How national bioeconomy strategies address governance challenges arising from forest-related trade-offs

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
T. Schulz, E. Lieberherr, A. Zabel
{"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}
引用次数: 6

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.
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
“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。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
46
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信