2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102689
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
37
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
1
37
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Many countries worldwide are aware of the importance of forest ecosystems and have adopted a range of policy measures to enhance ESV. For example, the National Forest Strategy, Biodiversity Strategy, and Bioeconomy Strategy have been implemented by Finland [58]. ESs are mentioned in forest-related policies in Bangladesh, but none provide details on the ESV, the decision-making process, or the scale of implementation [59].…”
Section: Prospectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many countries worldwide are aware of the importance of forest ecosystems and have adopted a range of policy measures to enhance ESV. For example, the National Forest Strategy, Biodiversity Strategy, and Bioeconomy Strategy have been implemented by Finland [58]. ESs are mentioned in forest-related policies in Bangladesh, but none provide details on the ESV, the decision-making process, or the scale of implementation [59].…”
Section: Prospectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Baker et al, 2019 ; Kauppi et al, 2020 ; Makkonen et al, 2015 ), while NCS promote mainly biodiversity and non‐wood ES. However, integration of these CCMS has been described as pivotal to decrease the conflicts in the use of forest for timber, climate change mitigation, and biodiversity (Blattert et al, 2022 ; Elomina & Pülzl, 2021 ; Köhl et al, 2021 ). For example, in the EU, bioenergy and bioeconomy solutions have been described as curbing anthropogenic GHG concentration in the EU Renewable Energy Directive (European Commission, 2021a ), and in the Land‐use, Land‐Use Change and Forestry Regulation and international climate targets (Shoeibi et al, 2015 ), but they do not consider the consequences for biodiversity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no statistical significance for any variable in the short term, unlike in the long term, where only government stability is positive and significant in the forest area in the ASEAN countries. In the long term, the significance of government stability is supported by the existing synergy between institutions, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and multiple social agents for the proposal of ideas that design programs for the restoration and protection of shared resources [74]. Thus, institutions should try to regulate their activities in the short and long term to avoid affecting ecosystems [52].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Nansikombi et al [73] highlight that the need for good governance is high in the Miombo ecoregion of Zambia, which is characterized by persistent deforestation that threatens those livelihoods who depend on the forests. Next, Sanches et al [74] explain the importance of adopting an institutional analysis and development framework to understand the interactions of multiple social agents and governmental and non-governmental organizations involved in the restoration and joint protection of natural resources. Finally, Blattert et al [75] pointed out that the combination of governance and long-term forest management planning provides new insights into the design of forest management as a result of sectoral policies.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%