具有法律约束力的欧洲森林协定--分析建立区域制度的失败尝试

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
{"title":"具有法律约束力的欧洲森林协定--分析建立区域制度的失败尝试","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The attempt at creating a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe has failed after two periods of negotiations. The first period (2011–2015) ended with an unresolved question about what organization should become the Convention's host. During the second negotiation period (2018–2021) the parties arrived at the conclusion to transfer secretarial duties to UNECE. However, eventually, the process was closed due to lack of consensus by the participating parties. Our analysis of the reasons that stood behind the failed agreement has confirmed two key conflicts typical for international forest agreements and occurring at both international and national levels – the tension between commodity and amenity-oriented goals and the question of national interest and relative power. Given the dynamics of the forest policy discussion, new opportunities for a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe may arise in future.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The legally binding agreement on forests in Europe – Analyzing the unsuccessful attempts at regional regime creation\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The attempt at creating a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe has failed after two periods of negotiations. The first period (2011–2015) ended with an unresolved question about what organization should become the Convention's host. During the second negotiation period (2018–2021) the parties arrived at the conclusion to transfer secretarial duties to UNECE. However, eventually, the process was closed due to lack of consensus by the participating parties. Our analysis of the reasons that stood behind the failed agreement has confirmed two key conflicts typical for international forest agreements and occurring at both international and national levels – the tension between commodity and amenity-oriented goals and the question of national interest and relative power. Given the dynamics of the forest policy discussion, new opportunities for a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe may arise in future.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-14\",\"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/S1389934124001758\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001758","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

摘要

在经过两个时期的谈判后,在欧洲制定一项具有法律约束力的森林协定的尝试失败了。第一个谈判期(2011-2015 年)结束时,关于哪个组织应成为《公约》东道主的问题仍未解决。在第二个谈判期(2018-2021 年),各方达成了将秘书职责移交给联合国欧洲经济委员会的结论。然而,由于参与方未能达成共识,这一进程最终宣告结束。我们对协议失败背后的原因进行了分析,确认了国际森林协议中典型的、同时发生在国际和国家层面的两个关键冲突--商品目标和福利导向目标之间的紧张关系,以及国家利益和相对权力问题。考虑到森林政策讨论的动态,未来可能会出现在欧洲达成具有法律约束力的森林协议的新机遇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The legally binding agreement on forests in Europe – Analyzing the unsuccessful attempts at regional regime creation

The attempt at creating a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe has failed after two periods of negotiations. The first period (2011–2015) ended with an unresolved question about what organization should become the Convention's host. During the second negotiation period (2018–2021) the parties arrived at the conclusion to transfer secretarial duties to UNECE. However, eventually, the process was closed due to lack of consensus by the participating parties. Our analysis of the reasons that stood behind the failed agreement has confirmed two key conflicts typical for international forest agreements and occurring at both international and national levels – the tension between commodity and amenity-oriented goals and the question of national interest and relative power. Given the dynamics of the forest policy discussion, new opportunities for a legally binding agreement on forests in Europe may arise in future.

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信