Reaction Web

Search REACTION projects Search REACTION projects

Map REACTION projects Map REACTION projects


III.5. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT

VI.2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT

1. What types of exploitation were and are most frequent in the area:
Types of exploitation Before the project % of project area Actual % of project area Date of abandonment
Field agriculture  YES 40  YES 16   
Orchards (olive trees, etc.)  -   -    
Bee-keeping  -   -    
Pasture lands  YES   YES    
Planted forest-tree crops (e.g., cork, timber, pulp,...)  -   -    
Managed semi-natural forest or coppice  YES   YES 100   
Aromatic plants  -   -    
Edible mushrooms  -   -    
Urban: residential, tourist facilities, etc.  -   -    
*Please indicate the reference date (e.g., at the time of project implementation; 25, 50, etc. years before project implementation; etc.):
At the time of implementation 

2. Does significant grazing take place in the project area?
Yes   
a) Indicate species and livestock population (data on past, present and projections for future, if available) 
Before the project Ref.Date: 1890 
Projection for the future Ref.Date:  
Type of livestock Before the project At present Projection for the future);echo " ";?>
Sheep  21 987  200   
b) Comments on past, present and projections for future census and exploitation systems in the restoration area:
 

3. Are timber and other wood products exploited:
Yes
a) Type of timber and other wood products (species):
 
b) Volume produced/year:
8-15000 m3 
c) Is timber and other wood products felled for use for local people?
No
Description:  

4. Are non-timber forest products collected?
Yes
Non-timber products collected Economic importance
Mushrooms  Low 
c) Does hunting take place? Yes

5. Employment
a) Did project implementation works generate jobs for the local population?
Yes
b) Does the restored area provide jobs at present?
- No
YES Occasional
- Permanent
Description: forest worker 
c) Number (approximate) of people employed in the restored area ? /year: 
Occasional  
Permanent  

6. Homeland
a) Are people living in the restored area?
No
b) If yes, indicate type of lifestyle:
- Indigenous
- Settled
- Part-time/Second home
c) Human population dynamics in the project area in the last 20 years:
Type (increase/decrease):  
Range of change:  

7. Recreational and educational value
a) Uniquiness of particular sites within the restored area?
No
Description:  
b) Do people use the restored area for recreation?
Yes
c) Average number of visitors/year (approximate value):
 
d) Presence of tourist or educational facilities (visitor centre, guide trails,...):
Yes
If yes, please list number and types:
trails 
e) Types of activity (walking, hunting,...)
Walking, mountain bike 
f) Is the area used in scientific work?
Yes
Description: INRA of Orleans works on comparative plantations of Pseudotsuga menziesii and on Pseudotsuga menziesii source 

8. Cultural value
a) Does the project area have particular significance to local inhabitants?
Yes
b) Are there important cultural or religious sites present in the project area?: (World Heritage sites, sacred groves, trees, burial sites, buildings, ..)
Yes
c) If yes, list sites, types, designations and indicate if they have official protection:
Prehistoric siet of the Dolmen of Clôt de l'Oste 
d) Presence of culturally important lanscapes: (land management, grazing system, ...)
No
Description:  
e) Are there references in folklore, literature, etc. to the project area?
- Yes
YES No
- Unknown
f) After the project implementation, were there any negative impacts to cultural sites/landscapes?
No
Description:  
g) Have the cultural sites/landscapes been protected in the framework of the project?
- Yes
YES No
- Partly

9. Local participation
a) In relation to the project, the local population has a position of?
- Participation
- Indifference
- Opposition
- Boycott
b) Are local people involved in decisions about the project area?
No
c) What is the nature of participation?
 
d) Has a questionnaire been prepared concerning local people's perception of the project (participatory approach)?
- Yes
YES No
- Unknown
Was it intended to make the population:
- more sensitive to risks (wildfires, floods, erosion, etc.)?
- Yes
- No
- Unknown
- more aware of the advantages of ecological restoration?
- Yes
- No
- Unknown
- Other:  

REACTION: This research is supported by the "Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development" programme, under contract EVK2-2002-80025