From timber to carbon: Stakeholder acceptance of policy measures supporting forest management transition in Finland

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS Forest Policy and Economics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103394
Annika Lonkila , Anna Ott , Samuli Pitzén , Terhi Arola , Suvi Huttunen
{"title":"From timber to carbon: Stakeholder acceptance of policy measures supporting forest management transition in Finland","authors":"Annika Lonkila ,&nbsp;Anna Ott ,&nbsp;Samuli Pitzén ,&nbsp;Terhi Arola ,&nbsp;Suvi Huttunen","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Policy acceptance is critical for legitimate and effective forest and climate policies. The acceptance of forest policies has been largely examined as an individual decision, especially among forest owners, based on attitudes, values and beliefs. To improve the usefulness of the concept of policy acceptance for political analysis, this article analyses the acceptance of key forest policy stakeholders and offers a novel contribution by integrating theoretical insights from the literatures on policy acceptance and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Previous literature has revealed two influential stakeholder coalitions in Finnish forest policy. The two coalitions reflect highly polarized perspectives to forest use, foregrounding either economic interests or nature conservation. This article examines how climate mitigation targets are accepted by these two stakeholder coalitions as part of their policy strategies. Specifically, we analyze the acceptance of four climate policy measures: forest fertilization, land use change fee, carbon payment, and carbon off-setting. The empirical analysis is based on the qualitative content analysis of 23 stakeholder interviews. We find that the integration of climate mitigation targets may exacerbate conflicts between polarized coalition positions in Finnish forest policy, because stakeholders' policy acceptance is relationally constructed between the coalitions and strongly influenced by their resources related to political influence, as well as existing institutional settings. By situating policy acceptance within a three-level framework, this article shows that the ultimate decision to reject or approve a policy is likely to evolve throughout the different stages of the policy process depending on available resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"170 ","pages":"Article 103394"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993412400248X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Policy acceptance is critical for legitimate and effective forest and climate policies. The acceptance of forest policies has been largely examined as an individual decision, especially among forest owners, based on attitudes, values and beliefs. To improve the usefulness of the concept of policy acceptance for political analysis, this article analyses the acceptance of key forest policy stakeholders and offers a novel contribution by integrating theoretical insights from the literatures on policy acceptance and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Previous literature has revealed two influential stakeholder coalitions in Finnish forest policy. The two coalitions reflect highly polarized perspectives to forest use, foregrounding either economic interests or nature conservation. This article examines how climate mitigation targets are accepted by these two stakeholder coalitions as part of their policy strategies. Specifically, we analyze the acceptance of four climate policy measures: forest fertilization, land use change fee, carbon payment, and carbon off-setting. The empirical analysis is based on the qualitative content analysis of 23 stakeholder interviews. We find that the integration of climate mitigation targets may exacerbate conflicts between polarized coalition positions in Finnish forest policy, because stakeholders' policy acceptance is relationally constructed between the coalitions and strongly influenced by their resources related to political influence, as well as existing institutional settings. By situating policy acceptance within a three-level framework, this article shows that the ultimate decision to reject or approve a policy is likely to evolve throughout the different stages of the policy process depending on available resources.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从木材到碳:芬兰利益相关者接受支持森林管理转型的政策措施
政策接受对于制定合法和有效的森林和气候政策至关重要。接受森林政策在很大程度上被视为个人决定,特别是森林所有者根据态度、价值观和信仰作出的决定。为了提高政策接受度概念在政治分析中的实用性,本文分析了主要森林政策利益相关者的接受度,并通过整合政策接受度和倡导联盟框架的理论见解,提出了一种新颖的贡献。以前的文献揭示了芬兰森林政策中两个有影响力的利益相关者联盟。这两个联盟反映了对森林利用的高度两极化的观点,要么强调经济利益,要么强调自然保护。本文考察了这两个利益攸关方联盟如何接受气候减缓目标作为其政策战略的一部分。具体而言,我们分析了森林施肥、土地利用变化费、碳支付和碳抵消四种气候政策措施的接受程度。实证分析基于对23个利益相关者访谈的定性内容分析。我们发现,气候减缓目标的整合可能会加剧芬兰森林政策中两极分化联盟立场之间的冲突,因为利益相关者的政策接受程度是在联盟之间构建的,并受到其与政治影响力相关的资源以及现有制度设置的强烈影响。通过将政策接受置于一个三层框架中,本文表明,根据可用资源,拒绝或批准政策的最终决定可能在政策过程的不同阶段演变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
期刊最新文献
Social determinants of Chilean forestry workers: A challenge for sustainable industry development Impacts of COVID-19 on forestry migrant workers in the Southern United States Culture change in the Forest sector: Insights from a participatory workshop at the Women's Forest congress Rules and interactions around customary tree ownership in forested public lands: A qualitative study in Jharkhand, India A comprehensive look at the forest products industry’s economic contribution to the United States: Pre- and post-COVID analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1