Building on solid ground? (In)Coordination within Norwegian and Finnish wood construction policies

IF 3.8 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Håkon Endresen Normann , Erkki-Jussi Nylén , Anne Toppinen , Jani Lukkarinen
{"title":"Building on solid ground? (In)Coordination within Norwegian and Finnish wood construction policies","authors":"Håkon Endresen Normann ,&nbsp;Erkki-Jussi Nylén ,&nbsp;Anne Toppinen ,&nbsp;Jani Lukkarinen","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Increased use of wood represents a potential way to reduce emissions from construction. However, its adoption depends on coherent and well-coordinated policy support. This paper examines how policies in Norway and Finland align, or fail to align, across sectors and levels of governance. We investigate how policy consistency and coordination shape the development and implementation of wood construction policies in Finland and Norway.</div><div>Drawing on literature on innovation policy sustainability transitions, and policy mixes, we analyse the consistency and coordination of goals, strategies, and instruments across policy domains and governance levels. The analysis is based on policy documents and interviews in both countries.</div><div>Both countries have promoted wood construction for decades, leading to innovation and the adoption of new solutions, but with varying levels of policy integration and commitment. In both cases, fragmentation across policy fields and limited vertical integration have hampered more transformative change. Horizontal coordination has been hindered by fragmented ministerial ownership, while vertical coordination is challenged by differences in local capacity and priorities, and a lack of stronger national level requirements.</div><div>This paper contributes to sustainability transitions research by offering a comparative analysis of how policy consistency and coordination shape wood construction policies in two forest-rich countries. It shows that fragmented responsibilities, weak regulatory direction, and limited vertical and horizontal coordination hinder the realisation of wood's decarbonisation potential. Strengthening policy alignment and institutional coordination is essential to enable wood to play a larger role in low-carbon construction transitions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"179 ","pages":"Article 103630"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","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/S1389934125002096","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

Increased use of wood represents a potential way to reduce emissions from construction. However, its adoption depends on coherent and well-coordinated policy support. This paper examines how policies in Norway and Finland align, or fail to align, across sectors and levels of governance. We investigate how policy consistency and coordination shape the development and implementation of wood construction policies in Finland and Norway.
Drawing on literature on innovation policy sustainability transitions, and policy mixes, we analyse the consistency and coordination of goals, strategies, and instruments across policy domains and governance levels. The analysis is based on policy documents and interviews in both countries.
Both countries have promoted wood construction for decades, leading to innovation and the adoption of new solutions, but with varying levels of policy integration and commitment. In both cases, fragmentation across policy fields and limited vertical integration have hampered more transformative change. Horizontal coordination has been hindered by fragmented ministerial ownership, while vertical coordination is challenged by differences in local capacity and priorities, and a lack of stronger national level requirements.
This paper contributes to sustainability transitions research by offering a comparative analysis of how policy consistency and coordination shape wood construction policies in two forest-rich countries. It shows that fragmented responsibilities, weak regulatory direction, and limited vertical and horizontal coordination hinder the realisation of wood's decarbonisation potential. Strengthening policy alignment and institutional coordination is essential to enable wood to play a larger role in low-carbon construction transitions.
在坚实的土地上建房?(In)挪威和芬兰木材建筑政策内的协调
增加木材的使用是减少建筑排放的一种潜在方法。然而,它的通过取决于连贯和协调良好的政策支持。本文考察了挪威和芬兰的政策如何在各部门和各级治理中保持一致或不一致。我们调查政策的一致性和协调如何塑造芬兰和挪威木结构建筑政策的发展和实施。
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 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信