IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v90y2018icp90-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From wicked problem to governable entity? The effects of forestry on mercury in aquatic ecosystems

Author

Listed:
  • Lidskog, Rolf
  • Bishop, Kevin
  • Eklöf, Karin
  • Ring, Eva
  • Åkerblom, Staffan
  • Sandström, Camilla

Abstract

In all Swedish lakes, the concentration of mercury (Hg) in fish exceeds the European Union threshold limit. While the ultimate source of Hg is primarily airborne emissions from fossil energy, forestry plays a small but important role because some forestry operations help mobilize and transform Hg, increasing Hg loads in downstream aquatic ecosystems. Simultaneously, climate change is placing additional demands on forests to provide biomass as a substitute for fossil fuel. Thus, decision-makers are facing a complex situation, a “wicked problem,” when it comes to how to handle the problem of forestry’s effects on Hg in aquatic ecosystems while at the same time securing other ecosystem services. In order to explore forestry’s degree of responsibility as well as possible solutions to this problem in Sweden, a transdisciplinary method has been used consisting of a structured dialogue with actors from relevant governmental agencies, forest companies, and forest associations. The analysis shows that while the issue can be addressed constructively, the complex character of the problem requires consideration of not only management practices for forestry but also current regulatory goals and environmental objectives. The Hg problem represents a class of difficult issues for forestry where stand- or property-based production has an impact on a greater spatial scale. This means that regulating the more direct impacts of forestry needs to be weighed against the implications this regulation may have on the overall issue of ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Lidskog, Rolf & Bishop, Kevin & Eklöf, Karin & Ring, Eva & Åkerblom, Staffan & Sandström, Camilla, 2018. "From wicked problem to governable entity? The effects of forestry on mercury in aquatic ecosystems," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 90-96.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:90:y:2018:i:c:p:90-96
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2018.02.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934117302721
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.02.001?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. Hood, Christopher & Rothstein, Henry & Baldwin, Robert, 2004. "The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270019.
    2. James Palmer, 2012. "Risk governance in an age of wicked problems: lessons from the European approach to indirect land-use change," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 495-513, May.
    3. Löfmarck, Erik & Uggla, Ylva & Lidskog, Rolf, 2017. "Freedom with what? Interpretations of “responsibility” in Swedish forestry practice," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 34-40.
    4. James Palmer, 2012. "Risk governance in an age of wicked problems: lessons from the European approach to indirect land-use change," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 515-515, May.
    5. Ragnar Lofstedt & Frederic Bouder & Jamie Wardman & Sweta Chakraborty, 2011. "The changing nature of communication and regulation of risk in Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 409-429, April.
    6. Lindahl, Karin Beland & Sténs, Anna & Sandström, Camilla & Johansson, Johanna & Lidskog, Rolf & Ranius, Thomas & Roberge, Jean-Michel, 2017. "The Swedish forestry model: More of everything?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 44-55.
    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. Magnus Boström & Erik Andersson & Monika Berg & Karin Gustafsson & Eva Gustavsson & Erik Hysing & Rolf Lidskog & Erik Löfmarck & Maria Ojala & Jan Olsson & Benedict E. Singleton & Sebastian Svenberg &, 2018. "Conditions for Transformative Learning for Sustainable Development: A Theoretical Review and Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, November.

    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. Rolf Lidskog & Daniel Sjödin, 2018. "Unintended Consequences and Risk(y) Thinking: The Shaping of Consequences and Responsibilities in Relation to Environmental Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Giuntoli, J. & Searle, S. & Jonsson, R. & Agostini, A. & Robert, N. & Amaducci, S. & Marelli, L. & Camia, A., 2020. "Carbon accounting of bioenergy and forest management nexus. A reality-check of modeling assumptions and expectations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Curtis, Keeli & Guillén, Luis Andrés & Brukas, Vilis, 2023. "Creating the landscape, one stand at a time: The dual roles of timber buyers in the nested domains of Swedish forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. James R Palmer, 2014. "Biofuels and the Politics of Land-Use Change: Tracing the Interactions of Discourse and Place in European Policy Making," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(2), pages 337-352, February.
    5. Lawrence, Anna & Deuffic, Philippe & Hujala, Teppo & Nichiforel, Liviu & Feliciano, Diana & Jodlowski, Krzysztof & Lind, Torgny & Marchal, Didier & Talkkari, Ari & Teder, Meelis & Vilkriste, Lelde & W, 2020. "Extension, advice and knowledge systems for private forestry: Understanding diversity and change across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Bostedt, Göran & Zabel, Astrid & Ekvall, Hans, 2019. "Planning on a wider scale – Swedish forest owners' preferences for landscape policy attributes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 170-181.
    7. Julia Szulecka, 2019. "Towards Sustainable Wood-Based Energy: Evaluation and Strategies for Mainstreaming Sustainability in the Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, January.
    8. Everingham, Jo-Anne & Rolfe, John & Lechner, Alex Mark & Kinnear, Susan & Akbar, Delwar, 2018. "A proposal for engaging a stakeholder panel in planning post-mining land uses in Australia’s coal-rich tropical savannahs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 397-406.
    9. Richard Helliwell & Julia Tomei, 2017. "Practicing stewardship: EU biofuels policy and certification in the UK and Guatemala," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 473-484, June.
    10. Chiasson, Guy & Angelstam, Per & Axelsson, Robert & Doyon, Frederik, 2019. "Towards collaborative forest planning in Canadian and Swedish hinterlands: Different institutional trajectories?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 334-345.
    11. Julien Etienne, 2015. "Different ways of blowing the whistle: Explaining variations in decentralized enforcement in the UK and France," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 309-324, December.
    12. Nilsson, Jerker & Helgesson, Matilda & Rommel, Jens & Svensson, Ellinor, 2020. "Forest-owner support for their cooperative's provision of public goods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Jeroen van der Heijden & Jitske de Jong, 2009. "Towards a Better Understanding of Building Regulation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(6), pages 1038-1052, December.
    14. Anaïs Valiquette L’Heureux, 2022. "The Case Study of Los Angeles City & County Fraud, Embezzlement and Corruption Safeguards during times of pandemic," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 593-610, September.
    15. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 2-22, March.
    16. Mathias Ericson, 2018. "“Sweden Has Been Naïve”: Nationalism, Protectionism and Securitisation in Response to the Refugee Crisis of 2015," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 95-102.
    17. Rudolf URBAN, & Roman URBAN, & Lukáš ŠTĚPà NEK, 2016. "A New Approach To Risk Assessment Based On The Semantic Value Of Expressions," EcoForum, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 5(1), pages 1-30, January.
    18. Hertog, Iris Maria & Brogaard, Sara, 2021. "Struggling for an ideal dialogue. An analysis of the regional dialogue processes within Sweden's first National Forest Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    19. Peter Taylor-Gooby, 2008. "Sociological approaches to risk: strong in analysis but weak in policy influence in recent UK developments," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 863-876, October.
    20. Elomina, Jerbelle & Pülzl, Helga, 2021. "How are forests framed? An analysis of EU forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:90:y:2018:i:c:p:90-96. 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.