Local perspectives on development conflicts in a mountainous socio-ecological system: A Q methodology study

221 Local perspectives on development conflicts in a mountainous socio-ecological system: A Q methodology study Elena Todorova1, Miglena Zhiyanski1 1 ForestResearchInstitute-BulgarianAcademyofSciences,Sofia,Bulgaria Corresponding author: Elena Todorova ([email protected]) Copyright: © Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski This is an open access article distributed under terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (Attribution 4.0 International – CC BY 4.0). Research Article Abstract This study suggests an understanding, based on the local perspectives, of the underlying reasons why the municipality of Velingrad, a mountainous region with abundant natural resources and promising tourism sector does not retain its population and harness its endogenous potential to develop sustainably. Q methodology is employed to better comprehend how people collectively perceive certain problems and their solutions. The results lead us to three well-defined perspectives that highlight high-disagreement areas where dialogue and negotiation are most needed, especially around tourism’s role, environmental trade-offs, and benefit-sharing mechanisms. The study revealed deep distrust in the governing system and a general sense of political and ecological alienation. The future of mountain villages is not perceived as a collective responsibility, but rather as a challenge they are expected to manage on their own. As a result of these insights, the study suggests changing the course of local development and reframing the management model into a more open community-based platform that integrates local voices and energy by involving them not only in framing the policies but also in the implementation and monitoring process. This study uses Q methodology to explore how local stakeholders perceive the factors influencing the socio-ecological framework that guides local management decisions. Key words: Highland communities, neo-endogenous development, Rhodope Mountain, stakeholders’ perspectives, Velingrad municipality 1. Introduction We live in a highly interconnected world with new cross-scale interactions linking people and places in new way (Folke et al. 2016). This interconnectedness is reflected in evolving understandings of good practices in local development and governance, where local actions are increasingly influenced by and responsive to broader social, ecological, and economic dynamics. This framing incorporates principles of neo-endogenous development and resilience (Domptail et al. 2013; Shaw and Maythorne 2013; Milán-García et al. 2019; Marango et al. 2021; Sieber et al. 2024), emphasizing the importance of local capacity, community participation, and adaptive governance as well as sustaining human well-being in balance with nature (Van Oudenhoven et al. 2018). Designing the path for prosperous local development that is both socially and ecologicalAcademic editor: Hristina Prodanova Received: 20 June 2025 Accepted: 29 October 2025 Published: 08 December 2025 Citation: Todorova E, Zhiyanski M (2025) Local perspectives on development conflicts in a mountainous socio-ecological system: A Q methodology study. Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241. https://doi. org/10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025) DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 222 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts ly responsible requires a transdisciplinary approach (Stock and Burton 2011; Moallemi et al. 2020) that employs holistic understanding of the human–environment interactions. Using a social-ecological system (SES) approach in generating knowledge and in formulating sustainable local governance solutions is critical, as it explicitly recognizes the connections and feedback linking human and natural systems (Leslie et al. 2015). Embracing this holistic perspective calls for the integration of diverse and context-specific knowledge systems that can meaningfully capture and explain the complex dynamics within these systems. In this setting, local perspectives emerge as essential sources of insight, offering not only contextual information but also practical skills, capabilities, and factual knowledge. Such locally grounded knowledge plays a crucial role in guiding strategic planning by helping to accurately define relevant problems and formulate appropriate questions to be addressed (Martínez-Fernández et al. 2021). Knowledge systems are dynamic, they are not objective, detached and value-free but are inextricably linked with the social, political and agro-ecological context in which they arise (Grimble 1998). Therefore, they consist not only of information, or knowledge as a resource, but also of factual knowledge, capabilities, and skills and have the advantage of being holistic or comprehensive vis-à-vis a particular theme (Antweiler 1998). Only thanks to familiarity with specific local reality is it possible to assess and take full advantage of local developmental potential (Adamski and Gorlach 2007). An effective tool that captures the diverse viewpoints of a community that form this local reality is the Q methodology. It is frequently used to delineate and understand different stakeholders’ perspectives making it particularly salient as a means to inform sustainability practice and policy, increasing its role in revealing hidden values and perspectives of those involved in community-based efforts, among all related to natural resource management (Gruber 2011; Niedziałkowski et al. 2018; Sneegas et al. 2021), as well as mountain regions development (Ciftcioglu et al. 2020; Moser and Baulcomb 2020; Pagot and Gatto 2024). Mountain regions face significant local development challenges related to demographic decline, persistent poverty, and economic marginalization, which collectively constrain their long-term development prospects (OECD 2021). This is particularly notable in Bulgaria, where mountainous areas occupy more than 40% of the national territory and account for a substantial share of the country’s water, mineral, and forest resources, as well as a significant portion of its demographic, agricultural, and tourism potential (Yordanova and Mateeva 2011; Petrov 2021) providing wide variety of ecosystem services (Borisova et al. 2023). Following Bulgaria’s accession to the European Union in 2007, cohesion and regional development policies have played a crucial role in reshaping how local governments plan, finance, and implement development projects. Nevertheless, increasing territorial disparities continue to persist (OECD 2021) and mountain regions in particular are characterized by enduring socio-ecological challenges and limited access to essential services, which often prevent them from fully benefiting from EU policy frameworks (Koulov 2018). These constraints are particularly acute in smaller settlements and rural areas, where outmigration, aging population, and economic stagnation hinder long-term planning and investment. The survival chances of vital communities in marginal mountainous territories depend on a balanced developmental approach that considers economy, ecology, culture and identity and endogenous potential altogether (Maino et al. 2018). 223 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts The present research focuses on a case study in Western Rhodope Mountains—Velingrad municipality, Bulgaria. The municipality is a very popular spa resort with long-lasting traditions in forestry, a sector that used to be the backbone of its economy in the 20th century (Todorova and Zhiyanski 2024). Although the number of tourists and tourism revenues increase every year, as well as the income from tourism, the number of local populations decreases, the local population continues to decline, unemployment remains three times higher than the national average, and salaries are barely 60% of the national average (National Statistical Institute 2022). This study suggests that local perspectives on development conflicts in this mountainous socio-ecological system may provide valuable insights into why the region’s potential remains underutilized and unsustainably managed. The central hypothesis is that a deeper understanding of local viewpoints can reveal new angles on the most pressing challenges and contribute to identifying more effective, context-sensitive solutions. Applying Q methodology offers a promising avenue for capturing the subjective viewpoints of Velingrad’s stakeholders, from local officials and tourism operators to residents and marginalized groups. There are studies on stakeholders’ perspectives in the region, especially targeting the forest sector that highlight the active, adequate and critical stand of the local stakeholders (Paligorov et al. 2015) and confirm the importance of public involvement for sustainable forest management (Tsvetkov et al. 2020). This investigation points at shared and divergent perspectives on key development issues in search of the variables that distort the human-nature balance and the commonalities that unite people in their visions for the future. Areas where dialogue and negotiations are most needed are highlighted and, through a socio-ecological approach, an analysis of their underlying causes is suggested. Q methodology is rarely used to explore the intersection of social and ecological issues in a local governance context in mountain regions in Eastern Europe. The study addresses this research gap and demonstrates the use of the Q methodology to clarify the bottom-up perspective to the factors that shape the socio-ecological framework in which the local management acts. This study aims to investigate the underlying factors that hinder the selected case study region, a mountainous area rich in natural resources and experiencing economic advancement, from effectively harnessing its endogenous potential, retaining its population, and setting sustainable development objectives. Furthermore, it seeks to investigate the foundation of the local problems by understanding the local viewpoints and the drivers that stand behind them. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Methods Q methodology was originally developed by William Stephenson (1935) and is a mixed qualitative-quantitative method that provides a foundation for the systematic study of subjectivity, its meaning and measure (Brown 1993). It asks its participants to decide what is ‘meaningful’ and hence what does (and what does not) have value and significance from their perspective (Watts and Stenner 2005). Q methodology enables the group of participating respondents (called the p-set) to rank-order a purposively sampled set of stimuli (а Q-sample) which 224 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts is then modeled in Q-sorts. The Q-sorts are intercorrelated as variables in factor analysis. Resulting factors represent points of view, and the association of each respondent with each point of view is indicated by the magnitude of his or her loading on that factor (McKeown and Thomas 2013). The factors produced represent clusters of shared subjective perspectives within the participant pool (Sneegas et al. 2021) revealing the structure of people’s beliefs and opinions. The present research followed the traditional Q methodology steps as described by Brown (1993) and McKeown and Thomas (2013), the workflow described in Fig.1. The Q study starts by identifying a topic of investigation (Webler et al. 2009), which in our case is “Problems and opportunities in the Velingrad Municipality.” Following this, the concourse, i.e., a curated collection of subjective statements Figure 1. Workflow of the study. 225 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts reflecting the diversity of viewpoints within the domain of interest, is compiled (Sneegas et al. 2021). For the present study, this analysis includes a literature review, including scientific literature, regional development plans, sector-specific local plans, social media discussions, and statistical data. To deepen and contextualize the concourse, ten semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide tailored according to each participant’s expertise and professional sphere in order to capture context-specific insights (Karatsareas 2022). The participants included: two representatives from the municipal administration (focused on local development and tourism), mayor of a mountain village, two local eco-activists, one hotel manager, one representative of a cultural institution, two professionals from the forestry sector, and one from the agricultural sector. All interviewees were individuals with significant engagement and expertise in their respective fields (McKeown and Thomas 2013). The interviews were transcribed, analyzed for recurring themes and patterns, completed with those of the literature review and then all the important messages were clustered into four categories: villages; tourism; forestry; agriculture, ending with a set of 184 statements in the concourse. Consensus and contradictory statements started emerging, and that early stage facilitated focusing on the local hot topics coming directly from the people being studied. The formulated statements are easy to read and contain “excess meaning” (Webler et al. 2009), both positive and negative statements are determined for each category, to encompass the essential subthemes that together could highlight the underlying reasons for the local development to stagnate. Q statements are then selected from each category, ensuring that all important aspects of the concourse are included in the Q sample (Webler et al. 2009). At the end a Q set of 41 statements was listed. The p-set, or participant pool (i.e., participants who are likely to express viewpoints relevant to the research question), was selected using a combination of purposive and snowball sampling.The p-set included 26 participants, distributed as in Table 1. The participant pool consisted of 26 individuals (12 women and 14 men), ranging in age from 20 to 80 years. Participants represented a diverse spectrum of professional backgrounds, including administration, agriculture, business, culture, environmental activism, education, forestry, industry, journalism, social services, and tourism. This heterogeneity was intentionally sought to represent the breadth of opinion in a target population (Webler et al. 2009) across generations, genders, public and private sectors, consumers of ecosystem natural resources, their managers, and protectors. The interviews were conducted in the period October 2024–April 2025. The conversation started with introducing the topic and explaining the rules for filling in the Q-sort. The Q-sort is under forced distribution and varies from “-5”, equal to “I completely disagree with this statement”, to “+5”, equal to “I completely agree with this statement”. The interviewees were encouraged to first sort the statements in three files, “yes”, “no” and “neutral’ and then distribute them in the Q-sort. The interviewees were also instructed to prioritize the topics they consider more important when they had hesitations while sorting. All interviews were recorded and conducted with one and the same interviewer. An exit interview was conducted, discussing the most polarized statements and those that the interviewee was most hesitant about. The interview ended with asking if an important statement was missing from the Q statements. 226 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts Table 1. P-set composition. №Date (dd/mm/yyyy) Stakeholder Age Gender 01 30.10.2024 Education 30–40 M 02 31.10.2024 Tourism 60–70 F 03 01.11.2024 Education 30–40 F 04 01.11.2024 Business 30–40 M 05 02.11.2024 Business 60–70 M 06 04.02.2025 Tourism 20–30 F 07 04.02.2025 Forestry 40–50 M 08 04.02.2025 Business 30–40 M 09 05.02.2025 Culture 50–60 M 10 05.02.2025 Journalist 50–60 F 11 01.03.2025 Administration 50–60 F 12 01.03.2025 Business 30–40 F 13 02.03.2025 Social 50–60 F 14 18.03.2025 Villages 50–60 M 15 18.03.2025 Villages 60–70 M 16 19.03.2025 Forestry 50–60 F 17 19.03.2025 Forestry 30–40 M 18 29.03.2025 Industry 70–80 M 19 29.03.2025 Education 60–70 F 20 30.03.2025 Agriculture 30–40 F 21 30.03.2025 Business 30–40 F 22 31.03.2025 Social 30–40 M 23 01.04.2025 Eco-Activist 30–40 M 24 02.04.2025 Industry 60–70 M 25 03.04.2025 Agriculture 30–40 M 26 11.04.2025 Eco-Activist 30–40 F The Q-sorts were then analyzed using the Ken-q Analysis software (Banasick 2023). The correlations were calculated and a correlation matrix was constructed. A principal component analysis (PCA) was then conducted, identifying eight factors with eigenvalues greater than one. The first factor explained 28% of the variance, followed by the second with 13% and the third with 8%.The first three factors were taken into account, considering Humphrey’s Rule whose results coincide with the scree plot analysis. Persons significantly associated with a given factor are therefore assumed to share a common perspective (McKeown and Thomas 2013). The significant factor loadings are interpreted according to Brown (1993), in excess of ± 0.50. These are selected for interpretation and rotated using varimax rotation (in Ken-Q Analysis) that maximizes the input of the participant group on the emergent factor structure (Watts and Stenner 2005). The factor loadings are set to P < 0.05 probability. Interpretation of the factor arrays was conducted and validated through verbatim excerpts from the interview data. Consensus and distinguishing statements were analyzed. Con- 227 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts sensus statements were determined using factor comparison—by calculating if the difference between the z-scores of a statement is statistically significant (based on the standard error of differences) (Zabala 2014) and if the statements are ranked among the first or last 15 (to pay attention to the most salient statements). 2.2. Case study area Velingrad Municipality (Fig. 2) is situated in the Western Rhodope Mountains and encompasses the town of Velingrad along with 20 nearby villages, most of which are scattered in the higher parts of the mountain. The territory of Velingrad is distinguished by its vast forests, offering beautiful landscapes dominated by Scots pine, black pine, common fir, and Norway spruce (Alexiev et al. 2002). It is widely recognized as one of the country’s premier spa and wellness Figure 2. Case study area, Velingrad Municipality, Western Rhodope Mountain (Basemap: Esri 2025a, 2025b). 228 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts tourist destinations. Tourism is the leading economic driver, complemented by forestry with rich and long traditions, small-scale agriculture, and service industries. The tertiary sector, particularly tourism, has also been the most rapidly developing over the past twenty years, while industry and agriculture have experienced serious decay (Todorova and Zhiyanski 2024). However, in contrast to its touristic appeal, Velingrad faces several development challenges, including depopulation, aging, unemployment and low living standards. Demographically, the town experiences population decline and outmigration, particularly among young people seeking better opportunities in larger cities or abroad (Dragozova et al. 2015). This demographic trend places pressure on the local labor force and hampers long-term economic resilience. These issues are coupled with infrastructural, ecological, and management problems (Dragozova et al. 2015; Paligorov et al. 2015; Tcherkezova et al. 2023; Todorova and Zhiyanski 2024). Pollution from solid household waste is recognized as a serious problem as well (Tcherkezova et al. 2023). As underlined previously, the municipality of Velingrad has great potential and long-standing traditions in the forestry sector in terms of education, training and production (Tsvetkov et al. 2020). Forests also play an important role for society as elements of natural heritage, with both cultural and socio-economic value (Zhiyanski et al. 2021). However, the sector experiences its own problems that are very well summarized in the Forest management plan and highlight the calamities, bad condition of infrastructure, lack of qualified and motivated human resources, the need to increase the added value of the forest wood and non-wood products, biodiversity preservation and implementation of contemporary forest management practices (Paligorov et al. 2015). 3. Results The quantitative processing of the q-sorts results in highlighting three distinct perspectives (factors) generated from the 26 interviews that explain 49% of the variance. These perspectives on the topic “Problems and opportunities in Velingrad Municipality” are as follows: 1. Balance between nature and people; 2. Governance pessimism and 3. Management and local incentives: a problem and a solution. 3.1. Balance between nature and people The supporters of Perspective 1, as presented in Fig. 3, strongly agree that the future of the region hangs in the balance and strongly disagree that the economic benefits are more important than biodiversity. “I believe there should be a balance between nature and people, and that we should use forest resources more consciously” (06_Tourism). They prioritize the solid waste pollution problems and the importance of ecosystem services that forests provide. Problems concerning management issues and political influence come to the forefront. Forestry is considered equally important as tourism, and forests are believed to have increasing importance in the future “I presume that in the future we will value them even more for the water they give us and for coolness we need ever more often in summer” (19_Education). Forest-related economic activities are still salient, and forests are the most important economic resource. They are rather hesitant about whether the forests are well-managed, although 229 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts they consider the sector is strongly politically influenced, and the logging is the main driving force in forestry. “I believe that people in the sector are too much focused on what things used to be. I think that if we want to have progress, we need to change our mindset and look ahead” (16_Forests). At the same time, “traditions in forest management are an important knowledge base that local people engaged in forestry are proud of” (17_Forests). They consider alternative tourism as a way to diversify the tourist product. They also believe tourism can be the future for the villages: “Tourists start looking for something else— life close to nature, coziness and village life atmosphere—I have guests that love to go biking, enjoy the views in the villages, share the muddy street with the hens” (06_Tourism). They are confident that the traditional way of life is not dying out and that the villages are very lively, and they will not depopulate soon: “I think that there is a lot of potential in the villages, people just need more information. There is initiative in young people” (14_Villages). “It’s peaceful, quiet and beautiful here (Draginovo)…We use mineral water for heating, and mineral public baths are free for the locals” (15_Villages). They do not recognize agriculture as a sector of great importance. All interviewed from the forestry sector and villages load on this perspective. There is no distinct pattern in the gender and age of the respondents. 3.2. Governance pessimism All the most strongly agreed and disagreed statements in this perspective are distinguishing statements, ranked significantly differently in the other two perspectives. As summarized in Fig. 4, they have no doubts that ecosystem services of forests related to water are underestimated in their management. They Figure 3. Perspective 1: Balance between nature and people. 236 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts fault line between those who prioritize ecological sustainability and those who see tourism as a vital economic engine. This high-disagreement signals areas where dialogue and negotiation are most needed, especially around tourism’s role, environmental trade-offs, and benefit-sharing mechanisms. The consensus on the need for alternative tourism reflects a broader recognition of the necessity to diversify and expand the sector. However, the role of rural villages within this envisioned development remains controversial, revealing underlying hesitations regarding their perceived value, capacity, and integration in tourism planning. 4.5. Development and management of mountain villages When it comes to villages, they find themselves situated between a struggling agricultural sector, a politically influenced forestry industry, and a tourism sector that remains largely inaccessible. Their cultural traditions and landscapes are often undervalued as development assets. Moreover, the future of these villages is not perceived as a shared societal responsibility, but rather as a challenge they are expected to manage on their own. To change the course of local development, the management model needs to be reframed into a more open community-based platform that integrates local voices and energy. Applying the bottom-up principle through community-led local development (Courades and Brosei 2018; Saracu and Trif 2019; Kah et al. 2023) is a way of encouraging shared responsibility and trust, aligning with Ostrom’s principles of collective governance (Ostrom 1990). This involvement needs to be done without bureaucratizing or politicizing local’s activities (Marango et al. 2021) and by involving them not only in framing the policies but also in the implementation and monitoring process. 4.6. Limitations of the study The limitations of the study stem from the broad scope and complexity of the topic, which encompasses multiple intersecting themes. Due to this multifaceted nature, it was not feasible to explore each dimension in comprehensive depth. Furthermore, the study attempts to include diverse stakeholder groups, but nevertheless, some perspectives may remain underrepresented (Pagot and Gatto 2024). Further research is needed to identify specific actions for integrating stakeholders and fostering neo-endogenous development. Although this study does not employ a spatial analytical approach, the role of place and geographic context is undeniably relevant to local development. Future research could combine Q methodology with spatial tools such as participatory mapping or GIS to examine how stakeholder perspectives intersect with geographic realities. 5. Conclusion The study identifies shared and divergent perspectives that are a reflection of the stability of the socio-ecological system and a result of its long-term dynamics. The Q methodology offers a roadmap for understanding local development perceptions, their nuances and the root causes underlying them. The results 237 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts revealed three distinct perspectives with both consensus and conflict points. The first perspective is distinctly shaped by people from villages and foresters. It uniquely emphasizes tourism as both currently and prospectively vital for villages. It recognizes the value of regulating ecosystem services and anticipates the increasing importance of forests. While it closely aligns with the second perspective regarding the role of forests and villages, the latter diverges by prioritizing tourism over nature conservation and downplaying environmental pollution. Although it values forests highly, the second perspective expresses strong pessimism about human impact and underutilized economic potential, viewing both forestry and agriculture as in decline. It also does not consider tourism could bring any more to the region that it currently does. The third perspective, primarily held by middle-aged respondents, shares the same view on forests as the first factor but is more sceptical about the viability of villages. It demonstrates heightened ecological awareness and seeks development opportunities across forestry, agriculture, and tourism. The study revealed deep distrust in the governing system and a general sense of political and ecological alienation. Nevertheless, exceptions from this model are also observed, and examples of local initiatives and motivation are also present. The study recommends transforming the local management model by engaging people and harnessing their energy and local knowledge as essential for crafting inclusive, place-based policies that recognize the local potential, but also integrate the dynamics and resilience of the surrounding ecological systems. It is essential that this involvement takes place from building the policies and continues in its implementation and monitoring phase. References Alexiev M, Zherev A, Kumanov G, Tsanov K, Ushev K, Deliev N, Mirchev N, Gelin P, Simeonov S, Karapeev S, Kanchev Ts (2002) Encyclopedic reference book Chepino A–Z. Book one. Floor “Boston-GC-91”, Velingrad. Antweiler C (1998) Local knowledge and local knowing: An anthropological analysis of contested “cultural products” in the context of development. Anthropos 93(4/6): 469–494. Banasick S (2023) shawnbanasick/ken-q-analysis: Ken-Q Analysis Version 2.0.0. https:// doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1300189 Bookchin M (1982) The ecology of freedom: The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy. Cheshire Books, Palo Alto, California, 392 pp. Borisova B, Glushkova M, Nedkov S, Zhiyanski MK, Stoycheva V (2023) Habitat maintenance assessment and mapping as priority ecosystem service in mountain protected areas. Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 49: 27–42. https://doi. org/10.3897/jbgs.e109172 Brown SR (1993) A Primer on Q Methodology. Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4). https://doi. org/10.22488/okstate.93.100504 Ciftcioglu GC (2020) Using a combination of Q-methodology and survey-based approach for assessing forest ecosystem services of Five Finger Mountains in Northern Cyprus. Sustainability Science 15: 1789–1805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-02000824-8 Courades J, Brosei P (2018) CLLD/LEADER: Applying the Partnership Principle to Local Development. European Structural and Investment Funds Journal 6(3): 210–222. 238 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts Domptail S, Easdale MH, Yuerlita (2013) Managing Socio‐Ecological Systems to Achieve Sustainability: A Study of Resilience and Robustness. Environmental Policy and Governance 23: 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1604 Dragozova E, Ivanov I, Kovacheva S, Paligorov I, Galev E, Stipcov V (2015) Demographic Factors for the Management of Forest Landscapes in the Velingrad Area. Economic Alternatives 2: 50–61. Esri (2025) World Imagery basemap [Basemap]. Sources: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community https://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?sortField=title&sortOrder=asc&id=702026e41f6641fb85da88efe79dc166#content [Accessed on 29.09.2025] Esri (2025) World Street Map (TomTom) [Basemap]. Sources: Esri, TomTom, 2025 https:// www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?sortField=title&sortOrder=asc&id=702026e41f6641fb85da88efe79dc166#content [Accessed on 29.09.2025] Folke C, Biggs R, Norström AV, Reyers B, Rockström J (2016) Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecology and Society 21(3). https://doi. org/10.5751/ES-08748-210341 Grimble R (1998) Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, 12 pp. Gruber JS (2011) Perspectives of effective and sustainable community-based natural resource management: An application of Q methodology to forest projects. Conservation and Society 9(2): 159–171. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.83725 Ivanov I, Dragozova E, Kovacheva S, Paligorov I, Panayotov M (2025) Forest management responsibility survey of forest land owners and managers. In: Proceedings of 3rd International Scientific Conference Industrial Growth Conference 2024. Az-buki National Publishing House, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.53656/igc-2024.02 Kah S, Martinos H, Budzich-Tabor U (2023) CLLD in the 2014–2020 EU Programming Period: An Innovative Framework for Local Development. World 4(1): 122–139. https:// doi.org/10.3390/world4010009 Karatsareas P (2022) Semi-Structured Interviews. In: Kircher R, Zipp L (Eds), Research Methods in Language Attitudes. Cambridge University Press, 99–113. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781108867788.010 Koulov B (2018) Social and economic transformations in Bulgarian mountain periphery: A 1986–2014 comparative analysis. Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 39: 73–78. https://doi.org/10.3897/jbgs.2018.39.14 Leslie HM, Basurto X, Nenadovic M, Sievanen L, Cavanaugh KC, Cota-Nieto JJ, Erisman BE, Finkbeiner E, Hinojosa-Arango G, Moreno-Báez M, Nagavarapu S, Reddy SMW, Sánchez-Rodríguez A, Siegel K, Ulibarria-Valenzuela JJ, Weaver AH, Aburto-Oropeza O (2015) Operationalizing the social-ecological systems framework to assess sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112(19): 5979–5984. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414640112 Maino F, Omizzolo A, Streifeneder T (2018) Marginal Mountainous Areas: Starting Over from Smart Communities—The Case Study of Seren del Grappa. In: Bisello A, Vettorato D, Laconte P, Costa S (Eds), Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions. Green Energy and Technology. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 649–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75774-2_44 Marango S, Bosworth G, Curry N (2021) Applying Neo-Endogenous Development Theory to Delivering Sustainable Local Nature Conservation. Sociologia Ruralis 61(1): 116–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12315 239 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts Martínez-Fernández J, Banos-González I, Esteve-Selma MÁ (2021) An integral approach to address socio-ecological systems sustainability and their uncertainties. Science of The Total Environment 762: 144457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144457 McKeown B, Thomas D (2013) Q Methodology. SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, California. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384412 Milán-García J, Uribe-Toril J, Ruiz-Real JL, de Pablo Valenciano J (2019) Sustainable local development: An overview of the state of knowledge. Resources 8(1). https:// doi.org/10.3390/resources8010031 Moallemi EA, Malekpour S, Hadjikakou M, Raven R, Szetey K, Ningrum D, Dhiaulhaq A, Bryan BA (2020) Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals Requires Transdisciplinary Innovation at the Local Scale. One Earth 3(3): 300–313. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.006 Moser DJ, Baulcomb C (2020) Social perspectives on climate change adaptation, sustainable development, and artificial snow production: A Swiss case study using Q methodology. Environmental Science & Policy 104: 98–106. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.10.001 Municipality of Velingrad (2018) Forest management plan. Velingrad Municipality. National Statistical Institute (2022) Regions, districts and municipalities in the Republic of Bulgaria. National Statistical Institute https://www.nsi.bg/publications/raionite-oblastite-i-obshtinite-v-republika-balgariya-2022-2195 [Accessed on 08.05.2025] Niedziałkowski K, Komar E, Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska A, Olszańska A, Grodzińska-Jurczak M (2018) Discourses on Public Participation in Protected Areas Governance: Application of Q Methodology in Poland. Ecological Economics 145: 401–409. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.018 Nygren A (1999) Local knowledge in the environment-development discourse: From dichotomies to situated knowledges. Critique of Anthropology 19(3): 267–288. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0308275X9901900304 OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] (2021) Decentralisation and Regionalisation in Bulgaria: Towards Balanced Regional Development, OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/ b5ab8109-en Ostrom E (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763 Pagot G, Gatto P (2024) Challenges for community-owned forests between traditional and new uses of forests: A Q-methodology study applied to an alpine case. Trees, Forests and People 18: 100688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100688 Paligorov I, Stipcov V, Galev E, Kovacheva S, Dragozova E, Ivanov I, Aleksandrov N, Borisov M (2015) Stakeholder’s final matrix and policy actions for forest development on the territory of Velingrad Municipality. Management and Sustainable Development 6(55): 43–51. Petrov KD (2021) Features in regional development and tourist potential of the mountain regions and areas in Bulgaria. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development 21(4): 409–422. Saracu A-F, Trif N-V (2019) Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)- A Tool for Implementing Regional Development Policies. Annals of Dunarea de Jos University of Galati. Fascicle I. Economics and Applied Informatics 25: 163–168. https://doi. org/10.35219/eai158404097069 240 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts Shaw K, Maythorne L (2013) Managing for local resilience: Towards a strategic approach. Public Policy and Administration 28(1): 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076711432578 Sabev D, Yordanov R (2018) Models for the development of mountain regions in Bulgaria. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26912.02563 Sieber IM, Carrasco AR, Ganan de Molina C, Prall M, Tiwari A, Ntemiri S, Bunnefeld N, Jose Ponton Cevallos (2024) Building Resilient Coastal Communities through Nature-based Solutions and Empowerment Tools. A report of an Eklipse Expert Working Group. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.11449488 Sneegas G, Beckner S, Brannstrom C, Jepson W, Lee K, Seghezzo L (2021) Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review. Ecological Economics 180: 106864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolecon.2020.106864 Stock P, Burton RJF (2011) Defining Terms for Integrated (Multi-Inter-Trans-Disciplinary) Sustainability Research. Sustainability 3(8): 1090–1113. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su3081090 Tcherkezova E, Zareva E, Stoyanova V, Vassilev D, Georgieva SR (2023) Identification of urban landscape units based on Sentinel-2A imagery and illegal landfills: case study from Velingrad city (Bulgaria). International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM 23(6.2): 641–648. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2023V/6.2/s27.78 Todorov L, Kirilov K (2022) Land use change and monitoring of endangered wetlands using geospatial technologies: a case study of Boyana marsh. Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 47: 3–14. https://doi.org/10.3897/jbgs.e94102 Todorova E, Zhiyanski M (2024) Study on the Coupled Human–Natural System in Velingrad municipality, Bulgaria: a resilience perspective. Silva Balcanica 25(2): 5–29. https://doi.org/10.3897/silvabalcanica.25.e121334 Adamski T, Gorlach K (2007) Neo-Endogenous Development and the Revalidation of Local Knowledge. Polish Sociological Review 160(4): 481–497. Tsvetkov I, Atanassov I, Rusanov K (2020) Assessment of public awareness of the forestry sector: biodiversity, certification and ecosystem services in Velingrad Municipality. Silva Balcanica 21(1): 69–76. https://doi.org/10.3897/silvabalcanica.21.e54698 Van Oudenhoven APE, Martín-López B, Schröter M, De Groot R (2018) Advancing science on the multiple connections between biodiversity, ecosystems and people. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 14(1): 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2018.1479501 Yordanova M, Mateeva Z (2011) The Natural Potential of Mountains in Bulgaria and Its Sustainable Use. In: Zhelezov G (Ed.), Sustainable Development in Mountain Regions. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0131-1_5 Watts S, Stenner P (2005) Doing Q methodology: Theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2(1): 67–91. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088705qp022oa Webler T, Danielson S, Tuler S (2009) Using Q Method to Reveal Social Perspectives in Environmental Research. Greenfield MA: Social and Environmental Research Institute. Zabala A (2014) Qmethod: A package to explore human perspectives using Q methodology. R Journal 6(2): 163–173. https://doi.org/10.32614/rj-2014-032 Zhiyanski M, Glushkova M, Dodev Y, Bozhilova M, Yaneva R, Hristova D, Semerdzhieva L (2021) Role of the cultural ecosystem services provided by natural heritage in forest territories for sustainable regional development. Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 45: 61–66. https://doi.org/10.3897/jbgs.e72766 241 Journal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society 53: 221–241 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/jbgs.e162641 Elena Todorova and Miglena Zhiyanski: Local perspectives on development conflicts Additional information Conflict of interest No conflict of interest was declared. Ethical statement No ethical statement was reported. Use of AI No use of AI was reported. Funding Bulgarian National Science Fund under project КП-06-КОСТ/19 from 14.12.2023; COST Action CA21125, A European forum for revitalisation of marginalised mountain areas (MARGISTAR). Author contributions Conceptualization: ET, MZ. Data curation: ET. Formal analysis: ET. Funding acquisition: ET. Investigation: ET. Methodology: ET, MZ. Project administration: ET. Resources: ET. Visualization: ET. Writing - original draft: ET. Writing - review and editing: MZ, ET. Author ORCIDs Elena Todorova https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0931-4829 Miglena Zhiyanski https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4843-6770 Data availability All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text or Supplementary Information. Supplementary material 1 Q sorts Authors: Elena Todorova, Miglena Zhiyanski Data type: xlsx Explanation note: The supplementary file contains the Q set (statements that were arranged by the participants) and the 26 Q-sorts obtained during the study. Copyright notice: This dataset is made available under the Open Database License (http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this Dataset while maintaining this same freedom for others, provided that the original source and author(s) are credited. Link: https://doi.org/10.3897/jbgs.e162641.suppl1