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 , Anna Ott , Samuli Pitzén , Terhi Arola , 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.
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.