2016
DOI: 10.5558/tfc2016-081
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Delphi method as an alternative to standard committee meetings to identify ecological issues for forest ecosystem-based management: A case study

Abstract: The face-to-face committee meeting is one of the most common expert consultation methods used in forest management. However, it is also laden with disadvantages, such as potential inequity in its consideration of participant opinion and the time involvement required. This led us to evaluate another expert consultation method, the Delphi method, namely by implementing it to identify ecological issues associated with second-growth boreal forests in eastern Canada. We compared this method to the committee meeting… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of those 22 participants that responded to the firstround invitation, 17 participants responded to the second round of the survey, an attrition of 22%. While there is no consensus on what can be considered a satisfactory attrition rate in Delphi studies (Mullen, 2003), the 22% attrition rate in this research is far less than the rates found in many other Delphi surveys where attrition rates near 50% are common (Hess & King, 2002, Khadka & Vacik, 2012, Waldron et al, 2016. The aggregated consensus results from both rounds of the Delphi survey questions are shown here in Table 6.2 to Table 6.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…Of those 22 participants that responded to the firstround invitation, 17 participants responded to the second round of the survey, an attrition of 22%. While there is no consensus on what can be considered a satisfactory attrition rate in Delphi studies (Mullen, 2003), the 22% attrition rate in this research is far less than the rates found in many other Delphi surveys where attrition rates near 50% are common (Hess & King, 2002, Khadka & Vacik, 2012, Waldron et al, 2016. The aggregated consensus results from both rounds of the Delphi survey questions are shown here in Table 6.2 to Table 6.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…They are always pertinent to subjects when generalization is required whilst still being able to understand the systems growing complexity (Keeney et al 2011;Waldron et al 2016).…”
Section: Delphi Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Delphi technique is also a useful socio-cultural method to evaluate ES (Rodríguez-Ortega et al, 2018). It has been previously applied for addressing the geographical distribution of ES based on land use (Geneletti, 2007;Scolozzi et al 2012;Shipley et al, 2020), public preferences for recreational use of forest (Edwards et al, 2012) and the effect of land use on ES and biodiversity (Waldron et al, 2016;Filyushkina et al, 2018;Rodríguez-Ortega et al, 2018).…”
Section: The Delphi Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%