Issues in Forest Restoration: Forest Service Contracting: A Basic Guide for Restoration Practitioners

During the past ten years, the array of administrative tools available to the Forest Service for restoration has changed and been enhanced. This guide provides an overview of the contracts, agreements, and permits available to pursue restoration work on national forests, and provides contractors with information on how to find and bid on restoration contracts

Issues in Forest Restoration: Navigating the Motives and Mandates of Multiparty Monitoring

In this paper, we discuss what we learned about multiparty monitoring for collaborative, community-based forest restoration projects, after providing technical assistance and training to more than 50 New Mexico community groups between 2002 and 2007. These community groups were all recipients of Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (CFRP) cost-share grants. The grants require multi-stakeholder monitoring and assessment of project effectiveness in terms of ecological change and effects on management skills. Because all CFRP grantees are required to monitor their projects, this program provided a unique opportunity for assessing community-based, multiparty monitoring of forest restoration projects. Given four years experience providing monitoring assistance to CFRP grantees, we explore the following questions:What are the goals of multiparty monitoring? How does it work? What are reasonable expectations of multiparty monitoring? What are the best ways to help community groups achieve these expectations? Finally, how should a community prepare for the implementation of multiparty monitoring in a community-based forestry program

Monitoring Handbook 6: Analyzing and interpreting monitoring data

The basic purpose of data analysis is to identify patterns of change in your indicator over time, and to evaluate these changes. Without doing some kind of analysis, it will be difficult for you to know the effect your project is actually having. The data analysis techniques presented in this handbook are not difficult. Most of them can be easily done using little more than a calculator and scratch paper. If necessary, there are resources listed in the handbook for additional assistance analyzing your data

Monitoring Handbook 4: Monitoring ecological effects

The goal of restoration should be to create a self-sustaining ecosystem that functions well and needs little maintenance. Monitoring is essential in order to see if projects are achieving improved ecological conditions. Part 1 of this handbook includes a description of common restoration goals and indicators. Methods for measuring each indicator are described in Part 2

Monitoring Handbook 1: What is multiparty monitoring?

There are many reasons for monitoring your project and using a multiparty approach. Multiparty monitoring will increase your understanding of the effects of restoration actions, support adaptive management, and set a course for future management. Multiparty monitoring also helps build trust among partners and establish project accountability in the broader community. This handbook will guide you through the initial steps required to develop a multiparty monitoring process

Monitoring Handbook 5: Monitoring social and economic effects of forest restoration

Forest restoration projects frequently have social, economic, and cultural goals as well as ecological goals. For instance, project partners may hope that their project will provide new jobs and reduce local unemployment, keep youth in the community, reduce the wildfire risk to human lives and property, or increase public involvement in national forest planning and decision making. Monitoring provides a way to determine whether you are headed toward or away from these goals. For example, your monitoring group might want to ask, Is our community becoming more or less sustainable? Are local management skills improving or getting worse? or Is the use of small-diameter trees increasing or decreasing? Part 1 of this handbook describes indicators that can help community-based multiparty monitoring groups measure changes in common forest restoration project goals. Part 2 describes specific methods for measuring change in each indicator

Monitoring Handbook 2: Developing a multiparty monitoring plan.

Developing a clear, concise plan for how monitoring will be done is an essential part of any monitoring program. A monitoring plan will help your group make sure that the date you gather are useful and meaningful. It ensures that information is collected at the right time and place and helps to provide transparency, an important part of the multiparty monitoring process. This handbook covers the basic steps in designing a monitoring plan

Get lucky? Luck and educational mobility in working-class young people’s lives from age 10–21

Scant sociological attention has been given to the role of luck within social mobility/reproduction. This paper helps address this conceptual gap, drawing on insights from over 200 longitudinal interviews conducted with 20 working-class young people and 22 of their parents over an 11-year period, from age 10–21. We explore the potential significance of luck within the trajectories of 13 educationally mobile young people who were the first in family to go to university, six young people who achieved similar educational levels to their parents and one young person whose status was less clear cut. Our analysis suggests that particular forms of luck may be instrumental in creating opportunities for social mobility, although the consequentiality of these are mediated through interplays of agency, structure, habitus and capital. We conclude that paying further attention to luck may help augment sociological understandings of structure/agency and Bourdieusian understandings of social reproduction

Reasons for not/choosing chemistry: Why advanced level chemistry students in England do/not pursue chemistry undergraduate degrees

There are international concerns about decreasing rates of chemistry degree enrolment. This article seeks to understand students' reasons for not/choosing to pursue a chemistry degree, drawing on (i) open-ended survey responses from a sample of 506 students in England aged 21–22 who had studied advanced level (“A level”) chemistry at age 18 (as either a full A level or a half “AS” level) and had either chosen (n = 70) or not chosen (n = 436) to pursue undergraduate chemistry and (ii) 185 interviews conducted with a subsample of 18 young people who had been longitudinally tracked from age 10 to 22 (with 17 of their parents) who took advanced level chemistry and then either did (n = 5), or did not (n = 13) go on to study for a chemistry degree. Analysis revealed four key reasons for not/choosing chemistry that were present to varying extents in both the quantitative and qualitative data (relative interest, connection and options; experiences of chemistry A level; feeling “not/clever enough”; and views of chemistry jobs). Four additional factors were predominantly found in the qualitative data (associations of chemistry with masculinity; encouragement from a significant adult; views of higher education; and chemistry work experience/outreach). Applying a sociological lens, we suggest that not/choosing chemistry was a relational process, produced through interactions of habitus, capital, and field. We identify conceptual and methodological implications and extrapolate reasons why chemistry degree enrolments may be declining, offering suggestions for how chemistry education might further support participation