Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making

Kleinschmit, Daniela; Pülzl, Helga; Secco, Laura; Sergent, Arnaud; Wallin, Ida

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.12.011

Cited by 36 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis found that coherence, with regard to forest-relevant policy instruments, is notably lacking. This conclusion is partially driven by EU policy objectives not being coordinated adequately, but also by the sheer number of policy domains, documents and instruments (see Tables 1 and 2), prevailing policy fragmentation [3,5,22] and the absence of a dominant steering instrument [4,30], meaning different governance patterns affecting forests have emerged at the EU level. Thus, from a policy coherence perspective, EU forest-related policy objectives remain deficient, a situation unlikely to be addressed by the new EU Forest Strategy [4].…”

Section: Discussion: Policy Coordination and Coherence-the New-old "Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This could well mean that the Strategy should be renamed the "Forest and Forest Products Value Strategy" and would furthermore require institutional mechanisms that can genuinely address policy coordination and coherence of the EUs forest-related policy framework. Coordination and coherence can, for example, be improved through an orchestration of the policy-making process [30] but would require competence at the EU level to ensure that orchestration takes place. This would be possible without having an actual EU forest policy as an underlying mandate for action.…”

Section: Discussion: Policy Coordination and Coherence-the New-old "Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coordinating the Uncoordinated: The EU Forest Strategy

Aggestam

Pülzl

2018

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The second European Union (EU) Forest Strategy responds to new challenges facing both forests and the forest-based sector which highlights the EU's need for a policy framework ensuring coordination and coherence of forest-related policies. The objective of the present article is to analyse whether the new Strategy contributes towards horizontal policy coherence of EU forest-related policies, given its shared and exclusive competences. This is achieved by comparing European Commission and forest industry policy priorities as articulated in the Strategy and through research carried out for the recent Cumulative Cost Assessment (CCA) of forest-based industries. Results from the comparative analysis demonstrate that the Strategy does not address many EU policies and policy instruments that affect the whole forest value chain and that it clearly omits existing EU policy instrument objectives that entail significant costs for the forest-based industry. It is therefore argued that without coordinating collective EU goals and gathering strong political support, it is at best extremely difficult or at worst impossible, to achieve coherence for EU forest-related policies across the whole forest value chain. Improving coherence of Union forest-related policies will require the Strategy to address more policy areas and instruments, including clearly defined parameters of what constitutes an EU forest-related policy. These pressing needs reach beyond what the Strategy presently sets out to achieve. Keywords: forest policy; European Commission; policy coordination; policy coherence; forest industry Introducing a Strategy for Europe's ForestsThe European Commission (EC) adopted the second European Union (EU) Forest Strategy in 2013, responding to additional challenges facing forests and the forest-based sector [1]. The Strategy provides an updated and integrative framework in response to the increasing demands on forests, addressing changing societal and policy priorities since the first Strategy was published in 1998 [2]. It has been frequently noted that the previous EU Forestry Strategy has had a limited impact on national forest policy [3][4][5][6]. The prevailing view is that the first Strategy simply had insufficient political traction to facilitate the operational change needed to achieve policy cooperation across sectors and EU policies (horizontal) and coordination between different governance levels (vertical). In addition, previous analysis of actors' preferences towards improving policy integration have revealed institutional constraints between the EU and its Member States [7][8][9].By now linking forests to other domains of EU competence, the EC argues for increased policy coordination on forest policy. In contrast to the first Strategy and its associated forest action plan [4,10], the new Strategy has ventured even further out of the forest to encompass not only rural development, but increasingly also the environment, forest-based industries, energy production and climate change.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Policy Coordination and Coherence-the New-old "Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussion: Policy Coordination and Coherence-the New-old "Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coordinating the Uncoordinated: The EU Forest Strategy

Aggestam

Pülzl

2018

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lack of inclusion of the perspectives of societal actors can lead to a lack of acceptance and engagement with the concept of bioeconomy on a consumer or citizen level [10,16]. The concept of bioeconomy then can easily be rejected by the society and thereby become meaningless.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Perceptions of the Bioeconomy in Austria—An Explorative Case Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The bioeconomy provides new approaches to deal with environmental challenges by substituting fossil fuels for sustainable, renewable resources and fuels. In Europe, this process and discourse has mainly been driven from a strategic top-down level. This leads to a lack of inclusion of societal actors, which can consequently lead to reduced acceptance and engagement. Henceforth, in this study, we focus on exploring how the bioeconomy is perceived, understood and evaluated by a wider audience. Through convenience sampling, 456 interviews conducted with students, employees, farmers and pensioners living in Austria provide the database for the study. Due to the novelty of the study’s objective and the consequentially explorative research approach, qualitative and quantitative social science research methods are applied. The results indicate that the bioeconomy concept is associated with various themes and visions. These associated topics also have negative or positive implications. Furthermore, a division between two visions of the bioeconomy, a technology- and industry-driven vision and a vision defined by regional environmentalism, can be observed. The feasibility of a future bioeconomy identifies as the most critical aspect. Sustainable consumption was mentioned as an important topic of the bioeconomy by the participants, a result that could be of particular interest when creating an inclusive bioeconomy, since it calls for active involvement of consumers. The study also shows that responding farmers tend to believe that the bioeconomy will lead to more inequity.

show abstract

“…This participative process is especially important in the forestry sector, which includes a multitude of conflicting interests among the actors [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Participatory Processes in Forestry Training Using Social Network Analysis Techniques

Blanc

Lingua

Bioglio

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public participation has become an important driver in increasing public acceptance of policy decisions, especially in the forestry sector, where conflicting interests among the actors are frequent. Stakeholder Analysis, complemented by Social Network Analysis techniques, was used to support the participatory process and to understand the complex relationships and the strong interactions among actors. This study identifies the forestry training sector stakeholders in the Western Italian Alps and describes their characteristics and priorities, in relation to training activities on entrepreneurial topics for forestry loggers. The hierarchy among actors has been identified, highlighting their respective roles and influence in decision-making processes. A lack of mutual communication among different and well-separated categories of actors has been identified, while good connections between stakeholders, operating in different territories, despite the presence of administrative and logistical barriers, have been observed. Training is a topic involving actors with different roles and interests. Nevertheless, all actors consider training about how to improve yields of forest operations and how to assess investments, particularly in innovative machinery, to be crucially important and conducive to a better comprehension of the wood supply chain and the enhancement of the raw material.

show abstract

Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making

Cited by 36 publications

References 81 publications

Coordinating the Uncoordinated: The EU Forest Strategy

Coordinating the Uncoordinated: The EU Forest Strategy

Understanding Perceptions of the Bioeconomy in Austria—An Explorative Case Study

Implementing Participatory Processes in Forestry Training Using Social Network Analysis Techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About