2 results
Private Forest Owners and Invasive Plants: Risk Perception and Management
- A. Paige Fischer, Susan Charnley
-
- Journal:
- Invasive Plant Science and Management / Volume 5 / Issue 3 / September 2012
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 375-389
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
We investigated nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) owners' invasive plant risk perceptions and mitigation practices using statistical analysis of mail survey data and qualitative analysis of interview data collected in Oregon's ponderosa pine zone. We found that 52% of the survey sample was aware of invasive plant species considered problematic by local natural resource professionals; 70% was concerned about these species; and 46% had treated invasive plants on their parcels. Owners' perceptions of invasive plant risks fell along a spectrum ranging from a lack of awareness or concern, to the view that invasive plant infestations have discrete causes and controllable consequences, to the perception that incursions by invasive plants have diffuse causes and uncontrollable effects. Being aware or concerned about invasive plant species were predictors (p ≤ 0.001) of whether owners treat their parcels to control invasive plants. Holding wildlife habitat and/or biodiversity as an important forest management goal was also a predictor (p ≤ 0.08) of whether owners treated their parcels to control invasive plants. Some owners were sensitive to the risks of invasive plant infestations from nearby properties, and a surprisingly high percentage of respondents had cooperated with others in forest management activities previously. Our findings suggest three approaches to increasing the frequency of invasive plant mitigation by NIPF owners that hold promise: (1) raising awareness and concern about invasive plants and their impacts on forest management goals that owners care about, such as wildlife habitat and/or biodiversity; (2) providing assistance to help owners mitigate invasive plants they feel unable to control; and (3) engaging owners in coordinated efforts across ownership boundaries to address invasive plant risks.
ten - Reflections on an evaluation of partnerships to cope with winter pressures
- Edited by David Taylor, Susan Balloch
-
- Book:
- The Politics of Evaluation
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 20 January 2022
- Print publication:
- 19 January 2005, pp 153-174
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
This chapter reflects on an evaluation of partnership working between health and social care services in West Sussex. In evaluating projects to combat ‘winter pressures’, it outlines the mapping of the main relationships between stakeholders, findings from a questionnaire sent to senior, middle management and frontline staff and an analysis of evaluation forms. It shows how national policy drove the projects and how local politics contributed to as well as impeded their success.
Winter pressures are governmentally recognised special problems experienced in winter by both health and social services as a result of a higher incidence of illness, especially among older people, and a consequent increase in emergency admissions. Special funding to meet these pressures was introduced in 1997 for local health and social care communities through Local Winter Planning Groups (LWPGs).
The LWPG provided a prime example of partnership working. Its broad representation included the relevant Health Authority, Social Services Departments, Trusts (acute, mental health, community, learning disability and ambulance services), Primary Care Trusts and Groups, Local Representative Committees, Out of Hours’ Cooperatives, Deputising Services, NHS Direct, Community Health Councils (CHCs)/Patient/Public representatives and members of the voluntary and private sectors involved in health and social care.
National criteria for local winter planning required each health and social care community to submit a single local winter plan to its health and social care region at the end of the July of that year for agreement by the end of September (DH, 2000). In 2000 national criteria focused on flu immunisation, hospital services (critical care and acute services), community and mental health services, ambulance services, intermediate care, social care and primary care. Further issues covered included contingency plans for escalation/control procedures, human resources and communications.
Six broad areas of action being taken to prepare for winter, as set out in the ‘Winter Plan’
• Promoting self-care and preventing ill health;
• investment in capacity and change;
• service improvement and design;
• staffing;
• better preparations and strengthened partnerships; and
• managing the winter.
The Winter Report 2000-01 found many examples of good progress, as well as areas still requiring considerable attention. Its recommendations, however, signalled a greater focus on year round capacity planning as the key to improved services:
Local planning for winter should explicitly include preparations to manage elective as well as emergency demand. LWPGs should operate all year round. (DH, 2001a, para 58)