IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v67y2016icp30-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder coalitions in forest politics: revision of Finnish Forest Act

Author

Listed:
  • Harrinkari, Teemu
  • Katila, Pia
  • Karppinen, Heimo

Abstract

The Finnish Forest Act was revised in 2010–2013. The need for revision emerged from societal changes manifested through the changing objectives of private forest owners, increasing and diversifying demands for forest goods and services and increasing number of stakeholders, as well as the changes in the forest sector operational environment that relate to the globalisation of markets and influences of international policies. Advocacy Coalition Framework guided this study to identify and describe the belief structures and coordination of advocacy coalitions in the Finnish forest sector in the context of the revision of the Forest Act. Three coalitions were identified on the basis of policy core beliefs and coordination between actors: Forestry coalition and Administrative coalition derive their normative beliefs from the forest paradigm, whereas Environmental coalition derives its beliefs from the environmental paradigm. The differences deriving from the two different paradigms have led to polarised coordination patterns between rival coalitions, minimal communication channels between opponents and a long-term disagreement about major questions in the subsystem. Interestingly, the government seems to have a divided representation in forest policy, since Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, and Ministry of Environment contribute via different coalitions. In the future, the success of Finnish forest sector depends on how well it is able to combine different preconditions deriving from these two paradigms.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:67:y:2016:i:c:p:30-37
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.02.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411630017X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.02.006?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. 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.
    2. Sotirov, Metodi & Memmler, Michael, 2012. "The Advocacy Coalition Framework in natural resource policy studies — Recent experiences and further prospects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 51-64.
    3. Kuuluvainen, Jari & Karppinen, Heimo & Hänninen, Harri & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2014. "Effects of gender and length of land tenure on timber supply in Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 363-379.
    4. Larsen, Jakob Bjerg & Vrangbæk, Karsten & Traulsen, Janine M., 2006. "Advocacy coalitions and pharmacy policy in Denmark--Solid cores with fuzzy edges," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 212-224, July.
    5. Villamor, Grace B., 2006. "The rise of protected area policy in the Philippine forest policy: An analysis from the perspective of Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 162-178, November.
    6. Matthew Zafonte & Paul Sabatier, 1998. "Shared Beliefs and Imposed Interdependencies as Determinants of Ally Networks in Overlapping Subsystems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 473-505, October.
    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. Teder, Meelis & Kaimre, Paavo, 2018. "The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-62.
    2. Venina Sucu Qiolevu & Seunghoo Lim, 2019. "Stakeholder Participation and Advocacy Coalitions for Making Sustainable Fiji Mineral Royalty Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Kröger, Markus & Raitio, Kaisa, 2017. "Finnish forest policy in the era of bioeconomy: A pathway to sustainability?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 6-15.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Vatn, Arild, 2018. "An Empirical Analysis of Institutional Demand for Valuation Knowledge," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 152-160.
    5. Farhan, Farwiza & Hoebink, Paul, 2019. "Can campaigns save forests? Critical reflections from the Tripa campaign, Aceh, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 17-27.
    6. van der Hoff, Richard & Rajão, Raoni, 2020. "The politics of environmental market instruments: Coalition building and knowledge filtering in the regulation of forest certificates trading in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Krause, Torsten & Orsi, Francesco & Geneletti, Davide & Brogaard, Sara & Aukes, Ewert & Ciolli, Marco & Grossmann, Carol & Hernández-Morcillo, Mónica & Kister, Jutta & , 2021. "Mapping Europe’s institutional landscape for forest ecosystem service provision, innovations and governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    8. Roitsch, Dennis & Abruscato, Silvia & Lovrić, Marko & Lindner, Marcus & Orazio, Christophe & Winkel, Georg, 2023. "Close-to-nature forestry and intensive forestry – Two response patterns of forestry professionals towards climate change adaptation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    9. Takala, Tuomo & Lehtinen, Ari & Tanskanen, Minna & Hujala, Teppo & Tikkanen, Jukka, 2019. "The rise of multi-objective forestry paradigm in the Finnish print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Pietarinen, Niina & Harrinkari, Teemu & Brockhaus, Maria & Yakusheva, Natalya, 2023. "Discourses in Finnish forest policy: Cherry-picking or sustainability?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    11. Blattert, Clemens & Eyvindson, Kyle & Hartikainen, Markus & Burgas, Daniel & Potterf, Maria & Lukkarinen, Jani & Snäll, Tord & Toraño-Caicoya, Astor & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2022. "Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    12. Yadav, Bhagwan Dutta & Shrestha, Krishna Kumar & Acharya, Bishnu Prasad, 2021. "Contested forest management and the Nepalese Government’s forest policy," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 23(C).
    13. Jaana Korhonen & Alexandru Giurca & Maria Brockhaus & Anne Toppinen, 2018. "Actors and Politics in Finland’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    14. 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).

    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. Metodi Sotirov & Georg Winkel, 2016. "Toward a cognitive theory of shifting coalitions and policy change: linking the advocacy coalition framework and cultural theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(2), pages 125-154, June.
    2. Adam Wellstead, 2017. "Plus ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose? A review of Paul Sabatier’s “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 549-561, December.
    3. Sotirov, Metodi & Blum, Mareike & Storch, Sabine & Selter, Andy & Schraml, Ulrich, 2017. "Do forest policy actors learn through forward-thinking? Conflict and cooperation relating to the past, present and futures of sustainable forest management in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 256-268.
    4. Farhan, Farwiza & Hoebink, Paul, 2019. "Can campaigns save forests? Critical reflections from the Tripa campaign, Aceh, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 17-27.
    5. Holopainen, Jani & Mattila, Osmo & Pöyry, Essi & Parvinen, Petri, 2020. "Applying design science research methodology in the development of virtual reality forest management services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Giessen, Lukas & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Local to global escalation of land use conflicts: Long-term dynamics on social movements protests against pulp mills and plantation forests in Argentina and Uruguay," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Juutinen, Artti & Tyrväinen, Liisa & Karhu, Jouni & Kurttila, Mikko, 2018. "Participation and compensation claims in voluntary forest landscape conservation: The case of the Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 14-24.
    9. Umaerus, Patrik & Högvall Nordin, Maria & Lidestav, Gun, 2019. "Do female forest owners think and act “greener”?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 52-58.
    10. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    11. Sarkki, Simo & Heikkinen, Hannu I. & Herva, Vesa-Pekka & Saarinen, Jarkko, 2018. "Myths on local use of natural resources and social equity of land use governance: Reindeer herding in Finland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 322-331.
    12. Segadlo, Nadine, 2021. "Navigating through an external agenda and internal preferences: Ghana's national migration policy," IDOS Discussion Papers 8/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    13. Mäkelä, Marileena, 2017. "Environmental impacts and aspects in the forest industry: What kind of picture do corporate environmental reports provide?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 178-191.
    14. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Krott, Max, 2012. "Identifying policy change — Analytical program analysis: An example of two decades of forest policy in Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 93-99.
    15. 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.
    16. Kilham, Philipp & Hartebrodt, Christoph & Schraml, Ulrich, 2019. "A conceptual model for private forest owners' harvest decisions: A qualitative study in southwest Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Ekström, Hanna & Danley, Brian & Clough, Yann & Droste, Nils, 2024. "Barking up the wrong tree? - A guide to forest owner typology methods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    18. Martha Isabel Gómez Lee, 2016. "Biodiversidad y políticas públicas: coaliciones de causa en las políticas de acceso a los recursos genéticos en Colombia," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 105, April.
    19. Triplat, Matevž & Helenius, Satu & Laina, Ruben & Krajnc, Nike & Kronholm, Thomas & Ženko, Zdenka & Hujala, Teppo, 2023. "Private forest owner willingness to mobilise wood from dense, small-diameter tree stands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    20. Arts, Bas & Behagel, Jelle & Turnhout, Esther & de Koning, Jessica & van Bommel, Séverine, 2014. "A practice based approach to forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 4-11.

    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:67:y:2016:i:c:p:30-37. 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.