IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v8y2008i2p99-122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Science in Environmental Governance: Competing Knowledge Producers in Swedish and Norwegian Forestry

Author

Listed:
  • Lars H. Gulbrandsen

    (Lars H. Gulbrandsen is a Senior Research Fellow at the Fridtjof Nansen Institute, Norway. He was a visiting scholar in 2007 at Harvard University's Center for International Development, Kennedy School of Government. His research interests include non-state environmental governance, corporate social responsibility, international environmental regimes, and social studies of science. His publications have appeared in journals such as Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Environment, Environmental Politics, Global Environmental Politics, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Journal of Environment and Development, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, Organization, and Third World Quarterly.)

Abstract

This article explores the influence of scientific knowledge in rule-making processes to enhance environmental protection in Swedish and Norwegian forestry. It examines the mapping and protection of small reserves; the development of plans for protection of large reserves; and rule-setting in voluntary forest certification schemes. The analysis shows that Sweden has enacted more stringent environmental protection policies on all measures examined. Whereas variation in the state of knowledge about environmental protection needs does not explain these differences, variation in the access to the science-policy dialogue and in the distribution of costs and benefits in the forestry sector does help explain the differences in the stringency of Norwegian and Swedish forest policy. I conclude that the influence of knowledge depends on the process by which it is created. Although scientific information usually has little influence when strong economic counter-forces are involved in the decision-making process, this problem can be ameliorated by facilitating processes of coproduction of knowledge among scientific experts, practitioners, and decision-makers. (c) 2008 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars H. Gulbrandsen, 2008. "The Role of Science in Environmental Governance: Competing Knowledge Producers in Swedish and Norwegian Forestry," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 99-122, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:8:y:2008:i:2:p:99-122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/glep.2008.8.2.99
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katharina Rietig, 2014. "‘Neutral’ experts? How input of scientific expertise matters in international environmental negotiations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 141-160, June.
    2. Sarkki, Simo, 2017. "Governance services: Co-producing human well-being with ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 82-91.
    3. Amelia Sharman, 2015. "The impact of controversy on the production of scientific knowledge," GRI Working Papers 207, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    4. Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "A closer look at the information provision rationale: Civil society participation in states’ delegations at the UNFCCC," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 55-80, March.
    5. Moritz Albrecht, 2012. "Public Procurement and Forest Governance: A German Case Study of Governmental Influences on Market-Driven Governance Systems," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Amelia Sharman, 2013. "Mapping the climate sceptical blogosphere," GRI Working Papers 124, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    7. Mitchell J. Small & Ümit Güvenç & Michael L. DeKay, 2014. "When Can Scientific Studies Promote Consensus Among Conflicting Stakeholders?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(11), pages 1978-1994, November.

    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:tpr:glenvp:v:8:y:2008:i:2:p:99-122. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.