国家生物经济战略如何应对森林相关权衡带来的治理挑战

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning Pub Date : 2021-08-22 DOI:10.1080/1523908X.2021.1967731
T. Schulz, E. Lieberherr, A. Zabel
{"title":"国家生物经济战略如何应对森林相关权衡带来的治理挑战","authors":"T. Schulz, E. Lieberherr, A. Zabel","doi":"10.1080/1523908X.2021.1967731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The term ‘bioeconomy’ stands for an economy that primarily relies on renewable biotic resources and thus supports the vision of a low carbon society. The respective ‘bioeconomy strategies’ bear high conflict potential as they, sometimes unintentionally, rely on forest-land or wood as a resource, which are already appropriated also in other policies. We first outline the resulting governance challenges in terms of coherence of policy goals, consistency of instruments and the congruence between the two and identify trade-offs between forest ecosystem services that exhibit a high conflict potential regarding the bioeconomy. We then provide a comparative analysis of the extent to which bioeconomy strategies tackle the related governance challenges for two pairs of countries from the temperate (Germany and Switzerland) and the boreal (Sweden and Norway) forest zone. We find that the strategies do not mention conflicts related to wood mobilization. Coherence and consistency tend to be addressed for non-extractive forest utilizations that are perceived as a market opportunity rather than solely a restriction on wood mobilization. The latter seems more common in countries with a multi-functional forestry paradigm. Consequences for the prevailing forest management paradigm, however, are not explored in the strategies and thus policy congruence is neglected.","PeriodicalId":15699,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","volume":"113 1","pages":"123 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How national bioeconomy strategies address governance challenges arising from forest-related trade-offs\",\"authors\":\"T. Schulz, E. Lieberherr, A. Zabel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1523908X.2021.1967731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The term ‘bioeconomy’ stands for an economy that primarily relies on renewable biotic resources and thus supports the vision of a low carbon society. The respective ‘bioeconomy strategies’ bear high conflict potential as they, sometimes unintentionally, rely on forest-land or wood as a resource, which are already appropriated also in other policies. We first outline the resulting governance challenges in terms of coherence of policy goals, consistency of instruments and the congruence between the two and identify trade-offs between forest ecosystem services that exhibit a high conflict potential regarding the bioeconomy. We then provide a comparative analysis of the extent to which bioeconomy strategies tackle the related governance challenges for two pairs of countries from the temperate (Germany and Switzerland) and the boreal (Sweden and Norway) forest zone. We find that the strategies do not mention conflicts related to wood mobilization. Coherence and consistency tend to be addressed for non-extractive forest utilizations that are perceived as a market opportunity rather than solely a restriction on wood mobilization. The latter seems more common in countries with a multi-functional forestry paradigm. Consequences for the prevailing forest management paradigm, however, are not explored in the strategies and thus policy congruence is neglected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning\",\"volume\":\"113 1\",\"pages\":\"123 - 136\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2021.1967731\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2021.1967731","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

“生物经济”一词代表着主要依赖可再生生物资源的经济,从而支持低碳社会的愿景。各自的“生物经济战略”具有很高的冲突潜力,因为它们有时无意中依赖林地或木材作为资源,而这些资源也已经在其他政策中被占用。我们首先从政策目标的一致性、工具的一致性以及两者之间的一致性方面概述了由此产生的治理挑战,并确定了在生物经济方面表现出高度冲突潜力的森林生态系统服务之间的权衡。然后,我们对来自温带(德国和瑞士)和寒带(瑞典和挪威)两对国家的生物经济战略在多大程度上解决了相关的治理挑战进行了比较分析。我们发现,这些战略没有提到与木材动员有关的冲突。连贯性和一致性倾向于解决被视为市场机会的非采伐森林利用问题,而不仅仅是对木材调动的限制。后者似乎在具有多功能林业模式的国家更为常见。然而,这些战略没有探讨对现行森林管理模式的影响,因此忽视了政策一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How national bioeconomy strategies address governance challenges arising from forest-related trade-offs
ABSTRACT The term ‘bioeconomy’ stands for an economy that primarily relies on renewable biotic resources and thus supports the vision of a low carbon society. The respective ‘bioeconomy strategies’ bear high conflict potential as they, sometimes unintentionally, rely on forest-land or wood as a resource, which are already appropriated also in other policies. We first outline the resulting governance challenges in terms of coherence of policy goals, consistency of instruments and the congruence between the two and identify trade-offs between forest ecosystem services that exhibit a high conflict potential regarding the bioeconomy. We then provide a comparative analysis of the extent to which bioeconomy strategies tackle the related governance challenges for two pairs of countries from the temperate (Germany and Switzerland) and the boreal (Sweden and Norway) forest zone. We find that the strategies do not mention conflicts related to wood mobilization. Coherence and consistency tend to be addressed for non-extractive forest utilizations that are perceived as a market opportunity rather than solely a restriction on wood mobilization. The latter seems more common in countries with a multi-functional forestry paradigm. Consequences for the prevailing forest management paradigm, however, are not explored in the strategies and thus policy congruence is neglected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
46
期刊最新文献
Chiefs and floods: hybrid governance and co-production of flood risk adaptation in Tamale, Ghana. City-to-city learning: a synthesis and research agenda The nested hierarchy of urban vulnerability within land use policies fails to address climate injustices in Turkey Does multidimensional distance matter? Perceptions and acceptance of wind power Exploring the potential of city networks for climate: the case of urbact
×
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