IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v82y2017icp52-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural power in Serbian anti-corruption forest policy network

Author

Listed:
  • Rogelja, Todora
  • Shannon, Margaret A.

Abstract

This study uses network analysis to describe the network of actors created by efforts to incorporate anti-corruption measures into forest policy in Serbia. The anti-corruption forest policy network in Serbia is directed network, comprised of sixteen key policy actors (organizations), but only five out of the sixteen have strong and mutual cooperation regarding the incorporation of anti-corruption measures into forest policy. The most central actors are governmental agencies and public enterprises that form a sub-network with characteristics of an elite. Actors at the center of power are unlikely advocates of changes that might reduce their status and power. Thus, through a network analysis, this study points to the possible limits in the forest sector in terms of incorporating anti-corruption measures in forest policy in Serbia.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogelja, Todora & Shannon, Margaret A., 2017. "Structural power in Serbian anti-corruption forest policy network," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 52-60.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:82:y:2017:i:c:p:52-60
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934117302903
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.008?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. Börzel, Tanja A., 1997. "What's So Special About Policy Networks? An Exploration of the Concept and Its Usefulness in Studying European Governance," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 1, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Bachrach, Peter & Baratz, Morton S., 1962. "Two Faces of Power1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 947-952, December.
    4. World Bank & Agency for Statistics of Bosnia and Herzegovina & FBiH Institute for Statistics & RS Institute for Statistics, 2015. "Bosnia and Herzegovina," World Bank Publications - Reports 22471, The World Bank Group.
    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. Rogelja, T. & Ludvig, A. & Weiss, G. & Secco, L., 2018. "Implications of policy framework conditions for the development of forestry-based social innovation initiatives in Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 147-155.
    2. Radosavljević, Maja & Rogelja, Todora & Masiero, Mauro & Čomić, Dragan & Glavonjić, Branko & Pettenella, Davide, 2024. "Institutional and actor-oriented factors influencing timber legality in selected Western Balkan countries: Multiple case study of Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia and the Republic of Srpska (Bosn," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    3. Ludvig, Alice & Weiss, Gerhard & Sarkki, Simo & Nijnik, Maria & Živojinović, Ivana, 2018. "Mapping European and forest related policies supporting social innovation for rural settings," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 146-152.
    4. Moreira-Dantas, Ianna Raissa & Söder, Mareike, 2022. "Global deforestation revisited: The role of weak institutions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.

    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. Prabowo, Doni & Maryudi, Ahmad & Senawi, & Imron, Muhammad A., 2017. "Conversion of forests into oil palm plantations in West Kalimantan, Indonesia: Insights from actors' power and its dynamics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 32-39.
    2. Mareike Kleine, 2013. "Daniel Finke, Thomas König, Sven-Oliver Proksch and George Tsebelis. 2012. Reforming the European Union: Realizing the Impossible (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 111-115, March.
    3. 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).
    4. Purnomo, Herry & Kusumadewi, Sonya D. & Ilham, Qori P. & Puspitaloka, Dyah & Hayati, Durrah & Sanjaya, Made & Okarda, Beni & Dewi, Sonya & Dermawan, Ahmad & Brady, Michael A., 2021. "A political-economy model to reduce fire and improve livelihoods in Indonesia's lowlands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    5. Long, Hexing & de Jong, Wil & Yiwen, Zhang & Liu, Jinlong, 2021. "Institutional choices between private management and user group management during forest devolution: A case study of forest allocation in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    6. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Trejos, Bernardo & Flores, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Influence of property rights on performance of community-based forest devolution policies in Honduras," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    8. Fettke, Ulrike, 2018. "Etablierte und Außenseiter in der Kommunalpolitik? Eine Fallstudie zu Windkraft in einer badenwürttembergischen Kleinstadt," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2018-03, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    9. Handler, Joel F., 2005. "Myth and ceremony in workfare: rights, contracts, and client satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 101-124, February.
    10. Contandriopoulos, Damien & Brousselle, Astrid, 2010. "Reliable in their failure: An analysis of healthcare reform policies in public systems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(2-3), pages 144-152, May.
    11. Ripoll Servent, Ariadna and Amy Busby, 2013. "Introduction: Agency and influence inside the EU institutions," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 17, July.
    12. Juerges, Nataly & Arts, Bas & Masiero, Mauro & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke & Borges, José G. & Brodrechtova, Yvonne & Brukas, Vilis & Canadas, Maria João & Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa & Corradini, Giulia & Cor, 2021. "Power analysis as a tool to analyse trade-offs between ecosystem services in forest management: A case study from nine European countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    13. Piet Verschuren & Bas Arts, 2005. "Quantifying influence in complex decision making by means of paired comparisons," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 495-516, January.
    14. Leonie Janssen-Jansen & Melika Levelt, 2005. "Borderless Space - Ideas for Regional Collaboration," ERSA conference papers ersa05p292, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Paster, Thomas, 2015. "Bringing power back in: A review of the literature on the role of business in welfare state politics," MPIfG Discussion Paper 15/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    16. Mazumder, Soumyajit & Yan, Alan, 2020. "What Do Americans Want From (Private) Government? Experimental Evidence Demonstrates that Americans Want Workplace Democracy," SocArXiv j9asz, Center for Open Science.
    17. Fernández Milmanda, Belén & Garay, Candelaria, 2019. "Subnational variation in forest protection in the Argentine Chaco," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 79-90.
    18. Richard C. Witmer & Joshua Johnson & Frederick J. Boehmke, 2014. "American Indian Policy in the States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1043-1063, December.
    19. Juerges, Nataly & Arts, Bas & Masiero, Mauro & Başkent, Emin Z. & Borges, José G. & Brodrechtova, Yvonne & Brukas, Vilis & Canadas, Maria João & Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa & Corradini, Giulia & Corrigan, E, 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services in power analysis in forest governance: A comparison across nine European countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    20. Carter, Chris & Clegg, Stewart & Wåhlin, Nils, 2011. "When science meets strategic realpolitik: The case of the Copenhagen UN climate change summit," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 682-697.

    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:82:y:2017:i:c:p:52-60. 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.