Author
Listed:
- G. G. Winkel
(Institute of Environmental Social Sciences and Geography, Forest and Environmental Policy Group - Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg = University of Freiburg)
- M. M. Sotirov
(Institute of Environmental Social Sciences and Geography, Forest and Environmental Policy Group - Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg = University of Freiburg)
- Marieke Blondet
(LEF - Laboratoire d'Economie Forestière - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - AgroParisTech)
- L. L. Borras
(Institute of Environmental Social Sciences and Geography, Forest and Environmental Policy Group - Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg = University of Freiburg)
- F. F. Ferranti
- G. G. Geitzenauer
(Institute of Forest, Environmental and Natural Resource Policy, Department of Economics and Social Sciences - BOKU - Universität für Bodenkultur Wien = University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences [Vienne, Autriche])
Abstract
European forests are a resource that is targeted by several EU environmental and land use policies as forests can be of critical importance to mitigate climate change. At the same time, they are central to the EU's biodiversity policy, and particular the Natura 2000 network of protected areas. Yet, the interlinkage between climate change and biodiversity policy is complex and discursively contested. In this paper, we assess how the debate on climate change adaptation affects forest conservation and management under Natura 2000. Drawing on the concept of argumentative discourse analysis, we present evidence from 213 qualitative interviews with policy stakeholders and practitioners that were conducted at both the European policy level and the local country level in 6 EU member states. Our results demonstrate that the nexus between climate change adaptation and forest conservation policy is conceptualised differently by different stakeholders and practioners at different levels. Three major discourses can be made out (pragmatic discourse, dynamics discourse, threat discourse), which are characterised by a set of partially overlapping story lines. These discourses are employed by four discourse coalitions (environmental, forest users', expert, and grass root coalition). As a general rule, debates at the European level are more polarised and politicised, while the local debates on climate change and Natura 2000 remain rather vague and are less polarised. This seems to indicate that the link between climate change adaptation and forest conservation is mostly an issue for an abstract high-level policy debate. At this level, climate change is used to influence well-known policies, and to legitimise distinct interests that were already present before the climate change debate has emerged.
Suggested Citation
G. G. Winkel & M. M. Sotirov & Marieke Blondet & L. L. Borras & F. F. Ferranti & G. G. Geitzenauer, 2013.
"Natura 2000 and climate change--Polarisation, uncertainty, and pragmatism in discourses on forest conservation and management in Europe,"
Post-Print
hal-01001540, HAL.
Handle:
RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01001540
Download full text from publisher
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's
web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Logmani, Jacqueline & Krott, Max & Lecyk, Michal Tymoteusz & Giessen, Lukas, 2017.
"Customizing elements of the International Forest Regime Complex in Poland? Non-implementation of a National Forest Programme and redefined transposition of NATURA 2000 in Bialowieza Forest,"
Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 81-90.
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:hal:journl:hal-01001540. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.