The Upper Silesia region, one of the most industrialised and densely populated areas in the country, faces significant challenges in promoting public participation in decision−making and forest management. Katowice, the region’s capital, is a unique case, characterised by high forest cover, reaching approximately 42% of the city’s area. Due to its long industrial history, forests in Upper Silesia are critical for mitigating environmental damage, improving air quality, and maintaining ecological balance. However, misinformation on social media about forestry practices and strict EU legal requirements have led to sporadic tensions between the public and forest authorities, highlighting the need to rebuild public trust. In response to the growing demand for cultural ecosystem services, a pilot programme of ‘social forests’ was launched in Katowice at the beginning of 2024, similar to initiatives in other major urban regions, indicating a need for a deeper understanding of residents’ expectations. This pilot study aimed to investigate the influence of various socio−economic factors and attitudes on participation in forest management within the industrial region of Katowice. To this end, a pilot survey was conducted among 82 participants, using online and snowball sampling methods. The questionnaire assessed demographics, attitudes towards forests, awareness of ecosystem services, willingness to participate, and level of trust. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was acceptable, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.806. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Chi−square tests, multinomial logistic regression, and decision tree analysis, allowing for a deeper exploration of the relationships. The results reveal a strong dominance of recreational and health motivations: 85% of respondents visit forests for relaxation, health, and fresh air, and 71.9% to escape urban pollution. These motivations are strongly associated with a greater willingness to participate in nature conservation, unlike visits driven by cultural or heritage reasons. Despite this, 72% of respondents were not interested in participating in forest programmes, and over 80% were opposed to financially supporting conservation efforts. The level of education proved to be the most important predictor of involvement; individuals with higher academic qualifications (e.g., Master’s or scientific degrees) were more likely to participate. Income level did not have a statistically significant relationship with the willingness to financially support forest activities (p=0.997). Moreover, a one−unit increase in ecological awareness increased the probability of involvement in forest conservation by 1.8 times, confirming the importance of education. Regarding information sources, 70% of respondents obtained knowledge from social media or friends, even though official channels were considered the most reliable (46%). A low level of trust in institutions also persists; for example, 30.5% strongly disagreed that payment systems were transparent. The findings suggest that forest policy aimed at increasing participation should focus on raising public awareness, providing non−financial incentives (e.g., volunteering), and improving transparency and public trust in institutions responsible for the state of forests. These insights are particularly relevant for urban and post−industrial areas like Katowice, where maintaining clean and well−managed green spaces is crucial for encouraging pro−environmental behaviour.

Abdulai, I.A., 2025. Public perception and willingness to participate in urban forest governance. Arboricultural Journal, 47 (1): 52-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2024.2397263. Abildtrup, J., Stenger, A., de Morogues, F., Polomé, P., Blondet, M., Michel, C., 2021. Biodiversity protection in private forests: PES schemes, institutions and prosocial behavior. Forests, 12 (9): 1241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f12091241. Acharya, R.P., Maraseni, T.N., Cockfield, G., 2021. Estimating the willingness to pay for regulating and cultural ecosystem services from forested Siwalik landscapes: Perspectives of disaggregated users. Annals of Forest Science, 78: 51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-021-01046-3. Affek, A.N., Solon, J., Kowalska, A., Regulska, E., Wolski, J., Kołaczkowska, E., 2024. The potential of Polish forests to provide ecosystem services. Geographia Polonica, 97 (1): 65-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7163/gpol.0269. Alazmi, S., Abdelmegid, M., Sarhan, S., Poshdar, M., Gonzalez, V., Bidhendi, A., 2025. An integrated framework to improve waste management practices and environmental awareness in the Saudi construction industry. Cleaner Waste Systems, 10: 100195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clwas.2024.100195. Ap, J., 1992. Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 19 (4): 665-690. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(92)90060-3. Avolio, M.L., Pataki, D.E., Trammell, T.L., Endter-Wada, J., 2018. Biodiverse cities: The nursery industry, homeowners, and neighborhood differences drive urban tree composition. Ecological Monographs, 88 (2): 259-276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1290. Bąkowska-Waldmann, E., Piniarski, W., 2023. Gender-specific preferences regarding urban green areas. Quaestiones Geographicae, 42 (4): 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/quageo-2023-0037. Baldessari, S., Paletto, A., De Meo, I., 2024. Rethinking public participation in forest policies: A literature review of participatory techniques. Forests, 15 (9): 1514. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f15091514. Baldi, L., Trentinaglia, M.T., Thrassou, A., Galati, A., 2025. Growing green: Exploring the drivers of citizens’ participation in Italian urban and peri-urban forestation governance. Land Use Policy, 148: 107385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107385. Balmford, A., Bruner, A., Cooper, P., Costanza, R., Farber, S., Green, R.E., ... Turner, R.K., 2002. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science, 297 (5583): 950-953. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1073947. Barona, C.O., Wolf, K., Kowalski, J.M., Kendal, D., Byrne, J.A., Conway, T.M., 2022. Diversity in public perceptions of urban forests and urban trees: A critical review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 226: 104466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104466. Baulenas, E., Baiges, T., Cervera, T., Pahl-Wostl, C., 2021. How do structural and agent-based factors influence the effectiveness of incentive policies? A spatially explicit agent-based model to optimize woodland-for-water pes policy design at the local level. Ecology and Society, 26 (2): 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12325-260210. Bennett, N.J., Whitty, T.S., Finkbeiner, E., Pittman, J., Bassett, H., Gelcich, S., Allison, E.H., 2018. Environmental stewardship: A conceptual review and analytical framework. Environmental Management, 61: 597-614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0993-2. Bielinis, E., Korcz, N., Janeczko, E., 2024. Exposure to waste might decrease relaxation: The effects of viewing an open dump in a forest environment on the psychological response of healthy young adults. Forests, 15 (8): 1302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f15081302. Boermans, D.D., Jagoda, A., Lemiski, D., Wegener, J., Krzywonos, M., 2024. Environmental awareness and sustainable behavior of respondents in Germany, the Netherlands and Poland: A qualitative focus group study. Journal of Environmental Management, 370: 122515. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.122515. Cabin, R.J., Clewell, A., Ingram, M., McDonald, T., Temperton, V., 2010. Bridging restoration science and practice: Results and analysis of a survey from the 2009 society for ecological restoration international meeting. Restoration Ecology, 18 (6): 783-788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2010.00743.x. Carmichael, C.E., McDonough, M.H., 2019. Community stories: Explaining resistance to street tree-planting programs in Detroit, Michigan, USA. Society and Natural Resources, 32 (5): 588-605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2018.1550229. Cetas, E.R., Yasué, M., 2017. A systematic review of motivational values and conservation success in and around protected areas. Conservation Biology, 31 (1): 203-212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12770. Ciesielski, M., Mohytych, V., Korcz, N., 2024. The role and significance of Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) based on a survey of forest users in the Warsaw metropolitan area. Sylwan, 168 (8): 533-548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26202/sylwan.2024027. Ciesielski, M., Tkaczyk, M., 2023. Visits in forests during the Covid-19 Pandemic in the cross-border area of Poland, the Czech Republic and Germany. Quaestiones Geographicae, 42 (2): 71-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/quageo-2023-0016. Derks, J., Giessen, L., Winkel, G., 2020. COVID-19-induced visitor boom reveals the importance of forests as critical infrastructure. Forest Policy and Economics, 118: 102253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102253. Derks, J., Winkel, G., Strieck, J., De Vreese, R., 2023. Visitor frequencies and attitudes towards urban forests and their management, before and during the COVID-19 lockdown. A mixed methods case study in Bonn, Germany. Ecosystems and People, 19 (1): 2195021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2023.2195021. Dulak, M., Kułakowska, M., 2024. Poland’s governmental response to the European Green Deal: Discursive strategies prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Politics in Central Europe, 20 (1): 169-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/pce-2024-0007. Dwucet, K., Rzetala, M., Śnieszko, Z., 2016. Regeneration and adaptation of strongly anthropogenically altered areas for recreation and tourism purposes: Case study of the Silesian Upland. Proceedings of the 3rd International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts SGEM 2016: Political Sciences, Law, Finance, Economics and Tourism, 24-30.08.2016, Albena, Bulgaria, pp. 24-30. EU, 1998. Council Resolution of 15 December 1998 on a forestry strategy for the European Union (1999/C 56/01). Official Journal of the European Communities, C 56: 1-4. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31999Y0226(01) [accessed: 31.07.2025]. FAO, 2016. Forest policy module. In: Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Toolbox. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available from: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-forest-management/toolbox/modules/forest-policy [accessed: 30.07.2025]. Felipe-Lucia, M.R., Soliveres, S., Penone, C., Fischer, M., Ammer, C., Boch, S., ... Allan, E., 2020. Land-use intensity alters networks between biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117 (45): 28140-28149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2016210117. Fischer, L.K., Honold, J., Cveji´c, R., Delshammar, T., Hilbert, S., Lafortezza, R., … Kowarik, I., 2018. Beyond green: Broad support for biodiversity in multicultural European cities. Global Environmental Change, 49: 35-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.02.001. Fridén, A., D’Amato, D., Ekström, H., Iliev, B., Nebasifu, A., May, W., ... Droste, N., 2024. Mapping two centuries of forest governance in Nordic countries: An open access database. Forest Policy and Economics, 160: 103142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103142. Frings, O., Abildtrup, J., Montagné-Huck, C., Gorel, S., Stenger, A., 2023. Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment. Ecological Economics, 213: 107944. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107944. George, D., Mallery, P., 2003. SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 380 pp. Gwiazdowicz, D.J., Matulewska, A.E., Moszczyński, M., 2023. Between nature, law and social expectations – a case study of approaches to human-wildlife conflicts resulting from synanthropization and synurbanization in the Republic of Poland. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 8 (2): 335-363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2023-2016. Hartig, T., Lopez, S., Roe, J., 2014. Psychological restoration in nature and the role of parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 132: 56-61. Jurowski, C., Uysal, M., Williams, D.R., 1997. A theoretical analysis of host community resident reactions to tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 36 (2): 3-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759703600202. Kabisch, N., Qureshi, S., Haase, D., 2015. Human-environment interactions in urban green spaces A systematic review of contemporary issues and prospects for future research. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 50: 25-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.08.007. Kabisch, N., Strohbach, M., Haase, D., Kronenberg, J., 2016. Urban green space availability in European cities. Ecological Indicators, 70: 586-596. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.029. Kellert, S.R., 1993. The biological basis for human values of nature. In: S.R. Kellert, E.O. Wilson, eds. The biophilia hypothesis. Washington: Island Press, pp. 42-69. Kendal, D., Williams, N.S., Williams, K.J., 2010. Harnessing diversity in gardens through individual decision makers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 25 (4): 201-202. Kikulski, J., 2023. Social perception of the need for forest management in Poland – assessment of the current status and occurring changes. Sylwan, 167 (9): 549-568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26202/sylwan.2023058. Konczal, A.A., 2020. Why can a forest not be private? A post-socialist perspective on Polish forestry paradigms – an anthropological contribution. Forest Policy and Economics, 117: 102206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102206. Korcz, N., Kamińska, A., Ciesielski, M., 2024. Is the level of quality of life related to the frequency of visits to natural areas? Forests, 15 (12): 2257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f15122257. Korcz, N., Koba, J., Kobyłka, A., Janeczko, E., Gmitrowicz-Iwan, J., 2021. Climate change and informal education in the opinion of forest users in Poland. Sustainability, 13 (14): 7892. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147892. Lenormand, M., Luque, S., Langemeyer, J., Tenerelli, P., Zulian, G., Aalders, I., ...Woods, H., 2018. Multiscale socio-ecological networks in the age of information. PLOS ONE, 13 (11): e0206672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206672. Malik, I., Bohr, M., Wistuba, M., … Woskowicz-Ślęzak, B., 2023. Multi-period exploitation in Upper Silesia, Central Europe. Journal of Field Archaeology, 48 (5): 366-379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2023.2200583. Maller, C., Townsend, M., Pryor, A., Brown, P., St Leger, L., 2006. Healthy nature healthy people: ‘Contact with nature’ as an upstream health promotion intervention for populations. Health Promotion International, 21 (1): 45-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dai032. Mandziuk, A., Bijak, S., Łukawska, I., Radomska, J., Studnicki, M., Parzych, S., 2025. Drivers of willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept of cross-country skiers in forests in Poland. Forests, 16 (3): 389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f16030389. Manhique, E., Wätzold, F., 2024. Effects of institutional distrust on value estimates of stated preference surveys in developing countries: A choice experiment on conserving biodiversity within agricultural landscapes in a biodiversity hotspot. Q Open, 4 (1): qoae014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoae014. Martinsson, J., Lundqvist, L.J., Sundström, A., 2011. Energy saving in Swedish households: The (relative) importance of environmental attitudes. Energy Policy, 39 (9): 5182-5191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.046. MCPFE., 1998. Resolution L1: People, forests and forestry – Enhancement of socio-economic aspects of sustainable forest management. Third Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe 2-4 June 1998, Lisbon/ Portugal. Available from: https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/MC_lisbon_resolutionL1.pdf [accessed: 10.05.2025]. MKiŚ, 2024. Wzmocnienie ochrony lasów cennych przyrodniczo i ważnych społecznie. Wytyczne i rekomendacje ogólno-polskiej narady o lasach. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska, 93 pp. Nousiainen, D., Mola-Yudego, B., 2022. Characteristics and emerging patterns of forest conflicts in Europe-What can they tell us? Forest Policy and Economics, 136: 102671. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102671. Owoeye, R.S., Ajayi, J., Oyeniran, T., 2025. Assessment of community participation in forest conservation in Ekiti State, Nigeria. American Journal of Environmental and Resource Economics, 10 (1): 31-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajere.20251001.13. Pawełczyk, F., Bolik, A., Błachut, B., Kamińska, A., Opała-Owczarek, M., Malik, I., ... Poręba, G., 2023. Development of chronology for historical mining shaft remains in the vicinity of Tarnowskie Góry based on radiocarbon, luminescence and dendrochronological dating. Geochronometria, 50 (1): 81-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/geochr-2023-0004. Peng, J., Wang, X., Liu, Y., Zhao, Y., Xu, Z., Zhao, M., ... Wu, J., 2020. Urbanization impact on the supply-demand budget of ecosystem services: Decoupling analysis. Ecosystem Services, 44: 101139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101139. Rasoolimanesh, S.M., Jaafar, M., Kock, N., Ramayah, T., 2015. A revised framework of social exchange theory to investigate the factors influencing residents’ perceptions. Tourism Management Perspectives, 16: 335-345. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.10.001. Richardson, G., 2009. The great bear media battle: How the forest was finally. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/great-bear-media-battle-how-forestwas-finally/docview/1027136500/se-2?accountid=35366 [accessed: 10.05.2024]. Sarvašová, Z., Pajtík, J., Dobšinská, Z., 2025. Understanding societal priorities for forest ecosystem services: Survey insights from ‘Forestry Days 2024’ in Slovakia. Journal of Forest Science, 71: 195-204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/7/2025-JFS. Sikora, J., Wartecka-Ważyńska, A., 2017. Social functions of forests in Poland. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 2 (61): 190-203. Statistics Poland, 2022. National population and housing census 2021 – final results. Warsaw, Statistics Poland. Available from: https://stat.gov.pl/en/national-census/national-population-and-housing-census-2021 [accessed: 20.05.2025]. Suškevičs, M., Ehrlich, T., Peterson, K., Hiiemäe, O., Sepp, K., 2023. Public participation in environmental assessments in the EU: A systematic search and qualitative synthesis of empirical scientific literature. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 98: 106944. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106944. Toukabri, M., Boutaleb, B., 2025. Assessing factors impacting electric vehicle adoption in Saudi Arabia: Insights on willingness to pay, environmental awareness, and perceived risk. Engineering, Technology and Applied Science Research, 15 (1): 19729-19736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.9311. Ustawa, 1991. Ustawa z dnia 28 września 1991 r. o lasach, Dz.U. 1991 nr 101 poz. 444. Wierzbicka, A., Koper-Staszowska, W., 2024. Needs of selected social groups related to forests in the Upper Silesian Conurbation. Sylwan, 168 (10): 703-716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26202/sylwan.2024014. Wierzbicka, A., Krokowska-Paluszak, M., Schmidt, M., 2019. Turystyka w Przemęckim Parku Krajobrazowym – czego oczekują turyści? Polish Journal for Sustainable Development, 23 (1): 65-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15584/pjsd.2019.23.1.8. Włodarczyk, E., Herczakowska, J., 2025. Social dimension of Poland’s sustainable energy transition as assessed by residents of the Silesian Region. Sustainability, 17 (6): 2707. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17062707. World Bank, 2023. Urban development. Overview. Available from: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview [accessed: 30.07.2025].