Criterion – H: Forest based human health issues
Consultant's Initials: |
RLL, BH, PW |
Source: |
CIFOR-BAG |
Identification No. in source: |
3.0 |
Final Identification No. (as reported in final list): |
H |
Class: |
Social |
Recommendation (after field testing) |
Yes |
Box A:
Enter the selected criterion as stated in the source document in this space:
Original Wording: The health of forest actors, cultures and the forest is acceptable to all stakeholders.
Revised Wording: Forest-based health issues are recognized.
Box B: Attributes
Rated on a scale of 1-5, where 1=no/bad/unimportant and 5=yes/good/important
| Original | revised | original | revised |
||||||||
(a) |
(j) |
(a) |
(j) |
||||||||
Precisely defined? (clear) |
3 |
4 |
Will it produce replicable results? (reliable) |
2 |
3 |
||||||
Diagnostically specific? (valid) |
2 |
3 |
Is it applicable for all landowners? |
4 |
4 |
||||||
Sensitive? |
3 |
3 |
Is it applicable to other areas/ecosystems? (robust) |
5 |
5 |
||||||
Easy to detect, record and interpret? |
2 |
4 |
How relevant is this criterion? |
5 |
5 |
||||||
Useable? |
3 |
4 |
|||||||||
Box C:
Justify your selection of the Criterion in Box A. Please ensure you discuss its relationship to theory:
Human health itself is a major component of well being. In other nations, people are so dependent on forests that they are best described as forest dwelling. In the North American context, truly forest-dependent communities are increasingly rare and forest dwellers virtually non-existent. As communities and individuals become less dependent solely on forest resources human health is less indicative of forest sustainability. However, some aspects of human health are still closely linked particularly with respect to the health and safety of forest workers and community water supply-related human health concerns.
Box D:
Provide bibliographic references (if any) which support your selection of this Criterion for evaluation:
Cofer, Prabhu and Wollenberg. (1995) Principles, Criteria and Indicators: Applying Ockham’s Razor to the People-Forestry Link. Working Paper No. 8, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
CIFOR. 1998. Criteria and Indicator Resource Book. CIFOR. Bogor, Indonesia.
Box E:
Please name (give the reference of) the Criterion that overlap (come closest) to the Criterion that has been selected for evaluation:
CIFOR: 3.2
CIFOR – BAG: 3.0 2.0
CCFM: 6.1 6.2 5.0
Box G: Geo-Political
Evaluate the geo-political scale on which the Criterion operates. Multiple-entries are
possible but care should be taken to determine the primary thrust of the criterion.
Justify: |
Original | revised | |
(a) |
(j) |
||
Global |
|||
North America |
|||
Intermountain |
|||
West |
|||
Study area |
X |
X |
|
Tenure |
X |
X |
|
Site |
|||
Box H: Function
Classify Criterion according to whether it refers to the structure of the system
(biophysical, social or management), function of the system, describes its composition or
describes perturbations to the system.
Justify: |
Original | Revised | |
(a) |
(j) |
||
Structure |
|||
Function |
|||
Composition |
|||
Perturbation |
|||
Not Applicable |
X |
X |
Box I: Linkages
Identify linkages between Criterion, to ensure that the same or similar information is not collected twice and to ascertain whether the necessary feedback loops exist between criterion.
Information from this criteria provides some useful information for ecological health criteria. Additionally, information from this criteria will be relevant to management criteria (Boise E)
Box J:
Final version of Criterion, state only if different to definition in Box A:
Forest-based health issues are recognized