The coalitional politics of the European Union's environmental forest policy: Biodiversity conservation, timber legality, and climate protection.
EUTR/FLEGT
LULUCF
Multi-level governance
Natura 2000
Policy beliefs
Policy change
Journal
Ambio
ISSN: 1654-7209
Titre abrégé: Ambio
Pays: Sweden
ID NLM: 0364220
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
23
12
2020
accepted:
28
09
2021
revised:
05
07
2021
pubmed:
11
10
2021
medline:
5
11
2021
entrez:
10
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
European forest policymaking is shaped by progressing European integration, yet with notable ideological divisions and diverging interests among countries. This paper focuses on the coalitional politics of key environmental forest issues: biodiversity conservation, timber legality, and climate protection policy. Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and the Shifting Coalition Theory, and informed by more than 186 key informant interviews and 73 policy documents spanning a 20-year timeframe, we examine the evolution of coalitional forest politics in Europe. We find that the basic line-up has remained stable: an environmental coalition supporting EU environmental forest policy integration and a forest sector coalition mostly opposing it. Still, strategic alliances across these coalitions have occurred for specific policy issues which have resulted in a gradual establishment of an EU environmental forest policy. We conclude with discussion of our findings and provide suggestions for further research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34628595
doi: 10.1007/s13280-021-01644-5
pii: 10.1007/s13280-021-01644-5
pmc: PMC8563925
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2153-2167Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Aggestam, F., and H. Pülzl. 2020. Downloading Europe: A regional comparison in the uptake of the EU forest action plan. Sustainability 12: 3999.
doi: 10.3390/su12103999
Baulenas, E. and M. Sotirov. 2020. Cross-sectoral policy integration at the forest and water nexus: National level instrument choices and integration drivers in the European Union. Forest Policy and Economics 118: 102247.
Baycheva-Merger, T., and M. Sotirov. 2020. The politics of an EU forest information system: Unpacking distributive conflicts associated with the strategic use of forest information. Forest Policy and Economics 112: 102–110.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102110
Beach, D. 2016. It’s all about mechanisms—What process-tracing case studies should be tracing. New Political Economy 21: 463–472.
doi: 10.1080/13563467.2015.1134466
Beach, D., and R.B. Pedersen. 2013. Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines, 1st ed. University of Michigan Press: Michigan.
doi: 10.3998/mpub.2556282
Borrass, L., M. Sotirov, and G. Winkel. 2015. Europeanization and policy change: Implementation of the European Union’s Habitats Directive in Germany and the UK. Environmental Politics 24: 788–809.
doi: 10.1080/09644016.2015.1027056
De Koning, J., G. Winkel, M. Sotirov, M. Blondet, L. Borras, F. Ferranti, and M. Geitzenauer. 2014. Natura 2000 and climate change—Polarization, uncertainty and pragmatism in discourses on forest conservation and management in Europe. Environmental Science and Policy 39: 129–138.
doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.08.010
Eckerberg, K., and C. Sandström. 2013. Preface to Forest conflicts: A growing research field, special issue. Forest Policy and Economics 33: 3–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.05.001
Edwards, P., and D. Kleinschmit. 2013. Toward a European forest policy—Conflicting courses. Forest Policy and Economics 33: 87–93.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.06.002
Fairbrass, J. and A. Jordan. 2003. The Europeanization of interest representation: The case of United Kingdom environment policy. In Influence and Interests in the European Union (pp. 150–171). Routledge.
Fernandez, S.A. 2003. Spanish coordination in the European Union: The case of the habitats directive. Administration & Society 34: 678–699.
doi: 10.1177/0095399702239170
Frei, T., J. Derks, C.R. Fernández-Blanco, and G. Winkel. 2020. Narrating abandoned land: Perceptions of natural forest regrowth in Southwestern Europe. Land Use Policy 99: 105034.
George, A.L., and A. Bennett. 2005. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hix, S. (2005): The political system of the European Union. 2nd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan.
Jenkins-Smith, H., D. Nohrstedt, C. Weible, and P. Sabatier. 2014. The advocacy coalition framework: Foundations, evolution, and ongoing research. In Theories of the policy process, ed. C. Weible and P. Sabatier, 183–223. Boulder: Westview Press.
Liefferink, D., and M.W. van der Zouwen. 2004. The Netherlands: The advantages of being 'Mr. Average'?. Environmental policy in Europe 136–153.
Marks, G., L. Hooghe, and K. Blank. 1996. European Integration from the 1980s: State-centric v. multi-level governance. Journal of Common Market Studies 3: 341–378.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.1996.tb00577.x
McDermott, C.L., and M. Sotirov. 2018. A political economy of the European Union’s timber regulation: Which member states would, should or could support and implement EU rules on the import of illegal wood? Forest Policy and Economics 90: 180–190.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.12.015
Nabuurs, G.J., M. Lindner, P.J. Verkerk, K. Gunia, P. Deda, R. Michalak, and G. Grassi. 2013. First signs of carbon sink saturation in European forest biomass. Nature Climate Change 3: 792–796.
doi: 10.1038/nclimate1853
Peterson, J. 1995. Decision-making in the European Union: Towards a framework for analysis. Journal of European Public Policy 2: 69–93.
doi: 10.1080/13501769508406975
Pralle, S.B. 2003. Venue shopping, political strategy, and policy change: The internationalization of Canadian Forest Advocacy. Journal of Public Policy 23: 233–260.
doi: 10.1017/S0143814X03003118
Pülzl, H., D. Wydra, and K. Hogl. 2018. Piecemeal integration: Explaining and understanding 60 years of European Union Forest Policy-Making. Forests 9: 719.
doi: 10.3390/f9110719
Sabatier, P.A. 1988. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences 21: 129–168.
doi: 10.1007/BF00136406
Sabatier, P.A. 1998. The advocacy coalition framework: Revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 98–130.
doi: 10.1080/13501768880000051
Sabatier, P., and H. Jenkins-Smith. 1999. The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In Theories of the policy process, ed. P. Sabatier, 117–166. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P., and C. Weible. 2007. The advocacy coalition framework: Innovations and clarifications. In Theories of the policy process, ed. P. Sabatier, 189–220. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sandström, C., K. Eckerberg, and K. Raitio. 2013. Studying conflicts, proposing solutions—Towards multi-level approaches to the analyses of forest conflicts. Forest Policy and Economics 33: 123–127.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.05.002
Savaresi, A., L. Perugini, and M.V. Chiriacò. 2020. Making sense of the LULUCF Regulation: Much ado about nothing? RECIEL (review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law) 2020: 212–220.
Sharp, R. 1998. Responding to Europeanisation. A governmental perspective. In British environmental policy and Europe: Politics and policy in transition, ed. P. Lowe and S. Ward, 33–56. London: Routledge.
Söderberg, C., and K. Eckerberg. 2013. Rising policy conflicts in Europe over bioenergy and forestry. Forest Policy and Economics 33: 112–119.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.09.015
Sotirov, M. 2017. Natura 2000 and forests: Assessing the state of implementation and effectiveness. Joensuu, Finland: European Forest Institute.
Sotirov, M., L. Borrass, and G. Winkel. 2011. Dem Wandel auf der Spur - Theoretische Ansätze zur Analyse von Politikwandel und -stabilität mit Fokus auf das Beispiel waldbezogener EU-Naturschutzpolitik. Allgemeine Forst- Und Jagdzeitung 182: 215–230.
Sotirov, M., M. Lovric, and G. Winkel. 2015. Symbolic transformation of environmental governance: Implementation of EU biodiversity policy in Bulgaria and Croatia between Europeanization and domestic politics. Environment and Planning C 33: 986–1004.
doi: 10.1177/0263774X15605925
Sotirov, M., and M. Memmler. 2012. The Advocacy Coalition Framework in natural resource policy studies—Recent experiences and further prospects. Forest Policy and Economics 16: 51–64.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.06.007
Sotirov, M., M. Stelter, and G. Winkel. 2017. The emergence of the European Union timber regulation: How Baptists, bootleggers, devil shifting and moral legitimacy drive change in the environmental governance of global timber trade. Forest Policy and Economics 81: 69–81.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.001
Sotirov, M., and Storch. 2018. Resilience through policy integration in Europe? Domestic forest policy changes as response to absorb pressure to integrate biodiversity conservation, bioenergy use and climate protection in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. Land Use Policy 79: 977–989.
Sotirov, M., and G. Winkel. 2016. Towards a cognitive theory of shifting alliances and policy change: Linking the advocacy coalition framework and cultural theory. Policy Sciences 49: 125–154.
doi: 10.1007/s11077-015-9235-8
Weber, N., and T. Christophersen. 2002. The influence of non-governmental organisations on the creation of Natura 2000 during the European Policy process. Forest Policy and Economics 4: 1–12.
doi: 10.1016/S1389-9341(01)00070-3
Weible, C.M., P.A. Sabatier, and K. McQueen. 2009. Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. The Policy Studies Journal 37: 121–140.
doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x
Winkel, G. 2017. Towards a sustainable European forest-based bioeconomy—Assessment and the way forward. What Science Can Tell Us 8
Winkel, G., M. Blondet, L. Borrass, T. Frei, M. Geitzenauer, A. Gruppe, and E. Turnhout. 2015. The implementation of Natura 2000 in forests: A trans-and interdisciplinary assessment of challenges and choices. Environmental Science & Policy 52: 23–32.
doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.018
Winkel, G., and M. Sotirov. 2016. Whose integration is this? European forest policy between the gospel of coordination, institutional competition, and a new spirit of integration. Environment and Planning C 34: 496–514.
doi: 10.1068/c1356j
Wolfslehner, B., H. Pülzl, D. Kleinschmit, F. Aggestam, G. Winkel, J. Candel, K. Eckerberg, P. Feindt, et al. 2020. European forest governance post-2020. Joensuu, Finland: European Forest Institute.
doi: 10.36333/fs10
Wurzel, R. 2008. European Union Environmental Policy and Natura 2000. In Legitimacy in European Nature conservation policy: Case studies in multilevel governance, ed. J. Keulartz and G. Leistra, 259–282. Dordrecht: Springer.
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6510-1_20
Yandle, B. 1983. Bootleggers and Baptists—The education of a regulatory economist. Regulation 7: 12–16.
Yin, R.K. 2009. Case study research: Design and methods, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.