IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v16y2012icp81-92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Foucault in the forests—A review of the use of ‘Foucauldian’ concepts in forest policy analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Winkel, Georg

Abstract

In this paper, a review is conducted on the use of the concepts of Michel Foucault in forest policy analysis. In doing so, three major questions are posed: (1) how Foucauldian thinking has influenced the analysis of forest policy, (2) what has been excluded from the analysis, and (3) how a Foucauldian perspective contributes to an enhancement of the theoretical knowledge on forest policy as well as how it may be used in future analyses. Accordingly, in the first section, the Foucauldian concepts that have been the most influential to forest policy analysis, discourse, knowledge, and power as well as governmentality are introduced and summarized in a table aiming to outline a ‘Foucauldian perspective’. Subsequently, thirty-nine papers on forest policy that draw on Foucauldian concepts are analyzed with regard to the following dimensions: author, academic background, research motivation, regional focuses, topics and time span covered by the analysis, disciplinary approach, frameworks, theoretical approach and Foucauldian concepts used, methods, main findings, and the conclusions drawn by the scholars about the value of using Foucault for their research. Additionally, the development of the studies over time is analyzed.

Suggested Citation

  • Winkel, Georg, 2012. "Foucault in the forests—A review of the use of ‘Foucauldian’ concepts in forest policy analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 81-92.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:16:y:2012:i:c:p:81-92
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2010.11.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411000167X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.11.009?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. Chong Ju Choi & Carla C. J. M. Millar & Caroline Y. L. Wong, 2005. "Knowledge and the State," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Knowledge Entanglements, chapter 0, pages 19-38, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Eeva Berglund, 2001. "Facts, Beliefs and Biases: Perspectives on Forest Conservation in Finland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 833-849.
    3. Maria Joutsenvirta, 2009. "A language perspective to environmental management and corporate responsibility," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 240-253, May.
    4. Sletto, Bjørn, 2008. "The Knowledge that Counts: Institutional Identities, Policy Science, and the Conflict Over Fire Management in the Gran Sabana, Venezuela," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1938-1955, October.
    5. Amita Baviskar, 2001. "Forest management as political practice: Indian experiences with the accommodation of multiple interests," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3/4), pages 243-263.
    6. Aasetre, Jorund, 2006. "Perceptions of communication in Norwegian forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 81-92, January.
    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. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    2. Leipold, Sina, 2014. "Creating forests with words — A review of forest-related discourse studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 12-20.
    3. Manuschevich, Daniela, 2016. "Neoliberalization of forestry discourses in Chile," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 21-30.
    4. Siegner, Meike & Hagerman, Shannon & Kozak, Robert, 2018. "Going deeper with documents: A systematic review of the application of extant texts in social research on forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 128-135.
    5. 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.
    6. Orihuela, José Carlos, 2017. "Assembling participatory Tambopata: Environmentality entrepreneurs and the political economy of nature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 52-62.
    7. Sadath, Nazmus & Kleinschmit, Daniela & Giessen, Lukas, 2013. "Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 37-41.
    8. Blicharska, Malgorzata & Van Herzele, Ann, 2015. "What a forest? Whose forest? Struggles over concepts and meanings in the debate about the conservation of the Białowieża Forest in Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-30.
    9. Stevanov, Mirjana & Dobšinska, Zuzana & Surový, Peter, 2016. "Assessing survey-based research in forest science: Turning lemons into lemonade?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 105-117.
    10. Teresa Pinto-Correia & José Muñoz-Rojas & Martin Hvarregaard Thorsøe & Egon Bjørnshave Noe, 2019. "Governance Discourses Reflecting Tensions in a Multifunctional Land Use System in Decay; Tradition Versus Modernity in the Portuguese Montado," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Rahman, Sabrina, 2016. "Forest in crisis: 2 decades of media discourse analysis of Bangladesh print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 16-21.
    12. Zambrano-Cortés, Darío Gerardo & Behagel, Jelle Hendrik, 2023. "The political rationalities of governing deforestation in Colombia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    13. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2012. "Forest owners and power: A Foucauldian study on Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 118-125.
    14. Boer, Henry James, 2018. "The role of government in operationalising markets for REDD+ in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 4-12.

    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. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2012. "Forest owners and power: A Foucauldian study on Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 118-125.
    2. Lawrence Bunnell & Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson & Victoria Y. Yoon, 0. "RecSys Issues Ontology: A Knowledge Classification of Issues for Recommender Systems Researchers," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-42.
    3. Joanna Sokolowska & Patrycja Sleboda, 2015. "The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1252-1267, July.
    4. Donald R. Haurin & Stuart S. Rosenthal, 2009. "Language, Agglomeration and Hispanic Homeownership," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 155-183, June.
    5. Jong Won Min, 2019. "The Influence of Stigma and Views on Mental Health Treatment Effectiveness on Service Use by Age and Ethnicity: Evidence From the CDC BRFSS 2007, 2009, and 2012," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, September.
    6. Alwang, Jeffrey & Larochelle, Catherine & Barrera, Victor, 2017. "Farm Decision Making and Gender: Results from a Randomized Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 117-129.
    7. Yanina Welp & Ferran Urgell & Eduard Aibar, 2007. "From Bureaucratic Administration to Network Administration? An Empirical Study on E-Government Focus on Catalonia," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 299-316, December.
    8. Brent Hammer & Helen Vallianatos & Candace Nykiforuk & Laura Nieuwendyk, 2015. "Perceptions of healthy eating in four Alberta communities: a photovoice project," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(4), pages 649-662, December.
    9. Rana, Pushpendra & Chhatre, Ashwini, 2017. "Beyond committees: Hybrid forest governance for equity and sustainability," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 40-50.
    10. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    11. Parag, Yael & Darby, Sarah, 2009. "Consumer-supplier-government triangular relations: Rethinking the UK policy path for carbon emissions reduction from the UK residential sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 3984-3992, October.
    12. Mikko Jauho & Johanna Mäkelä & Mari Niva, 2016. "Demarcating Social Practices: The Case of Weight Management," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 21(2), pages 10-22, May.
    13. Shaunak Roy, 2016. "Anatomizing the Dynamics of Societal Behaviour towards E-waste Management and Recycling Initiatives: A Case Study of Kolkata, India," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 41(1), pages 19-36, February.
    14. Cornelia Blank & Magdalena Flatscher-Thöni & Katharina Gatterer & Elisabeth Happ & Wolfgang Schobersberger & Verena Stühlinger, 2021. "Doping Sanctions in Sport: Knowledge and Perception of (Legal) Consequences of Doping—An Explorative Study in Austria," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Shuk Ying Ho & David Bodoff & Kar Yan Tam, 2011. "Timing of Adaptive Web Personalization and Its Effects on Online Consumer Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 660-679, September.
    16. Kastner, Thomas, 2009. "Trajectories in human domination of ecosystems: Human appropriation of net primary production in the Philippines during the 20th century," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 260-269, December.
    17. A. Maes & G. Poels, 2006. "Development of a user evaluations based quality model for conceptual modeling," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/406, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    18. T. D. Pol & S. Gabbert & H.-P. Weikard & E. C. Ierland & E. M. T. Hendrix, 2017. "A Minimax Regret Analysis of Flood Risk Management Strategies Under Climate Change Uncertainty and Emerging Information," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1087-1109, December.
    19. Johannes Hörner & Nicolas S Lambert, 2021. "Motivational Ratings [Toward the Next Generation of Recommender Systems: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art and Possible Extensions]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(4), pages 1892-1935.
    20. Carl Bonham & Christopher Edmonds & James Mak, 2006. "The Impact of 9/11 and Other Terrible Global Events on Tourism in the U.S. and Hawaii," Working Papers 200602, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.

    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:16:y:2012:i:c:p:81-92. 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.