guide.

8. Determine the nature and scope of the moderator

report.

9. Develop a flowchart for the focus-group

implementation process.

10. Agree on rules and parameters for the session.

Step 1. Define the Situation.

The first step is to prepare a 1- or 2-page document stating

the purpose of the research and what you expect to achieve.

It should (a) outline information used in choosing the focusgroup method, (b) briefly describe your primary goals and

objectives, (c) describe how information from the focus

group will be used, (d) describe the types of people who

would be included in the focus group, and (e) estimate the

focus-group implementation costs.

Step 2. Secure Agreement to the Research Plan.

The second step is to ensure that everyone involved with the

social assessment agrees on all aspects of the focus-group

process, including its objectives, participants, and use of the

results. This step is important because it invites input from a

broad range of people, improving the quality of the product

and ensuring unilateral agreement on the scope of research.

Input from one’s peers increases the likelihood they will

accept your results.

Step 3. Select the Moderator.

Careful selection of a moderator will help ensure the

gathering of quality information. He or she should be

selected relatively early in the process. A moderator must

have an ability to manage the dynamics of a focus group.

Many private research companies have workers experienced

in this technique. However, whomever you select should be

very familiar with the subject of your research; i.e., able to

steer the discussion in useful directions.

Step 4. Get a Detailed Proposal from the Moderator.

Written, detailed proposals from potential moderators often

are useful in the selection process. The selected proposal

should confirm that the moderator understands the issues

and objectives of your research. A thorough moderator

proposal should include (a) a statement describing the need

for a focus group, (b) a statement of focus-group objectives

as the moderator understands them, (c) a timeline for focusgroup implementation and completion of the moderator

report, (d) a discussion of the implementation process
52

including selection of participants and facility and

equipment needs, (e) a description of the final report format,

and (f) an itemized analysis of costs.

Step 5. Brief the Moderator.

To ensure that a focus-group interview provides as much

useful information as possible, the moderator must have

sufficient background materials. Although he or she need not

be an expert on the issue(s), the moderator must be able to

guide the discussion in useful directions.

Step 6. Define Parameters for Starting the Group(s).

The moderator should be involved in preparing a specific

outline of the focus-group interview. Primary questions to be

answered are

1. How many group interviews will be conducted and in

what time frame? Several focus groups often are

necessary to reach a broad population.

2. How many people will be in each group session? Focus

groups generally range from 8 to 10 people; fewer will

limit the quality of information, reduce group dynamics,

and may make participants feel they were chosen as

experts rather than representatives of a larger group. On

the other hand, a group of more than 10 is harder to

control; the moderator’s ability to stimulate interaction

among group members probably will be less effective;

and probing individual participants for more in-depth

responses will be more difficult.

3. Where will group interview(s) be held? The facility used

and the geographic region in which the focus group is

held are important, especially when a social assessment

is to cover a broad geographic scale.

4. What will be the group’s composition? The researcher

must establish criteria for determining who will be in the

focus group. What are participants’ relationships to

resources within the ecosystem; e.g., commercial,

recreational. Ideally, focus-group members will share,

making it easier to evaluate information from a single

session, encouraging useful group dynamics, and

allowing the moderator to invite discussion rather than

mediate disagreements. Multiple focus-group sessions

should be conducted when diverse stakeholder groups

are identified.

5. What stimuli will be used to elicit responses from

respondents? Visual aids may help encourage

participants to offer opinions.

Step 7. Discuss Preparation of the Moderator Guide.

The moderator guide is an outline of material to be covered

by the group. It is the primary implementation vehicle for a

group, in much the same way that a questionnaire is the

primary data-collection vehicle for survey methods. It will

help determine how the discussion should be directed to

cover the topic(s) and ensure that priorities are maintained.

The moderator’s guide also may serve as an outline for the

focus-group report.

Step 8. Determine the Nature and Scope of the

Moderator Report

The moderator’s report may be a summary of the session or

a more comprehensive report. A summary will be relatively

short (5 to 10 pages) and describe only the group’s main

points. However, a more detailed report may be desired—

one that provides not only the key points, but also minor

points that help explain the nature of the group’s discussions.

A comprehensive report is not useful to those who may not

have been directly involved with focus-group planning and

administration.

Step 9. Develop a Flowchart for the Focus-Group

Implementation Process.

Once details of the focus groups have been determined, the

researcher will prepare a flowchart showing a timeline that

includes all stages of the process. It will identify important

steps the moderator will take and estimate the time necessary

to complete each step.

Step 10. Agree on Rules and Parameters of the Session.

In the final preparation step, the moderator and others

involved in the research will identify what administrative

personnel will be necessary; who, in addition to the focusgroup participants, will be invited to attend; and which lines

of communication among research personnel will be used.

Steps for Conducting a Focus-Group Interview

Greenbaum (1988) identified several steps to be taken when

conducting a focus-group interview. They are taken before,

during, and after the participants are gathered:

Step 1. Presession Arrangements

This involves ensuring the facility is ready; e.g., appropriate

equipment (video cassette players, tape recorders, and

easels), chairs and tables, refreshments, and nametags are

provided. The moderator should also ensure that the room is

quiet enough so that participants are not distracted.

Step 2. Introduction

This step will be taken in two phases.

Phase 1—The moderator welcomes participants and tells

them about available refreshments. Each participant is
53

provided a nametag and told the general rules and

procedures that should be followed during the session; e.g.,

breaks.

Phase 2—The moderator introduces him or herself and

describes session objectives and specific rules of discussion.

The moderator also will describe any use of audio/video

equipment and acknowledge the presence of any observers.

Step 3. Warm-up

A warm-up is designed to make the participants feel

comfortable with the process. The moderator asks

participants to introduce themselves and describe where they

live, as well as any familiarity or connection they have with

the focus-group topic(s). A general discussion of the topic(s)

then begins. The moderator helps more participants into the

focus-group process and gets them to begin thinking about

the issue(s).

Step 4. Specific Topic Discussion

Depending on the nature of the issues, the discussion

proceeds in several phases. The following can serve as a

guide to coordinated discussion:

1. Issue introduction phase—The moderator provides more

specific description of the issue(s), including specific

goals and objectives.

2. Issue presentation—If several issues are to be discussed,

each is presented; and the moderator poses questions that

will stimulate discussion.

3. Presentation of the second (and subsequent) issue(s)—

Respondents are encouraged to disregard discussions of

the first issue before moving on to the next.

4. Wrap-up section—When the last issue has been

discussed, the moderator will describe how the issues are

connected.

Step 5. Close

This step is intended to send the participants away with

positive feelings about the process, as well as the agency that

conducted the focus group. Although it is a relatively short

step (a few minutes), it is a very important part of the

session. The moderator will thank everyone for coming,

stressing the importance of their participation. When

appropriate, the moderator should ask participants to avoid

discussing their experience with those who will be

participating in future focus groups.

Step 6. Postgroup Discussion

Many consider postgroup discussion the most important part

of the focus-group process. It gives the moderator and others

on the research team an opportunity to discuss what they

learned at the session and the implications of the views

expressed. The postgroup discussion also may help the

moderator report on issue(s) that the research team thinks

are especially important.

Bibliography for Conducting Group Interviews

Gorden, R.L. 1992. Basic interviewing skills. Itasca, IL:

Peacock. 236 p.

The book provides a review of all stages of the interview

from designing relevant questions to establishing a proper

atmosphere for interviewing, listening to the respondent,

probing responses, and properly recording information.

Greenbaum, T.L. 1998. The handbook for focus-group

research. 2d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 262

p.

The handbook provides information about conducting

effective focus groups, including discussions about

common mistakes, moderating focus groups, controlling

the costs of focus groups, and using technology in focus

groups.

Krueger, R.A. 1994. Focus groups: a practical guide for

applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

255 p.

This guide provides information about planning and

conducting focus groups including conducting focus

groups for special situations.

Merton, R.K.; Fiske, M.; Kendall, P.L. 1990. The focused

interview: a manual of problems and procedures. 2d

 ed. New

York: The Free Press. 200 p.

It is the second edition to a classic manual on conducting

focused interviews. Topics include the purposes and

criteria necessary for using focused interviews, procedures

for obtaining information of the appropriate range, depth,

and specificity, and use of focused interview techniques

for group interviews.

Morgan, D.L., ed. 1993. Successful focus groups. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications. 271 p.

The book has contributions from leading authorities in the

use of group interviewing with an emphasis on focus

groups and includes the advantages and disadvantages of

this type of research as well as specific accounts of how

the group interview can be used to augment survey

implementation.

Templeton, J.F. 1994. The focus group. Chicago: Probus

Publishing Co. 308 p.

This book offers a comprehensive guide to organizing,

conducting, and analyzing the focus-group interview.

[Different editors for each volume]. 1998. The focus group

kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 6 vols. Series of

six publications (available separately) describing the various
54

aspects of planning, designing and administering focusgroup interviews is listed below with the titles and authors of

each publication.

Volume Number and Title Author

1. The Focus Group Guidebook David Morgan

2. Planning Focus Groups David Morgan

3. Developing Questions for Richard Krueger

Focus Groups

4. Moderating Focus Groups Richard Krueger

5. Involving Community Members Richard Krueger

in Focus Groups and Jean King

6. Analyzing and Reporting Focus Richard Krueger

Group Results
55

Chapter 7

Selecting a Sample of Respondents from the Population

One of the researcher’s first tasks is to determine which

people are to be sources of data suitable for the social

assessment. The process of determining who will be

surveyed or interviewed is called sampling. This chapter

describes two general types of samples, probability and

nonprobability, and discusses several specific sampling

techniques for each.

Probability Samples

Probability samples are based on random selection. The

researcher uses statistical techniques to draw such a

sample—techniques that give every individual in a

population an equal chance of being selected. Such a sample

is therefore likely to be representative of an entire

population. Typically, probability samples are used in survey

research. The purposes of probability sampling are to:

1. Compare characteristics and responses among various

groups

2. Identify characteristics that may be associated with

specific responses

3. Estimate characteristics of the total population from the

sample selected

4. Identify changes in characteristics within groups or a

total population at two or more different times (Branch

and others 1984).

Steps in Selecting Probability Samples

The researcher must follow several steps in identifying the

optimal make-up of the sampling frame (list of study

population). These steps include:

1. Define the study population

2. Determine the unit of analysis

3. Establish a sampling frame

4. Select a procedure for drawing from the sampling frame

5. Determine the sample size

6. Draw the sample

7. Define the study population.

The sampling process begins when the researcher defines the

study population. He or she identifies the nature of the

population from which the sampling units will be drawn.

This sampling could represent all residents in a watershed,

or all residents and visitors present during a given span of

time.

Determine the Unit of Analysis

The second step is to determine whether individual persons,

households, organizations, or other social groups will be

studied.

Establish a Sampling Frame

A sampling frame is as comprehensive a list of a population

as possible and will be the source of potential study

respondents. Sampling frames include public telephone

directories, voter-registration lists, city directories, platted

maps or county tax roles, organizational directories, public

utility customers, residences in a particular zip code, and

specific groups within a population; e.g., all elected officials.

Although such sources are generally adequate, they all may

be limited by inherent omissions of potential respondents;

e.g., telephone directories do not include individuals with

unlisted telephones or no telephones. Statisticians often can

determine the best method of selecting a sampling frame for

an assessment. Some private companies provide a variety of

random samples, although such samples also may have

limitations. An adequately selected sample will infer

characteristics of an entire population.

Select a Sampling Procedure

The researcher can choose from several types of probability

samples, depending on identified needs. The next section

provides a detailed list and description of several probability

sampling techniques.

Determine the Sample Size

There is not one correct sample size for a social assessment.

The appropriate size will be a compromise among sampling

technique, research goals and objectives, size and variability

of the population, and resources available (Branch and

others 1984). Statistical or research consultants can weight

these factors and determine an appropriate sample size.

Draw the Sample

Although a relatively straightforward task, actually drawing

a sample may be time-intensive; and the effort should be

carefully organized beforehand.
56

Probability Sampling Procedures

There are several types of probability samples, and each is

capable of randomly selecting respondents from a sampling

frame. Here is a brief description of the most common

methods of probability sampling:

Simple Random Sampling

In this common technique, a sample is drawn in a way that

gives all subjects an equal chance of being selected. It is

assumed that the sample drawn is statistically representative

of the total population.

Stratified Random Sampling

In this technique, a population first is divided into two

nonoverlapping groups, or strata. A simple random sample is

selected from each stratum. It is assumed that the sample

drawn from each stratum is statistically representative of the

strata from which the sampling unit was drawn. This

technique often is used when the researcher wants to break a

sample into two or more convenient subgroups; e.g., urban

and rural residents, males and females.

Systematic Sampling

In systematic sampling the researcher randomly chooses an

element from the sampling frame; e.g., registered voters, and

then selects every nth element. For instance, if a sampling

frame included 100,000 names and the researcher wanted to

select 500 of those individuals, he could select the first name

and then every 200th person on the list. This type of sampling

technique is superior to simple random sampling when the

sampling frame is an ordered list. When the elements are

random, a systematic sample would be the same as a simple

random sample.

Cluster Sampling

A cluster sample is a probability sample in which each

sampling unit is a group, or cluster, of elements. For

example, in a statewide survey the researcher may decide

that rather than taking a simple random sample of all State

residents, he or she wants to cluster the sample. To create the

cluster, the researcher might take a random sample of

counties within the State and randomly select individuals

from each. This method is common when a good sampling

frame for a large population is not available, but a sampling

frame for smaller components of that population is. It also

may be used when elements of the sampling frame are

widely dispersed geographically.

Nonprobability Samples

In nonprobability sampling, the researcher does not

necessarily need a large statistically representative sample of

the population, but, rather, wants a sample that is

purposefully biased toward information-rich subjects. One

such technique often is used when data collection is

primarily qualitative rather than quantitative. The best

method to use will depend on the type of information sought

and the resources available.

Nonprobability Sampling Procedures

Here are some brief descriptions of the most common

nonprobability sampling methods:

Maximum-Variance Sampling

Maximum-variance sampling is conducted when the

researcher wants to ensure that the sample represents a broad

range of relevant characteristics; e.g., every rural female

with red hair. In this method, subjects are selected

successively; i.e., after interviewing one subject, the

researcher selects the next one from those within the

population who has characteristics that the first interviewee

did not have. This procedure gives the researcher flexibility

to ask questions in one interview that are based on

information from a previous one. For example, after

interviewing an individual who had lived in the community

for 50 years, the researcher may purposely seek out an

individual who moved into the area within the last 5 years.

Snowball Sampling

In snowball sampling, one individual is the source for

locating others who also may have the desired information.

As its name suggests, the sample selection increases over

time enabling the researcher to find potential interviewees

with knowledge of or concern about the issue(s). It also

provides a view of relevant social networks. The researcher

can select respondents from those who are most often

mentioned in the interview process.

Expert Sampling

Also called judgment sampling, the researcher’s informed

opinion is the basis on which a population is sampled.

Ample justification of making such selections is essential.

Quota Sampling

In this technique, the researcher identifies a characteristic of

the population to be studied, then selects a sample that will

represent that characteristic to the same extent. For example,

if 40 percent of the population is older than 65 years, the
57

researcher will select a sample that includes the same

proportion of persons over 65 years. In quota sampling, it is

important to choose a characteristic that somehow relates to

the type of information sought.

Convenience Sampling

Convenience sampling is the most informal and probably the

least useful type. The researcher simply selects the most

convenient subjects in terms of accessibility or willingness

to participate; and the sample probably will not represent the

larger population.
58
59

References

Berg, Scott; Gufstafson, Earl; Miley, Elizabeth. 1993. State forest

practices throughout the United States: a review of forest laws,

practices, acts, and best management practices. Washington, DC:

American Forest & Paper Association. 74 p. + appendix.

Betz, Carter J. 1997. SEELA 1997: social, economic, environmental, and

leisure assessment database codebook and documentation. [Number of

pages unknown]. On file with: USDA Forest Service, Southern

Research Station, Recreation, Wilderness, Urban Forestry and

Demographic Trends Research, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA 30602-

2044.

Bitterroot Social Research Institute. 1994. Social assessment of the

Bitterroot Valley, Montana, with special emphasis on national forest

management.[Number of pages unknown]. On file with: USDA Forest

Service, Missoula, MT.

Branch, K.; Hooper, D.A.; Thompson, J.; Creighton, J. 1984. Guide to

social assessment: a framework for assessing social change. Boulder,

CO: Westview Press. 322 p.

Brown, Greg; Harris, Charles C. 1992. The U.S. Forest Service: toward

the new resource management paradigm. Society and Natural

Resources Journal. 5: 231–245.

Clark, R.N.; Stankey, G.H.; Brown, P.J. [and others]. 1999. Toward an

ecological approach: integrating social, economic, cultural, biological,

and physical considerations. In: Sexton, W.T.; Malk, A.J.; Szaro, R.C.;

Johnson, N.C., eds. Ecological stewardship: a common reference for

ecosystem management. Kidlington, Oxford, UK: Elsevier Sciences

Ltd.: 297–318.

Cleland, David T.; Avers, Peter E.; McNab, W. Henry [and others].

1997. National hierarchical framework of ecological units. In: Boyce,

Mark S.; Haney, Alan, eds. Ecosystem management: applications for

sustainable forest and wildlife resources. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press: 181-200.

Cordell, H.K.; Thompson, H.; McDonald, B. [and others]. 1999.

Shifting values and public expectations: management perspectives. In:

Sexton, W.T.; Malk, A.J.; Szaro, R.C.; Johnson, N.C., eds. Ecological

stewardship: a common reference for ecosystem management.

Kidlington, Oxford, UK: Elsevier Sciences Ltd.: 59–84.

Cortner, H.J.; Moote, M.A. 1992. Sustainability and ecosystem

management: forces shaping political agendas and public policy. In:

American forestry—an evolving tradition: Proceedings of the Society

of American Foresters national convention. Bethesda, MD: Society of

American Foresters: 310–316.

Cortner, H.J.; Shannon, M.A.; Wallace, M.G. [and others]. 1996.

Institutional barriers and incentives for ecosystem management: a

problem analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-354. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. 35 p.

Decker, D.J.; Brown, T.L.; Knuth, B.A. 1996. Human dimensions

research: its importance in natural resource management. In: Ewert,

A.W., ed. Natural resource management: the human dimension.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 29-47.

Dillman, D.A. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: the total design method.

New York: John Wiley. 325 p.

Driver, B.L.; Manning, C.J.; Peterson, G.L. 1996. Toward better

integration of the social and biophysical components of ecosystems

management. In: Ewert, A.W., ed. Natural resource management: the

human dimension. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 109-127.

ECOMAP. 1993. National hierarchical framework of ecological units.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. [Not

paged].

Everett, Richard; Hessburg, Paul; Jensen, Mark; Bormann, Bernard.

1994. Executive summary. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-317. Portland,

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station. 61 p. Vol. I.

Ewert, A.W. 1996. Human dimensions research and natural resource

management. In: Ewert, A.W., ed. Natural resource management: the

human dimension. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 5-12.

Force, J.E.; Machlis, G.E. 1997. The human ecosystem, part II: social

indicators in ecosystem management. Society & Natural Resources.

10(4): 369–382.

Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. 1993. Forest

ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social

assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S.

Department of the Interior [and others]. [Irregular pagination].

Fowler, F.J. 1993. Survey research methods. 2d

 ed. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications. 156 p.

Frey, J.H. 1989. Survey research by telephone. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications. 289 p.

Frey, J.H. 1983. Survey research by telephone. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications. 208 p.

Greenbaum, T.L. 1998. The handbook for focus group research. 2d ed.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 262 p.

Grumbine, R.E. 1994. What is ecosystem management? Conservation

Biology. 8: 27–38. [Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management

Project].

Keystone Center. 1996. The Keystone national policy dialogue on

ecosystem management. Keystone, CO: The Keystone Center. 43 p. +

appendices.

Lang, R. 1986. Achieving integration in resource planning. In: Lang, R.,

ed. Integrated approaches to resource planning and management.

Calgary, AB: The University of Calgary Press: 27-50.

Likens, G. 1992. An ecosystem approach: its use and abuse. In:

Excellence in ecology. Oldendorf/Luhe, Germany: Ecology Institute.

166 p. [Book 3].

Likert, R. 1967. The human organization: its management and value. NY:

McGraw-Hill. 258 p.

Manfredo, M.J.; Vaske, J.J.; Sikorowski, L. 1996. Human dimensions

of wildlife management. In: Ewert, A.W., ed. Natural resource

management: the human dimension. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 53-

72.

Miller, D.C. 1991. Handbook of research design and social measurement.

5th ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 704 p.
60

Mitchell, B. 1986. The evolution of integrated resource management. In:

Lang, R., ed. Integrated approaches to resource planning and

management. Calgary, AB: The University of Calgary Press: 12-26.

Moote, M.A.; Burke, S.; Cortner, H.; Wallace, M.G. 1994. Principles of

ecosystem management. http://wildlife.wisc.edu/courses/379/readings/

moote1994.htm. [Date accessed unknown].

Morgan, D.L., ed. 1993. Successful focus groups: advancing the state of

the art. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 271 p.

Morrissey, Wayne; Zinn, Jeffrey; Corn, Lynne. 1994. Ecosystem

management, Federal agency activities. Rep. 94-339. Washington, DC:

Congressional Research Service Reports. 124 p.

Overbay, J.C. 1992. Ecosystem management. In: Taking an ecological

approach to management. Publ. WO–WSA–3. [Location of publisher

unknown]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 3-15.

Quigley, T.M.; Haynes; R.W.; Graham, R.T., eds. 1996. Integrated

scientific assessment for ecosystem management in the interior

Columbia Basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-382. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. 303 p.

Schlager, D.B.; Freimund, W.A. 1997. Legal and institutional obstacles

to implementing ecosystem management. In: Cordell, H.K., ed.

Integrating social science and ecosystem management: a national

challenge. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS–17. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 57-72.

Society of American Foresters. 1993. Task force report on sustaining

long-term forest health and productivity. SAF Publ. 93-02. Bethesda,

MD: The Society. 83 p.

Stankey, G.H.; Clark, R.N. 1992. Social aspects of new perspectives in

forestry: a problem analysis. Milford, PA: Grey Towers Press. 33 p.

Stewart, S.I.; Jakes, P.J.; Monson, P. 1997. Emergent issues in forest

plan revision: a dialogue. In: Vogelsong, H., ed. Proceedings of the

1997 northeast recreation research symposium. GTR-NE-241. Newton

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Northeastern Research Station: 220-224.

The Ecological Society of America. 1996. The report of the Ecological

Society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem

management. Ecological Applications. 6(3): 665–691.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1994. Implementing

the concepts of ecosystem management in the USDA Forest Service.

Washington, DC: Ecosystem Task Team Report. 97 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1996. Status of the

Interior Columbia Basin: summary of scientific findings. Gen. Tech.

Rep. PNW–GTR–385. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Land Management. 144 p.

Wood, C.A. 1994. Ecosystem management: achieving the new land ethic.

Renewable Natural Resources Journal. 12: 6–12.
61

Appendix

Description of Dimensions, Concepts, and Indicators

Dimension I Historical Background

Concept Ia. Record of a community’s past and present dependence on the natural

resource base will reflect important social attitudes and the structures

supporting them. Problems and opportunities stem from historical

experience.

Indicator 1 Community origin

Description of indicator Communities are born of and evolve from key industries, migrating

peoples, social attitudes, and common human behavior.

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

ecosystem managers?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records

indicator

Indicator 2 Recent or current experience with ecosystem management (EM) issues

Description of indicator Information about public response(s) to EM policies, practices, and

planning is dynamic. It is important to recognize how EM issues have

been addressed in the past, what political controversy surrounds those

issues, which prominent individuals or major groups seem to influence

management (as well as public opinion), what other events in the

community are related to EM issues, and what recurrent or unresolved

problems must be addressed?

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Indicator 3 Names and characteristics of influential persons, groups, or families

Description of indicator Individuals, families, and other important groups influence the evolution

and development of a community.

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator
62

Dimension I (cont.) Historical Background

Concept Ia. (cont.)

Indicator 4 Distinctive characteristics of the community, which are strongly valued

locally

Description of indicator Community characteristics that serve as accepted identifiers of the

personality and nature of the community. These characteristics address

general values held by the community as a whole and may be

manifested in the work and leisure of its residents.

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Indicator 5 Prominent stakeholder groups with a history in the area

Description of indicator Prominent groups who have a stake in management of the assessment

area’s natural resources

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Dimension II Population Characteristics

Concept IIa. Increasingly, America’s regions and communities are home to diverse

racial, ethnic, religious, and occupational populations. Because such

diversity often will foster a variety of values, forest planners must

address ecosystem management (EM) issues within several frames of

reference.

Indicator 1 Ethnicity and race

Description of indicator Ethnicity and race of the population

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 2 Language diversity

Description of indicator Analysis of primary languages spoken in the homes of the various ethnic

groups
63

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIa. (cont.)

Indicator 2 Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

(cont.) assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Survey data (personal interviews) research

indicator

Indicator 3 Religious affiliations and practices

Description of indicator Beliefs and unique religious and cultural practices

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 2. Who are the users of natural resources in the assessment area?

3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Indicator 4 Property ownership

Description of indicator Land and resource holdings of ethnic groups in the community

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Indicator 5 Length of residence

Description of indicator General assessment of the time that an ethnic group has been present in

the area.

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Indicator 6 Cultural based values

Description of indicator Values assigned to natural resources based on ethnicity, race, and

culture.
64

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIa. (cont.)

Indicator 6. Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

(cont.) assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data research

indicator

Concept IIb. Population size and demographics are practical descriptors of a

community or region. They can be used to identify trends towards

change and how communities are affected by EM policy, planning, and

practices. They provide the forest planner with a view of how social

relationships based on age, gender, educational achievement, and other

factors are changing over time.

Indicator 1 Total population

Description of indicator Number of people in the region of interest

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 2 Changes in population size

Description of indicator Enduring trends in population changes

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 3 Residential distribution

Description of indicator Spatial distribution of residents within the region

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?
65

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIb. (cont.)

Indicator 3 Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

(cont.) indicator

Indicator 4 Age distribution

Description of indicator Age categories of residents

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 5 Gender distribution

Description of indicator Population by male and female

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 6 Education

Description of indicator Education levels of population

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 7 Household composition

Description of indicator The presence, number, and ages of children; single-parent households,

and other domestic factors.

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 8 Population and demographics by ethnicity/race

Description of indicator Breakdown of population and demographic characteristics within ethnic

group

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?
66

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIb. (cont.)

Indicator 8 Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

(cont.) indicator

Concept IIc. Economic and employment characteristics—It is important to note

whether a community continues to depend on or is moving away from a

natural resource-based economy. Current employment levels by sector

will identify the size of populations by occupational categories; e.g.,

forestry, farming, or tourism. More specifically, the planner should

understand the extent to which management of local ecosystems

contributes or detracts from a region’s economy.

Indicator 1 Employment levels

Description of indicator Rate of unemployment in the region

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 2 Occupational diversity

Description of indicator The variety and range of occupations in a region; e.g., managerial,

administrative and clerical, blue-collar.

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 3 Distribution of employment by sector

Description of indicator Proportion of residents employed in industrial and commercial

occupations

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 4 Labor force participation by groups

Description of indicator Distribution of labor force by age, gender, and ethnicity
67

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIc. (cont.)

Indicator 4 Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

(cont.) assessment question(s) 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 5 Household income

Description of indicator Mean household income of the general population

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 6 Poverty

Description of indicator The statistical index of the level of poverty in a region

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 7 Wealth

Description of indicator The statistical index of the level of wealth in a region

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 8 Public assistance and welfare

Description of indicator Proportion of residents receiving social security and welfare payments.

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator
68

Dimension II (cont.) Population Characteristics

Concept IIc. (cont.)

Indicator 9 Economic and employment characteristics by ethnicity

Description of indicator Breakdown by ethnicity and race of the economic and employment

characteristics described in Indicators 1 through 8.

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Dimension III Community Resources

Concept IIIa. Facilities and Services—Demand for facilities and services directly

related to population level. Changes in population, resources, economic

activity, and income influence the supply of both facilities and services.

The cost, quality, and availability of public and private services are

ultimately connected to the public’s sense of well-being and satisfaction

with the community.

Indicator 1 Current levels of public facilities and service

Description of indicator The presence and number of public facilities and services; e.g., schools,

health care and emergency services, public utilities, social services, law

enforcement, emergency services, parks, and recreation

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 2 Current levels of private facilities and service

Description of indicator The presence and number of private facilities and services; e.g.,

housing, medical care, mental health, household services, and recreation

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Concept IIIb. Spatial relationships and ecosystem dependency—Land use patterns

range from developed to undeveloped; humans depend on and use

ecological resources in various ways. Over the short term, communities

heavily dependent on traditional, extractive uses of forest resources

experience significant changes in the distribution of economic and

noneconomic activities. Knowing the type and extent of these

distributions provides the forest planner with important information for

managing sustainable ecosystems. Such knowledge will require

identification and promotion of forest economics, employment

opportunities, and community education.
69

Dimension III (cont.) Community Resources

Concept IIIb. (cont.)

Indicator 1 Ecosystem classifications

Description of indicator Description of natural resources based on Bailey’s classification of

terrestrial and aquatic ecoregions

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 2 Water resources

Description of indicator Nature of and allowed uses of water resources

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 3 Energy and mineral resources

Description of indicator Extraction or exploitation of natural resources

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 4 Wildlife abundance

Description of indicator The nature, abundance, and management status of wildlife species living

within a region

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data, historical and archival records, and survey

indicator data (personal interviews) research

Indicator 5 Recreation resources

Description of indicator Demand for and availability of recreation resources

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?
70

Dimension III (cont.) Community Resources

Concept IIIb. (cont.)

Indicator 5 5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

(cont.) forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data, historical and archival records, and survey

indicator data (personal interviews) research

Indicator 6 Public land classifications

Description of indicator Federal, Native American, municipal, State, or county

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 7 Private land classifications

Description of indicator Land and forest

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 8 Resource uses

Description of indicator Uses of public and private resource lands

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 9 Population density

Description of indicator Persons per square mile

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator
71

Dimension III (cont.) Community Resources

Concept IIIb. (cont.)

Indicator 10 Migration

Description of indicator Change in population

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 11 Settlement patterns

Description of indicator Urban and rural

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Historical and archival records and survey data (personal interviews)

indicator research

Indicator 12 Land tenure

Description of indicator Nature of ownership of rural land

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Dimension IV Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVa. Economic Organization–Job creation has significant effects on a

community’s economy just as the economic health of a community

affects the number and types of services that are provided. The diversity

of available economic opportunities available is an important factor in

the economic health of a community. In small communities, where

economic diversity is often limited, growth is generally limited to one,

or, at most, two industries. In such cases, economic growth is often

masked by the fragile nature of a one-dimensional economy. This is

especially important when an aggressive regional population center

exists nearby.

Indicator 1 Economic diversity

Description of indicator Range of commercial sectors providing employment opportunities in the

region

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?
72

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVa. (cont.)

Indicator 1 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

(cont.) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data and survey data (personal interviews)

indicator research

Indicator 2 Export dependency

Description of indicator The extent to which local businesses produce goods that are sold

outside the immediate region

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews) research and historical and

indicator archival records

Indicator 3 Small businesses

Description of indicator The presence of small, family-owned businesses

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data and historical and archival records

indicator

Indicator 4 Shopping patterns

Description of indicator The extent to which residents can acquire goods and services within the

local community.

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research; group interviews

Indicator 5 House values

Description of indicator Mean and median values of homes

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator
73

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVa. (cont.)

Indicator 6 Land values

Description of indicator Mean and median values of land

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 7 Retail sales

Description of indicator Receipts on retail goods and services

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Concept IVb. Governmental structure—In a small community, administrative tasks

often are done by officials who serve without pay and earn their living

elsewhere. When the complexity of local government increases, those

officials experience unmanageable demands on their time and personal

commitments. A need for paid officials and professional staff often

results. An increasingly complex local government must deal with

corporations, State and Federal agencies, and other organizations.

Compliance with outside demands, in addition to the enforcement of

local regulations, inevitably establishes formal and structured decisionmaking processes that often are difficult and unpopular.

Indicator 1 Local government positions

Description of indicator The nature of local government positions, including full-time vs. parttime and paid vs. unpaid

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 2 Formalization of planning department

Description of indicator The presence of formal planning in a community or region

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 3 Connections to outside agencies

Description of indicator The connections of local officials to outside government and

nongovernmental agencies and organizations
74

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVb. (cont.)

Indicator 3 Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

(cont.) assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 4 Relationships among officials of local jurisdictions

Description of indicator Formal and informal nature of relationships among officials of local

governmental jurisdictions

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Concept IVc. Social Diversity—An increase in population and economic diversity

will change the social complexity of a community or region. Ethnicity,

culture, religions, and other demographics often will drive such change

and may actually diversify accepted norms of behavior. Long-time

residents of a community may blame increasing populations for loss of

community and shared values. Increases in natural resource-based

tourism, changes in the kinds and sizes of local industries, and a

growing transient population contribute to changes in community

perception.

Indicator 1 Gender distribution

Description of indicator Distribution of population by male and female

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 2 Ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity

Description of indicator The diversity of ethnicities/races as well as cultural practices and

behaviors. Particular attention should be given to situations where there

is a dominant or a subordinate group or both.

Related social 3. What are social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research
75

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVc. (cont.)

Indicator 3 Residential stability

Description of indicator Estimation of the proportion of life-long residents in the community and

a general assessment of the level of migration

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator

Indicator 4 Voluntary organizations and membership

Description of indicator The presence of voluntary organizations in the region, their membership

patterns, and recent trends

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews) research

indicator

Indicator 5 Factions and special interest groups

Description of indicator The presence of (or perception of) factions within a community; e.g.,

townspeople, ranchers, newcomers

Related social 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

region surrounding the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 6 Values and beliefs related to natural resource issues

Description of indicator Specific public perceptions about natural resources that may influence

attitudes towards EM issues.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?
76

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVc. (cont.)

Indicator 6 Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

(cont.) indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 7 Attitudes toward natural resources

Description of indicator Public attitudes towards past and present EM issues, policies, and

procedures; the diversity of attitudes held and by whom.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 8 Transient populations

Description of indicator The presence and influence of transient populations, including military

personnel, tourists, and public attitudes toward them.

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 9 Civil rights

Description of indicator Relationships among various racial and ethnic groups, especially as

reflected in behavior and expressed opinion about minority access to

community resources.

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records, personal interviews, and

indicator group interviews

Concept IVd. The social processes of a community or region are driven by decisions

made about community investment, resource distribution, and new

projects. Such processes may be linked to outside interests affecting a

community’s autonomy and its ability to respond to changes in the

social and natural environments. Links to State, regional, national, and

international groups can enhance a community’s ability to get assistance

in the form of political support, as well as government grants and loans.

In the Western U.S., communities often are strongly affected by

management of Federal lands. Forest planners throughout the West have

found that strong links to other agencies and political interests can help

reduce potential problems.
77

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVd. (cont.) As rural populations grow, so does the demand for additional

development. Community leaders’ ability to establish effective links

with outside organizations may help them draw outside resources to

facilitate development. However, too many such links may result in too

much development, which can both reduce a community’s autonomy

and limit its ability to make decisions about local governance.

Overdevelopment also may limit a citizen’s work opportunities.

Indicator 1 Local ties to State and Federal Governments

Description of indicator How individual citizens relate to and are affected by State and Federal

officials; e.g., employees, neighbor, school board member.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 2 Previous Federal/State grants and other programs

Description of indicator Public record of funding through State and Federal grants; selection as a

site for State institutions and programs (schools, fairs).

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 3 The presence of regional, national, or international businesses or

agencies

Description of indicator National or international businesses or agencies; e.g., retail chains,

financial institutions, State or Federal agencies, or national voluntary

organizations.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 4 Newcomers to the area

Description of indicator The proportion of local residents who have lived in the area 5 years or

less.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator
78

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVe. Distribution of resources and power—Ultimately, any EM policy,

planning effort, or project will affect human society. The resources and

power held by individuals, institutions, and user groups determine how

economic and employment opportunities are distributed. That

distribution determines the extent to which there is equity and

environmental justice among stakeholders. In the past, many ethnic,

cultural, or socially disadvantaged groups have been disproportionately

affected by development or environmental hazards. Environmental

justice will help bring employment opportunities, economic and

ecological health, and social equity to all such groups.

Indicator 1 Economic equity

Description of indicator How economic resources and employment opportunities are distributed,

and what effects management decisions have had on various residents or

groups.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 2 Environmental justice

Description of indicator How management decisions affect residents or groups

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 3 Size and structure of local government

Description of indicator The number and nature of positions within the local government, the

ratio of temporary-to-permanent positions, and the relationship that

individuals and groups have with officials.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data and historical and archival records

indicator

Indicator 4 Presence of stakeholder groups

Description of indicator Involvement in and relative influence of local, regional, or national

groups that have a stake in land-management decisions

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 2. Who are users of natural resources in the assessment area?

4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research
79

Dimension IV (cont.) Social Organization Structures and Processes

Concept IVe. (cont.)

Indicator 5 Legal constraints

Description of indicator Rules, regulations, agency mandates; and local, State, and Federal laws

related to EM issues.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring

indicator

Concept IVf. Community resilience—A community’s ability to adapt and control

change is reflected in the way it coordinates efforts and resources to

establish cooperation among individuals, stakeholders, and government

officials. Community resilience is a measure of social, economic, and

government complexity; the ability of officials to lead; links to

resources; and the nature of management issues to be addressed.

Indicator 1 Coordination in current projects

Description of indicator Assessment of how the community worked together in previous projects

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of Analysis of historical and archival records, and survey data (personal

measuring indicator interviews) research

Indicator 2 Coordinative mechanisms

Description of indicator Mechanisms such as special-purpose boards, task forces, and councils

and the process or processes by which those mechanisms have been

established.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Indicator 3 Persistent conflicts or issues

Description of indicator Enduring conflicts between or among influential stakeholder groups and

how newcomers are received by the community.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

Method of measuring Analysis of historical and archival records, and survey data (personal

indicator interviews) research

Dimension V Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Va. Perceptions of natural resources—A community’s perceptions of the

natural world are many and various. Any approach to ecosystem

management (EM) will include careful consideration of the nature of

specific management issues, the managing agency’s credibility, and the

tenor of public opinion as reflected in local, regional, or national media.

Any information about public perceptions should be representative of
80

Dimension V (cont.) Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Va. (cont.) people throughout the affected area, not just of opinion leaders. The

forest planner’s responsibility is to decide what weight to give the

expressed views of any individual, influential or not. He or she also

must consider the opinions of those supported by stakeholder groups;

they often will have strong opinions about the issues.

Indicator 1 Values and beliefs related to natural resource issues.

Description of indicator Specific perceptions the public holds about natural resources, which

ultimately may influence attitudes related to specific issues.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews and mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 2 Attitudes toward natural resource issues

Description of indicator Expressed public opinions about specific management policies, issues,

or actions

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 3 Stakeholder views and beliefs

Description of indicator Stakeholder views and opinions that may affect public attitudes towards

EM policies and practices

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records
81

Dimension V (cont.) Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Va. (cont.)

Indicator 4 Attitudes toward natural resource issues

Description of indicator Public opinions about the management policies, issues, or actions

espoused by stakeholder groups.

Related social 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

assessment question(s) managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

6. What are the relevant stakeholder and public perceptions related to

EM issues driving the social assessment?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Concept Vb. Connection to natural resources—Public perceptions, attitudes, and

values are reflected in individual and community uses of natural

resources; e.g., recreation, livelihood, and the extent to which these

resources support community and family traditions.

Indicator 1 Tourism and recreational uses

Description of indicator How individuals and groups use natural resources for recreation

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 2 Resource-based employment

Description of indicator How natural resources support employment and productivity in the

region

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records
82

Dimension V (cont.) Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Vb. (cont.)

Indicator 3 Traditional uses

Description of indicator How the values, customs, and traditions of individuals and groups are

tied to the natural resources

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, group interviews, and historical and archival

records

Indicator 4 Sense of place

Description of indicator The psychological importance that individuals and groups find in the

natural world or specific locations within it.

Related social 1. What are human uses of natural resources in the assessment area?

assessment question(s) 4. What conflicts exist among various uses, users, stakeholders, and

managers of the ecosystem?

5. What is the nature of relationships between nearby communities, the

forest or other ecosystem, and the larger encompassing ecosystem?

7. What do stakeholders and the public value about the natural

environment, its resources, and various uses of those resources?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, and group interviews

Concept Vc. Sense of well-being—An important aspect of a social assessment is an

analysis of the general well-being in the community and the related

perceptions that people have about their community. This includes an

assessment of both the actual well-being within a community measured

by specific indicators as well as resident perceptions about the quality of

life in the community and the extent to which they have access to

community facilities and services.

Indicator 1 Behavioral and situational conditions

Description of indicator Crime rates, divorces and suicides, unemployment, public assistance,

and welfare

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of statistical data

indicator
83

Dimension V (cont.) Public Perceptions and Well-Being

Concept Vc. (cont.)

Indicator 2 Access to facilities, services, and resources

Description of indicator The extent to which a person feels he/she has the same access to

community resources as anyone else

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, and group interviews

Indicator 3 Community satisfaction

Description of indicator A general measure of the public’s satisfaction with the community or

region they live in.

Related social 3. What are the social and economic characteristics of the geographic

assessment question(s) region surrounding the assessment area?

8. What recent social and economic trends relevant to management of

the ecosystem are occurring in the region?

Method of measuring Analysis of survey data (personal interviews, mail and telephone

indicator questionnaires) research, and group interviews

Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.

Psychological Abstracts. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Resources in Education. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute of Education,

Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.

Social Sciences Citation Index. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.

Social Sciences Index. New York: H.W. Wilson Co.

Sociological Abstracts. San Diego: Sociological Abstracts, Inc.
84
Bright, Alan D.; Cordell, H. Ken; Hoover, Anne P., Tarrant, Michael A. 2003. A human

dimensions framework: guidelines for conducting social assessments. Gen. Tech. Rep.

SRS-65. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research

Station. 83 p.

This paper provides a framework and guidelines for identifying and organizing human dimension

information for use in forest planning. It synthesizes concepts from a variety of social science

disciplines and connects them with measurable indicators for use in analysis and reporting.

Suggestions of analytical approaches and sources of data for employment of the identified social

indicators are provided.

Keywords: Forest planning, human dimensions, social indicators.
The Forest Service, United States Department of

Agriculture (USDA), is dedicated to the principle of

multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources

for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation.

Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private

forest owners, and management of the National Forests and

National Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to

provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation.

The USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities

on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age,

disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family

status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons

with disabilities who require alternative means for communication

of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should

contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and

TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office

of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400

Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call

(202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.