Integrating ecosystem services in power analysis in forest governance: A comparison across nine European countries

Within forest governance research, the transfer of power from governmental actors to civil society and market actors has been subject to intense scientific debate. We move forward on this debate by analyzing how ongoing transformations and power shifts in forest governance affect the power relations...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Forest policy and economics 2020-12, Vol.121, p.102317, Article 102317
Hauptverfasser: Juerges, Nataly, Arts, Bas, Masiero, Mauro, Başkent, Emin Z., Borges, José G., Brodrechtova, Yvonne, Brukas, Vilis, Canadas, Maria João, Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa, Corradini, Giulia, Corrigan, Edwin, Felton, Adam, Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke, Krott, Max, van Laar, Jim, Lodin, Isak, Lundholm, Anders, Makrickienė, Ekaterina, Marques, Marlene, Mendes, Américo, Mozgeris, Gintautas, Novais, Ana, Pettenella, Davide, Pivoriūnas, Nerijus
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Within forest governance research, the transfer of power from governmental actors to civil society and market actors has been subject to intense scientific debate. We move forward on this debate by analyzing how ongoing transformations and power shifts in forest governance affect the power relations of actors with interest in various ecosystem services (ESs) in nine countries (Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Turkey). In order to examine power resources of actors, we triangulated 220 qualitative interviews, document analysis, and participatory observations. Governmental actors (with various interests in ESs) were the most powerful actors in most countries, and thus drove forest management. Our analysis shows that the power relations of actors with interest in different forest ESs, varied within the nine countries, though many similarities existed. Governmental, market, and civil society actors differed in their capacity to apply the power strategies “coercion”, “(dis)incentives”, and “dominant information”, to realize their interests in ESs. In Lithuania, Slovakia and Turkey, governmental actors relied mostly on coercion; in the Netherlands on incentives; and in Sweden on dominant information. In Germany, Ireland, Italy and Portugal governmental actors relied on a mix of coercion, incentives, and dominant information. Market actors in all countries relied mostly on incentives, and civil society actors on dominant information as their power strategy. •Examines power strategies of actors in forest management.•Presents results of 220 qualitative interviews in nine countries.•Analyzes ongoing transformations and power shifts in forest governance.•Analyzes power relations of actors with interest in various ecosystem services.
ISSN:1389-9341
1872-7050
1872-7050
DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102317