Dataset Information

A global systematic review of forest management institutions: towards a new research agenda.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Globally, forest landscapes are rapidly transforming, with the role of institutions as mediators in their use and management constantly appearing in the literature. However, global comparative reviews to enhance comprehension of how forest management institutions (FMIs) are conceptualized, and the varying determinants of compliance, are lacking. And so too, is there knowledge fragmentation on the methodological approaches which have and should be prioritized in the new research agenda on FMIs.

Objectives

We review the regional variations in the conceptualization of FMIs, analyze the determinants of compliance with FMIs, and assess the methodological gaps applied in the study of FMIs.

Methods

A systematic review of 197 empirically conducted studies (491 cases) on FMIs was performed, including a directed content analysis.

Results

First, FMIs literature is growing; multi-case and multi-country studies characterize Europe/North America, Africa and Latin America, over Asia. Second, the structure-process conceptualization of FMIs predominates in Asia and Africa. Third, global south regions report high cases of compliance with informal FMIs, while non-compliance was registered for Europe/North America in the formal domain. Finally, mixed-methods approaches have been least employed in the studies so far; while the use of only qualitative methods increased over time, the adoption of only quantitative approaches witnessed a decrease.

Conclusion

Future research should empirically ground informality in the institutional set-up of Australia while also valorizing mixed-methods research globally. Crucially, future research should consider multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches to explore the actor and power dimensions of forest management institutions.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-022-01577-8.

SUBMITTER: Kimengsi JN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9789374 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A global systematic review of forest management institutions: towards a new research agenda.

Kimengsi Jude Ndzifon JN Owusu Raphael R Charmakar Shambhu S Manu Gordon G Giessen Lukas L

Landscape ecology 20221224 2

<h4>Context</h4>Globally, forest landscapes are rapidly transforming, with the role of institutions as mediators in their use and management constantly appearing in the literature. However, global comparative reviews to enhance comprehension of how forest management institutions (FMIs) are conceptualized, and the varying determinants of compliance, are lacking. And so too, is there knowledge fragmentation on the methodological approaches which have and should be prioritized in the <i>new researc ...[more]

PMID: 36589773

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealth Impact Assessment (HIA) advances Health in All Policies by identifying impacts of proposed actions on health and equity and recommending changes to address these impacts. Since the Gothenburg Consensus Statement in 1999, HIA has been applied to policies, plans, programmes and projects in multiple sectors and settings across the world. Despite demonstrated effectiveness, its use across the world is inconsistent with few nations systematically using HIA. In a global context of increasing health inequities, pandemics, climate change, and economic crises, HIA can help integrate health and equity into decision making. There is a need for research to support the ongoing evolution and development of HIA. This paper presents a research agenda for the field of HIA.MethodsWe used a mixed method approach utilising insights of approximately 280 participants through an international online survey and participatory workshops. We compared priority areas of research identified through the survey, workshops, and literature review to inform the development of a research agenda. The team drew on their own positioning and experience as HIA practitioners and researchers to shape this agenda.ResultsWe identified four research priorities: (1) Institutionalisation - Sustaining and institutionalising HIA in varying contexts and levels. (2) Influence - Identifying mechanisms and strategies that can be employed to effectively influence stakeholders and decision making. (3) Equity and Participation - Analysing the role of equity, justice, power and participation in HIA, and (4) Methodology - Improving HIA Methods to understand the complex relationships between proposed actions, health and health equity outcomes and identifying what to do. We developed research questions for each theme.ConclusionsThe research agenda advocates for sustained research and practice to strengthen impact and address knowledge gaps in the field. Functioning as a roadmap for both researchers and funders, it aims to contribute to a healthier and more equitable world. Recognising the valuable role of HIA in addressing global health challenges, the agenda encourages researchers to investigate, develop, and advance the field of HIA.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, there is renewed interest in and momentum for strengthening community health systems, as also emphasized by the recent Astana Declaration. Recent reviews have identified factors critical to successful community health worker (CHW) programs but pointed to significant evidence gaps. This review aims to propose a global research agenda to strengthen CHW programs.Methods and resultsWe conducted a search for extant systematic reviews on any intermediate factors affecting the effectiveness of CHW programs in February 2018. A total of 30 articles published after year 2000 were included. Data on research gaps were abstracted and summarized under headings based on predominant themes identified in the literature. Following this data gathering phase, two technical advisory groups comprised of experts in the field of community health-including policymakers, implementors, researchers, advocates and donors-were convened to discuss, validate, and prioritize the research gaps identified. Research gap areas that were identified in the literature and validated through expert consultation include selection and training of CHWs, community embeddedness, institutionalization of CHW programs (referrals, supervision, and supply chain), CHW needs including incentives and remuneration, governance and sustainability of CHW programs, performance and quality of care, and cost-effectiveness of CHW programs. Priority research questions included queries on effective policy, financing, governance, supervision and monitoring systems for CHWs and community health systems, implementation questions around the role of digital technologies, CHW preferences, and drivers of CHW motivation and retention over time.ConclusionsAs international interest and investment in CHW programs and community health systems continue to grow, it becomes critical not only to analyze the evidence that exists, but also to clearly define research questions and collect additional evidence to ensure that CHW programs are effective, efficient, equity promoting, and evidence based. Generally, the literature places a strong emphasis on the need for higher quality, more robust research.

Dataset Information

A global systematic review of forest management institutions: towards a new research agenda.

Context

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Supplementary information

Publications

A global systematic review of forest management institutions: towards a new research agenda.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets