This article is summarized and concluded from articles as follow:
(1) Making GIS Work in Forest Management by Manij Upadhyay, unpublished work.
(2) A Hierarchical Approach to Spatial Forest Planning by Ugo Feunekes and Andrew Cogswell, USDA Forest Service, Proceeding
(3) HCVF/A Identify Within Ecoregion; Integrating Conservation Planning into Regional Spatial Planning by Barano Siswa Sulistyawan, WWF Indonesia,
(4) Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resources management: claiming community forests in Cameroon by Michael K. McCall and Peter A. Minang, The Geography Journal Volume 171 No.(4) pages 283-306, 2010
Previous Section – Participatory GIS (PGIS) for Community Based Natural Resources Management (Case Study in Tinto, Cameroon)
Participatory GIS (PGIS) for Community Based Natural Resources Management (Case Study in Tinto, Cameroon) (continued)
Integrating GIS into Forest Resources Spatial Management and Planning (5.1) — Participatory spatial planning, in its various manifestations, demonstrates the common ‘imperfect data’ characteristics of ‘naïve geography’ (Egenhofer and Mark 1995):
- fuzzy and layered zones and zonal information (area data);
- simultaneity of views and ‘jumping scale’ – people’s consciousness and cognition operate at several spatial scales simultaneously;
- fuzzy, blurred, flexible and multiple boundaries (line data);
- perceived distances which are asymmetric and/or nonlinear;
- ambivalent, hidden or restricted spatial locations (point data);
- dynamics – the flows of resources, information, ideas, influence, power;
- use of empirically graspable, but indistinct spatial terms like ‘near’, ‘far’, ‘isolated’, ‘crowded’, ‘central’, ‘peripheral’;
- sounds capes and smells capes.
Technical manageability of GIS and PGIS by local groups has a number of requirements, notably the following:
- Feasibility, which can be interpreted as the adaptability of geographic information technology hardware – such as Global Positioning System and mobile GIS – to local physical and climatic conditions, e.g. solar charging, cockroach and termite damage, and the maintenance support needed.
- Local cultural and social conditions referring to information interchange, multi-application capacities, simplicity to learn and use, and literacy, numeracy and computer literacy requirements.
- Operational inclusiveness – PGIS should be a community enterprise, not just using ‘key informants’ who are likely to be educated, adult, and senior males.
- Maintaining the currency of data – updating information is costly, time-consuming, and liable to be overlooked.
- Cost-effectiveness in local terms, meaning looking at the full implications of the costs of ‘voluntary’ time investments and comparative returns.
First Section – Integrating GIS into Forest Resources Spatial Management and Planning (1) – Introduction
References
Bassole, A., Brunner, J., and Tunstall, D., 2001, GIS: Supporting Environmental Planning and Management in West Africa, World Resources Institute, London
Bettinger, P., and Wing, M.G., 2004, Geographic Information Systems Application in Forestry and Natural Resources Management, Mc Graw Hill, New York
Feunekes, U., and Cogswell, A.. 1993. A hierarchical approach to spatial forest planning. Proceedings of the International Symposium on System Analysis and Management Decisions in Forestry. Traverse City, Michigan, USA
ESRI, 2008, What is GIS, Guide to Geographic Information System, GIS. Com /ESRI.com from http://www.gis.com/whatisgis/
JAmnick, M.S., AND Walter, K.R. 1991. Harvest blocking, adjacency constraints and timber harvest volumes. In Proceedings of the 1991 Symposium on Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, 255–261. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-74. 1991 March 3–6. Charleston, SC. Charleston, SC: USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station.
Meneghin, B.J., M.W. Kirby, AND J.G. Jones. 1988. An algorithm for writing adjacency constraints efficiently in linear programming models. In The 1988 Symposium on Systems Analysis in Forestry Resources, eds. Kent, B. and L.S. Davis, 46–53. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-161. 1988 March 29–April 1. Asilomar, CA. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest Range Experiment Station.
Pradhan, B.M., 2008, Geoinformatics for Resource Mapping and Analysis, Handouts for M.Sc. in Forestry, M. Sc. In Watershed Management, and M. Sc. Natural Resource Management. & Rural Development. Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
Upadhyay, M., 2009, Making GIS Work in Forest Management, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal, un-published
WALLINGER, S., 1995, Sustainable forestry initiative, Journal of. Forestry, 93(1): 17–19.
Warnecke, L., Nanni, R.V., Nedovic-Budic, Z., and Stiteler, W., 2002, Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Technology in the Nation’s 50 State Forestry Organizations., Geomanagement Associates Inc., Syracuse, Ney York
*Geo-information for Spatial Planning and Risk Management — Batch 6 — Faculty of Geography, Gadjah Mada University*
*Intended to fulfil Spatial Planning lecture task*