DIGITALNA ARHIVA ŠUMARSKOG LISTA
prilagođeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu



ŠUMARSKI LIST 7-8/2019 str. 26     <-- 26 -->        PDF

of respondents are from Serbia; 12.2% from Croatia, Italy, and North of Macedonia respectively; 9.8% from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovakia and Slovenia respectively; 7.3% from Montenegro; and the remaining 4.9% from Bulgaria and Czech Republic respectively. Therefore, 22 stakeholders come from EU28 member countries (54% of the sample of stakeholders), while the remaining 19 stakeholders are from non-EU28 countries (46%). 
On average, the respondents have 14 years of past expertise in forestry or nature conservation issues with a range from a minimum of 2 years to a maximum of 40 years. The distribution of respondents by expertise year’s class shows that the majority of the stakeholders (58% of sample of stakeholders) have a past expertise between 5 and 14 years (Figure 1).   
With regard to the distribution of the stakeholders by group of interest (Table 1), the results show that 41.5% of respondents are representatives of public administrations; 29.3% of universities and research institutes; 22.0% are actors of forest-wood chain; and 7.3% are members of environmental NGOs.
Types of conflicts – Vrste sukoba
The results show that for the stakeholders involved in the survey the most common type of conflict is those related to the procedure for the establishment of a new protected area with a mean of 3.50 (Table 2). Conversely, the conflicts between forest management activities and nature conservation, and between hunting activities and nature conservation are considered less important with mean values of 3.01 and 3.02 respectively. In the first type of conflict, stakeholders assigned a high level of importance to four specific conflicts: property rights restrictions (mean=3.73); additional bureaucracy for forest management activities (mean=3.65); a different stakeholders’ perception about nature conservation issue (mean=3.51), and a lack in communication between public authorities and citizens (mean=3.50). In the other two types of conflicts, the most important conflicts are no fair compensation for property rights restrictions (mean=3.55) and the extension of the forest rotation period (mean=3.19) for forestry activities, and the limitations in hunting zones and period (mean=3.33) for the hunting activities.
In addition, the results show that for the representatives of non-EU28 countries the three most important conflicts are the limitations in hunting activities, the additional bureaucracy, and the different stakeholders’ perception about nature conservation issue. Conversely, for the representatives of EU28 member countries the most important conflicts are the additional bureaucracy, and those due to the property rights restriction and no fair compensation for restrictions. The Mann-Whitney U test shows statistically significant differences only for conflicts between hunting activities and nature conservation (p=0.003). These statistical differences are related to the limitations in hunting zones and period (p=0.004).
In summary, the stakeholders from EU and non-EU countries have a similar opinion about the high importance to generate conflicts of the additional burocracy and no fair compensation for property rights restrictions. Conversely, the representatives of the non-EU member countries mostly emphasize the importance of restrictions in hunting activities as a potential conflict compared to the colleagues of EU member countries.
The groups of interest assigned a different order of importance to the conflicts. The most important conflicts for the representative of public administrations is due to the limitations in the construction of forest roads (mean=3.67) followed by property rights restriction (mean=3.56) and a different stakeholders’ perception about nature conservation issue (mean=3.50). For the representative of universities and research institutes the most important conflict is due the property rights restrictions (mean=4.36) followed by the additional bureaucracy (mean=4.08) and the conflicts related to the definition, identification and mapping of protected areas (mean=3.90). For the actors of forest-wood chain the main conflicts are due to the extension of the forest rotation period (mean=3.75) and a different stakeholders’ perception about nature conservation issue (mean=3.75). Finally, for the representative of environmental NGOs the most important conflict is related to the hunting activities (mean=4.50) followed by additional bureaucracy and no fair compensation for property rights restrictions at the same level of importance (mean=4.0). In addition, it is interesting to highlight that the representatives to the public administration assigned a low importance to all types of conflicts rather than other categories of stakeholders. Probably, this difference is because public administration – Ministries, regions and municipalities – are in many cases the main actor for the establishment of protected areas and implementation process related to the stakeholders’ involvement. Conversely, the main stakeholder’s involved in the protected areas management changes from country to country: in some countries protected areas are managed by public and private enterprises, in other countries the protected areas are managed by public authorities, while in more rare situations protected areas are managed by environmental NGOs (e.g., some Natura 2000 sites). Supposedly, this lower perception of conflicts by representatives of public administrations is due to an underestimation of the importance of participatory process and the socio-economic consequences related to the establishment of a new protected area. In case it is necessary to comply with national or international obligations (e.g., Natura 2000 network implementation), the socio-economic consequences