IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i10p3999-d357714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Downloading Europe: A Regional Comparison in the Uptake of the EU Forest Action Plan

Author

Listed:
  • Filip Aggestam

    (Institute of Forest, Environmental and Natural Resource Policy, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU) and the European Forest Institute (EFI) Forest Policy Research Network, Feistmantelstrasse 4, Vienna 1180, Austria)

  • Helga Pülzl

    (Institute of Forest, Environmental and Natural Resource Policy, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU) and the European Forest Institute (EFI) Forest Policy Research Network, Feistmantelstrasse 4, Vienna 1180, Austria)

Abstract

The first EU Forest Strategy was adopted in 1998 to provide general guidelines for an EU forest policy designed to coordinate other EU forest-relevant policies. The implementation of the first strategy was done under the auspices of the EU Forest Action Plan, covering the period from 2007 to 2011. The Forest Action Plan was a tool that facilitated voluntary cooperation between EU Member States (no enforcement capabilities), with some coordinating actions being implemented by the European Commission. The reason for returning to the Forest Action Plan in this article is to provide further insight into how it was employed by EU Member States—in contrast to the majority of similar articles on the topic, which are primarily concerned with an examination of EU forest-relevant policies by either analyzing the impact of EU decision-making on forestry at the national level or studying EU Member States’ influence on the EU rather than how EU Member States actually react to EU strategies. This paper addresses this empirical gap and highlights the significant variations of the Europeanization effects on EU Member States when deciding upon and implementing a non-legally binding policy instrument when compared to legally binding policy instruments. Individual Member States exhibit varied strategies when implementing a soft policy instrument, as their respective decision spaces are substantially different, particularly when the costs and benefits of complying are not comparable to those of a legally binding instrument. These results highlight the need for a more nuanced and varied approach to the implementation of soft policy instruments by the EU, with the additional implementation strategies suggested in this article being presented to assist in meeting this need for variation.

Suggested Citation

  • Filip Aggestam & Helga Pülzl, 2020. "Downloading Europe: A Regional Comparison in the Uptake of the EU Forest Action Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:10:p:3999-:d:357714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/3999/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/3999/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Treib, Oliver, . "Implementing and complying with EU governance outputs," Living Reviews in European Governance (LREG), Institute for European integration research (EIF).
    2. Kaeding, Michael, 2006. "Determinants of Transposition Delay in the European Union," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 229-253, December.
    3. McDermott, Constance L. & Sotirov, Metodi, 2018. "A political economy of the European Union's timber regulation: Which member states would, should or could support and implement EU rules on the import of illegal wood?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 180-190.
    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. Winkel, Georg & Lovrić, Marko & Muys, Bart & Katila, Pia & Lundhede, Thomas & Pecurul, Mireia & Pettenella, Davide & Pipart, Nathalie & Plieninger, Tobias & Prokofieva, Irina & Parra, Constanza & Pülz, 2022. "Governing Europe's forests for multiple ecosystem services: Opportunities, challenges, and policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Elomina, Jerbelle & Pülzl, Helga, 2021. "How are forests framed? An analysis of EU forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    3. Beland Lindahl, Karin & Söderberg, Charlotta & Lukina, Natalia & Tebenkova, Daria & Pecurul, Mireia & Pülzl, Helga & Sotirov, Metodi & Widmark, Camilla, 2023. "Clash or concert in European forests? Integration and coherence of forest ecosystem service–related national policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Vito Imbrenda & Rosa Coluzzi & Francesca Mariani & Bogdana Nosova & Eva Cudlinova & Rosanna Salvia & Giovanni Quaranta & Luca Salvati & Maria Lanfredi, 2023. "Working in (Slow) Progress: Socio-Environmental and Economic Dynamics in the Forestry Sector and the Contribution to Sustainable Development in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, June.

    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. Stijn van Voorst & Ellen Mastenbroek, 2017. "Enforcement tool or strategic instrument? The initiation of ex-post legislative evaluations by the European Commission," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(4), pages 640-657, December.
    2. Koetter, Michael & Krause, Thomas & Tonzer, Lena, 2019. "Delay determinants of European Banking Union implementation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-20.
    3. Brigitte Pircher & Karl Loxbo, 2020. "Compliance with EU Law in Times of Disintegration: Exploring Changes in Transposition and Enforcement in the EU Member States between 1997 and 2016," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1270-1287, September.
    4. Diesenreiter, Carina & Österle, August, 2021. "Patients as EU citizens? The implementation and corporatist stakeholders’ perceptions of the EU cross-border health care directive in Austria," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(11), pages 1498-1505.
    5. Asya Zhelyazkova & Nikoleta Yordanova, 2015. "Signalling ‘compliance’: The link between notified EU directive implementation and infringement cases," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 408-428, September.
    6. Martin Stangborli Time & Frode Veggeland, 2020. "Adapting to a Global Health Challenge: Managing Antimicrobial Resistance in the Nordics," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 53-64.
    7. Carlos Mendez & John Bachtler, 2017. "Financial Compliance in the European Union: A Cross-National Assessment of Financial Correction Patterns and Causes in Cohesion Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 569-592, May.
    8. Nora Dörrenbächer & Ellen Mastenbroek, 2019. "Passing the buck? Analyzing the delegation of discretion after transposition of European Union law," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 70-85, March.
    9. Martin Stangborli Time & Frode Veggeland, 2020. "Adapting to a Global Health Challenge: Managing Antimicrobial Resistance in the Nordics," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 384-395.
    10. Michael Blauberger & Susanne K. Schmidt, 2023. "Negative Integration Is What States Make of It? Tackling Labour Exploitation in the German Meat Sector," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 917-934, July.
    11. Lucia Rossel & Brigitte Unger & Joras Ferwerda, 2022. "Shedding light inside the black box of implementation: Tax crimes as a predicate crime for money laundering," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 781-800, July.
    12. Camilla Mariotto, 2022. "The Implementation of Economic Rules: From the Stability and Growth Pact to the European Semester," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 40-57, January.
    13. Juna Toska & Renate Reiter & Annette Elisabeth Töller, 2022. "When European Policies Meet German Federalism: A Study on the Implementation of the EU Reception Conditions Directive," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 26-35.
    14. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:46:y:2008:i::p:27-48 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Ellen Mastenbroek & Tim Veen, 2008. "Last Words on Delegation?," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(2), pages 295-311, June.
    16. Köthke, Margret, 2020. "Implementation of the European Timber Regulation by German importing operators: An empirical investigation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    17. Baulenas, Eulàlia & Sotirov, Metodi, 2020. "Cross-sectoral policy integration at the forest and water nexus: National level instrument choices and integration drivers in the European Union," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    18. Jan R. Starke & Helena F. M. W. Van Rijswick, 2021. "Exemptions of the EU Water Framework Directive Deterioration Ban: Comparing Implementation Approaches in Lower Saxony and The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, January.
    19. Morten Egeberg & Jarle Trondal, 2017. "Researching European Union Agencies: What Have We Learnt (and Where Do We Go from Here)?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 675-690, July.
    20. Metodi Sotirov & Benno Pokorny & Daniela Kleinschmit & Peter Kanowski, 2020. "International Forest Governance and Policy: Institutional Architecture and Pathways of Influence in Global Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    21. Stine Aakre & Jon Hovi, 2010. "Emission trading: Participation enforcement determines the need for compliance enforcement," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 427-445, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:10:p:3999-:d:357714. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.