IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v154y2023ics1389934123001041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenging the dominant path of forest policy? Bottom-up, citizen forest management initiatives in a top-down governance context in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof
  • Chmielewski, Piotr

Abstract

Forest governance in Poland is characterised by the dominance of public forest ownership and hierarchical, top-down policy-making. These governance arrangements, characteristic of post-socialist countries, have traditionally been challenged by environmental NGOs, advocating stronger protection of old-growths. Recently, institutional stability of the forest policy field has been increasingly influenced by numerous citizen initiatives responding to technocratic local forest management decisions. These initiatives, so far not analysed scientifically, vary in terms of the issues addressed, actions employed, and the local actors involved. In the paper we use a data base of 274 such initiatives to explore their manifestation, actors involved, main postulates, and the responses of forest managers. Based on this, we explored whether these initiatives pose challenges to the traditional forest management and, if so, what kind. We imply that the growth of bottom-up initiatives indicates a growing diversity of beliefs and values regarding forests and the increasing determination of local people to impact local environmental decisions. Furthermore, informed by the institutional theory, we argue that the growth of local initiatives, particularly during and after Covid-19 pandemics, suggests the eroding legitimacy of dominant rules and discourses. This process is particularly visible in sub-urban forests, which are increasingly seen through a ‘well-being discourse’ that highlights cultural, regulative and supportive functions of forests, while putting less emphasis on provisioning functions. We also identify a networking trend among the initiatives that unifies their discursive background and enhances their influence at the national level. Therefore, local activists can be seen as a new advocacy group in the Polish forest policy subsystem. In response to local demands public forest administration has introduced institutional changes enhancing participation but their impact is still to be assessed. We recommend establishing a monitoring programme to track new participatory practices and to identify and promote best practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Chmielewski, Piotr, 2023. "Challenging the dominant path of forest policy? Bottom-up, citizen forest management initiatives in a top-down governance context in Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s1389934123001041
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934123001041
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Konczal, Agata A., 2020. "Why can a forest not be private? A post-socialist perspective on Polish forestry paradigms – an anthropological contribution," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Nousiainen, Daniela & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2022. "Characteristics and emerging patterns of forest conflicts in Europe - What can they tell us?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Shkaruba, Anton, 2018. "Governance and legitimacy of the Forest Stewardship Council certification in the national contexts – A comparative study of Belarus and Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 180-188.
    4. Logmani, Jacqueline & Krott, Max & Lecyk, Michal Tymoteusz & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Customizing elements of the International Forest Regime Complex in Poland? Non-implementation of a National Forest Programme and redefined transposition of NATURA 2000 in Bialowieza Forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 81-90.
    5. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Komar, Ewa & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2018. "Discourses on Public Participation in Protected Areas Governance: Application of Q Methodology in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 401-409.
    6. de Jong, Wil & Arts, Bas & Krott, Max, 2012. "Political theory in forest policy science," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Harrinkari, Teemu & Katila, Pia & Karppinen, Heimo, 2016. "Stakeholder coalitions in forest politics: revision of Finnish Forest Act," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 30-37.
    8. Mola-Yudego, Blas & Gritten, David, 2010. "Determining forest conflict hotspots according to academic and environmental groups," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 575-580, October.
    9. Hall, Peter A. & Taylor, Rosemary C. R., 1996. "Political science and the three new institutionalisms," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kumeh, Eric Mensah, 2023. "Contestations, counteractions and equitable conservation – a case study of Ghana's Krokosua Hills Forest Reserve," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    2. Singer, Benjamin & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Towards a donut regime? Domestic actors, climatization, and the hollowing-out of the international forests regime in the Anthropocene," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 69-79.
    3. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    4. Konczal, Agata A., 2020. "Why can a forest not be private? A post-socialist perspective on Polish forestry paradigms – an anthropological contribution," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    5. Rommelfanger, Jan, 2023. "Management of German national parks: The role of institutions and actors in defining goals and making decisions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Yefimov, Vladimir, 2009. "Comparative historical institutional analysis of German, English and American economics," MPRA Paper 48173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    8. Maarten Hillebrandt, 2017. "Transparency as a Platform for Institutional Politics: The Case of the Council of the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 62-74.
    9. Raitio, Kaisa, 2013. "Discursive institutionalist approach to conflict management analysis — The case of old-growth forest conflicts on state-owned land in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 97-103.
    10. Luis Alfonso Dau & Aya S. Chacar & Marjorie A. Lyles & Jiatao Li, 2022. "Informal institutions and international business: Toward an integrative research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 985-1010, August.
    11. repec:mje:mjejnl:v:12:y:2017:i:2:p:25-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.
    13. Sophie Jacquot & Cornelia Woll, 2003. "Usage of European Integration - Europeanisation from a Sociological Perspective," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01019642, HAL.
    14. Streeck, Wolfgang, 2009. "Institutions in history: Bringing capitalism back in," MPIfG Discussion Paper 09/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    15. Strzelecka, Marianna & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Akhshik, Arash & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2021. "Environmental justice in Natura 2000 conservation conflicts: The case for resident empowerment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Kaplan Yilmaz, 2017. "China’s OBOR as a Geo-Functional Institutionalist Project," TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 7(1), pages 7-23, June.
    17. Simon Guy & John Henneberry, 2000. "Understanding Urban Development Processes: Integrating the Economic and the Social in Property Research," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(13), pages 2399-2416, December.
    18. Niamh Hardiman, 2007. "Governing the Economy," Working Papers 200739, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    19. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Procedural Politics Revisited: Institutional Incentives and Jurisdictional Ambiguity in EU Competence Disputes," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1381-1399, November.
    20. Stroh, Alexander & Elischer, Sebastian & Erdmann, Gero, 2012. "Origins and Outcomes of Electoral Institutions in African Hybrid Regimes: A Comparative Perspective," GIGA Working Papers 197, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    21. Salla Eilola & Lalisa Duguma & Niina Käyhkö & Peter A. Minang, 2021. "Coalitions for Landscape Resilience: Institutional Dynamics behind Community-Based Rangeland Management System in North-Western Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-23, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s1389934123001041. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.