- Download PDF - 

SEEFOR 2 (2): 61-71
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.11-07 

Original scientific paper


Analysis of Participatory Processes in the Formulation of Spatial Plan for Nature Park Medvednica

Nataša Lovrić 1*, Marko Lovrić 1, Ivan Martinić 2

1 Croatian Forest Research Institute, Regional Office for South East Europe (EFISEE), Vilka Novaka 50 c, 42000 Varaždin, Croatia
2 Faculty of Forestry, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

* Corresponding author: e-mail: natasal@sumins.hr  

LOVRIĆ N, LOVRIĆ M, MARTINIĆ I 2011 Analysis of Participatory Processes in the Formulation of Spatial Plan for Nature Park Medvednica. South-east Eur for 2 (2): 61-71. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.11-07 

Cited by:        CrossRef        Google Scholar


Background and Purpose: This research aims to assess the stakeholders influence on spatial planning of Nature Park Medvednica, a mountainous protected area adjacent to Zagreb, the capital city of Croatia, which tries to hold on to the pressure of the urbanization. Because of the inexistence of spatial plan which is required with the Croatian laws, its area was significantly decreased in 2009. This kind of research has not been done yet for NP Medvednica, and it will provide a contribution to the process of developing a spatial Plan for NP Medvednica. 
Material and Methods: The study was conducted in the framework of stakeholder analysis, for which a series of in-depth interviews with - stakeholders were performed, and documents concerning the spatial plan were analysed. The data gained was processed in MAXQDA software for qualitative analysis.
Results and Conclusion: The gathered data explains which are the disadvantages of the tree processes of the formulation of the spatial plan and is giving a possible theoretical explanation or a model which can be implied in any decision making process involving stakeholders in natural resources management in within a given political and cultural context. Description of the past and current spatial planning situation of the NP Medvednica was specified and issues and stakeholders concerning the creation of the spatial plan where identified. The key conflict areas that affect the formulation of spatial plan were detected and examined. The level of participation of stakeholders in the context of fulfilment of their own interests was assessed as well as the influence on participation processes of different stakeholder groups on the formulation of the spatial plan. In order to have proper citizens and stakeholders participation some changes in the legislation should take place.

Keywords: stakeholders, participation, spatial planning, protected areas 


  1. PRENDERGAST JR, QUINN RM, LAWTON JH, EVERSHAM BC, GIBBONS DW 1993 Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies. Nature 365 (6444): 335-337. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/365335a0
  2. SCHMEER K 1999 Guidelines for Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis. Bethesda, MD, Partnerships for Health Reform, Abt Associates Inc., p 8-10
  3. BRUGHA R, VARVASOVSZKY Z 2000 Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy Plann 15 (3): 239-246. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.239
  4. VARVASOVSZKY Z, BRUGHA R 2000 A stakeholder analysis. Health Policy Plann 15 (3): 338-345. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.338
  5. BLAIR JD, FOTTLER MD 1990 Challenges in Health Care Management: Strategic Perspectives for Managing Key Stakeholders. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-115-2-161_2  
  6. GRIMBLE  R,  CHAN MK 1995 Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries. Some practical guidelines for making management more participatory and effective. Nat Resour Forum 19 (3): 113-124. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.1995.tb00599.x
  7. CHEVALIER JM, BUCKLES D 1999 Conflict management: A hetero cultural perspective. In: Buckles D (ed) Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource Management. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada, p 13-44
  8. GRIMBLE R, WELLARD K 1997 Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agr Syst 55 (2): 173-193. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00006-1
  9. DE LOPEZ TT 2003 Economics and stakeholders of Ream National Park, Cambodia. Ecol Econ 46 (2): 269-282. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00142-3
  10. NEPAL SK, WEBER KE 1995 Prospects for coexistence: Wildlife and local people. Ambio 24 (4): 238-245.
  11. ROCKLOFF SF, LOCKIE S 2004 Participatory Tools for Coastal Zone Management: use of Stakeholder Analysis and Social Mapping in Australia. Journal of Coastal Conservation 10 (3-4): 81-92. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1652/1400-0350(2004)010[0081:PTFCZM]2.0.CO;2
  12. MUSHOVE P, VOGEL C 2005 Heads or tails? Stakeholder analysis as a tool for Conservation Area management. Global Environ Chang 15 (3): 184-198. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.008
  13. ELIOT L 2001 Ask these questions to reach your stakeholders Management. Global Environmental Change 15: 184-188
  14. SVENDSEN AC, BOUTLIER RG, ABBOT R, WHEELER D 2004 Measuring the business value of stakeholder Vancuver, BC, Simon Fraser Centre for Innovation in Management. Available at:  http://www.cica.ca/ (Accessed: 20 July 2010)
  15. SAVAGE GT, NIX TW, WHITEHEAD CJ, BLAIR JD 1991 Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Acad Manage Exec 5 (2): 61-75. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AME.1991.4274682
  16. MITCHELL RK, AGLE BR, WOOD DJ 1997 Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What really Counts. Acad Manage Rev 22 (4): 853-888. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1997.9711022105
  17. CLELAND DI 1999 Project management Strategic design and implementation. 3rd edition, New York, McGraw-Hill.
  18. BRIINER W, HASTINGS C, GEDDES M 1996 Project leadership. New York, Van Nostrnd Reinhold 2nd ed., Aldershot,England; Brookfield, Vt: Gower
  19. FLETCHER A, GUTHRIE J, STEANE P, ROOS G, PIKE S 2003 Mapping stakeholder perceptions for a third sector organization. Journal of Intellectual Capital 4 (4): 505-527. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14691930310504536
  20. FROOMAN J 1999 Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manage Rev 24 (2): 191-205. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.1893928
  21. TURNER JR, KRISTOFFER V, THURLOWAY R 2002 The Project Manager as Change Agent. London, McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. p 264
  22. DE LOPEZ TT 2001 Policy options for Cambodia's Ream National Park: A stakeholder and economic analysis. Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), Singapore, p 269-282
  23. CHO K J 2009 Developing an interpretative planning model for a national park system: A stakeholder-based needs assessment study for Korea. PhD dissertation, The Ohio State University, p 247.
  24. PRELL C, HUBACEK K, REED M 2009 Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Management. Society and Natural Resources 22 (6): 501-518. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920802199202
  25. SUMAN D, SHIVLANI M, ILON JW 1999 Perceptions and attitudes regarding marine reserves: a comparison of stakeholder groups in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Ocean Coast Manage 42 (12): 1019-1040. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0964-5691(99)00062-9
  26. JENNINGS SF, LOCKIE S 2002 Democratisation and capacity building in coastal zone decision-making in Australia: the application of stakeholder analysis and social mapping. Paper presented at the Coastal Zone Asia Pacific Conference, Bangkok, TH, 12-16 May 2002
  27. CHRISTIE P 2004 Marine Protected Areas as Biological Successes and Social Failures in Southeast Asia. Am Fish S S 42:155-164
  28. RENARD Y, BROWN N, GEOGHEGAN T 2001 Stakeholder approaches to natural resource management in the Caribbean. Regional Conference on Community-Based Coastal Resource Management Mérida, Mexico 19-20 Juni 2001
  29. SHEPARD G, 2004 The ecosystem approach – Five steps to implementation. IUCN Publications Services Unit,  Ecosystem Management Series No. 3
  30. BRENNER B 2001 Stakeholder management and ecosystem management: A stakeholder analysis of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. MBA Thesis, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, p 153
  31. ENSERINK E 2000 A quick scan for infrastructure planning: screening alternatives through interactive stakeholder analysis. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 18 (1): 15-22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154600781767628
  32. PARLIAMENT OF SOCIALISTIC REPUBLIC OF CROATIA 1981 Act to designate the western part of Medvednica Nature Park. Official Gazette, Zagreb, 24
  33. CROATIAN PARLIAMENT 2005 Law on nature protection. Official Gazette, Zagreb, 07
  34. MINISTRY OF CONSTRUCTION AND PHYSICAL PLANNING 1997 Spatial Planning Strategy of Croatia. Naklada Zadro, Zagreb, p 168
  35. CROATIAN PARLIAMENT 2007 Law on spatial planning and Construction. Official Gazette, Zagreb, 76
  36. ARNSTEIN SR 1969 A Ladder of Citizen Participation. J Am I Planners 35 (4): 216-224. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
  37. IFC 1998 Doing Better Business Through Effective Consultation and Disclosure. Available at: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_pubconsult/$FILE/PublicConsultation.pdf  (AcceSsed: 15 July 2010)
  38. BROWN JT 2007 The handbook of program management. McGraw-Hill, p 288
  39. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, IAP2 2004 Public participation spectrum. Available at: http://www.iap2.org.au/sitebuilder/resources/knowledge/asset/files/36/iap2spectrum.pdf (AcceSsed: 20 October 2011)   
  40. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT, Power Tools: for policy influence in natural resource management (iied). Available at: http://www.iied.org/natural-resources/key-issues/empowerment-and-land-rights/power-tools-for-policy-influence-natural-re (Accesed: 10 June 2011)
  41. CROATIAN PARLIAMENT 2009 Law Amendments to the Act to designate the western part of the Nature Park Medvednica. Official Gazette, Zagreb, 25
  42. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 2006 Regulation on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies. Regulation no. 1367/2006. Available at: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:264:0013:0019:EN:PDF (AcceSsed: 5 February 2012)
  43. OFAK L 2009 Sudjelovanje javnosti u odlučivanju u pitanjima okoliša (Public Participation in environmental issues decision making). Hrvatska javna uprava: opis za teoriju i praksu javne uprave 9 (2): 443-470
  44. BAN A 2004 Croatian Accession to the European Union: Institutional Challenges. Institute of Public Finance 2: 223-248


© 2015 by the Croatian Forest Research Institute. This is an Open Access paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).