IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v144y2022ics1389934122001514.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing forest policy mixes based on the coherence of policies and the consistency of legislative policy instruments: A case study from Ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • Sarker, Pradip Kumar
  • Fischer, Richard
  • Tamayo, Fabian
  • Navarrete, Bolier Torres
  • Günter, Sven

Abstract

Due to widespread over-exploitation, tropical forests became a priority issue on the political agenda in the 1990s. Policy frameworks incorporating forest aspects in different policy sectors and building on existing structures have been implemented in many tropical countries. This poses challenges to policy design, including the consistency of policy instruments and policy instrument mixes. Such instruments need to be coherently integrated across various policy domains affecting forests. The Ecuadorian government has been striving for improved policy design by adjusting the policies and policy instruments over time, considering the multifunctionality of forests and the maintenance of the related ecosystem services. This study aims to amend methodologies of existing policy analysis in tropical forestry, taking into account the increasing complexity of the forest policy domain and applying this in a case study in Ecuador. We present an approach that links overarching sectoral policies with policy instruments and considers structures (mainly objectives and contents of the policy mix), actors and their interactions. The work is based on two empirical components: a qualitative content analysis of policy documents, and key informant interviews. Results for the case of Ecuador show a formally largely coherent and consistent forest policy framework. Challenges are mainly related to institutional responsibilities. The stakeholder perceptions deviate from the results of the content analysis. These deviations are interpreted as being based on specific values and beliefs. We conclude that policy development and design need to take into account these stakeholder perceptions. Based on the key informant interviews, we also highlight challenges, provide recommendations for specific thematic policy areas in Ecuador, and conclude that a specific focus needs to be kept on implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Fischer, Richard & Tamayo, Fabian & Navarrete, Bolier Torres & Günter, Sven, 2022. "Analyzing forest policy mixes based on the coherence of policies and the consistency of legislative policy instruments: A case study from Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:144:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122001514
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102838
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934122001514
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102838?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. Beate El-Chichakli & Joachim von Braun & Christine Lang & Daniel Barben & Jim Philp, 2016. "Policy: Five cornerstones of a global bioeconomy," Nature, Nature, vol. 535(7611), pages 221-223, July.
    2. Laura Rival, 2003. "The meanings of forest governance in Esmeraldas, Ecuador," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 479-501.
    3. Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Braña-Varela, Josefina & Gupta, Aarti, 2017. "A reality check on the landscape approach to REDD+: Lessons from Latin America," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 10-20.
    4. Felix Kalaba & Claire Quinn & Andrew Dougill, 2014. "Policy coherence and interplay between Zambia’s forest, energy, agricultural and climate change policies and multilateral environmental agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 181-198, May.
    5. Jale Tosun & Achim Lang, 2017. "Policy integration: mapping the different concepts," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 553-570, November.
    6. Fischer, Richard & Tamayo Cordero, Fabian & Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & DeDecker, Maria & Torres, Bolier & Giessen, Lukas & Günter, Sven, 2021. "Interplay of governance elements and their effects on deforestation in tropical landscapes: Quantitative insights from Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    7. Park, Mi Sun & Youn, Yeo-Chang, 2017. "Reforestation policy integration by the multiple sectors toward forest transition in the Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 45-55.
    8. Loaiza, T. & Borja, M.O. & Nehren, U. & Gerold, G., 2017. "Analysis of land management and legal arrangements in the Ecuadorian Northeastern Amazon as preconditions for REDD+ implementation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 19-28.
    9. Barbara Aretino & Paula Holland & Anna Matysek & Deborah Peterson, 2001. "Cost Sharing for Biodiversity Conservation: A Conceptual Framework," Others 0105001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Jenny Lieu & Niki Artemis Spyridaki & Rocio Alvarez-Tinoco & Wytze Van der Gaast & Andreas Tuerk & Oscar Van Vliet, 2018. "Evaluating Consistency in Environmental Policy Mixes through Policy, Stakeholder, and Contextual Interactions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    11. Lawrence C. Christy & Charles E. Di Leva & Jonathan M. Lindsay & Patrice Talla Takoukam, 2007. "Forest Law and Sustainable Development : Addressing Contemporary Challenges Through Legal Reform," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6671, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Lukas Giessen & Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman, 2016. "International and Domestic Sustainable Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    14. Di Gregorio, Monica & Nurrochmat, Dodik Ridho & Paavola, Jouni & Sari, Intan Maya & Fatorelli, Leandra & Pramova, Emilia & Locatelli, Bruno & Brockhaus, Maria & Kusumadewi, Sonya Dyah, 2017. "Climate policy integration in the land use sector: Mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development linkages," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 35-43.
    15. Giliberto Capano & Michael Howlett, 2020. "The Knowns and Unknowns of Policy Instrument Analysis: Policy Tools and the Current Research Agenda on Policy Mixes," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440199, January.
    16. Chinseu, Edna L. & Stringer, Lindsay C. & Dougill, Andrew J., 2018. "Policy Integration and Coherence for Conservation Agriculture Initiatives in Malawi," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(4).
    17. Atela, Joanes O. & Quinn, Claire H. & Minang, Peter A. & Duguma, Lalisa A. & Houdet, Joël A., 2016. "Implementing REDD+ at the national level: Stakeholder engagement and policy coherences between REDD+ rules and Kenya's sectoral policies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 37-46.
    18. Vasco, Cristian & Torres, Bolier & Pacheco, Pablo & Griess, Verena, 2017. "The socioeconomic determinants of legal and illegal smallholder logging: Evidence from the Ecuadorian Amazon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 133-140.
    19. Ladu, Luana & Imbert, Enrica & Quitzow, Rainer & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "The role of the policy mix in the transition toward a circular forest bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    20. Jörg Schweinle & Natalia Geng & Susanne Iost & Holger Weimar & Dominik Jochem, 2020. "Monitoring Sustainability Effects of the Bioeconomy: A Material Flow Based Approach Using the Example of Softwood Lumber and Its Core Product Epal 1 Pallet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-27, March.
    21. Blattert, Clemens & Eyvindson, Kyle & Hartikainen, Markus & Burgas, Daniel & Potterf, Maria & Lukkarinen, Jani & Snäll, Tord & Toraño-Caicoya, Astor & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2022. "Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    22. Michael Howlett & Jeremy Rayner, 2013. "Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(2), pages 170-182.
    23. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    24. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    25. Florian Kern & Michael Howlett, 2009. "Implementing transition management as policy reforms: a case study of the Dutch energy sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 391-408, November.
    26. Holland, Margaret B. & de Koning, Free & Morales, Manuel & Naughton-Treves, Lisa & Robinson, Brian E. & Suárez, Luis, 2014. "Complex Tenure and Deforestation: Implications for Conservation Incentives in the Ecuadorian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-36.
    27. Donald McTavish & Ellen Pirro, 1990. "Contextual content analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 245-265, August.
    28. Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki & Jenniver Sehring & Maria Brockhaus & Monica Di Gregorio, 2014. "Enabling factors for establishing REDD+ in a context of weak governance," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 167-186, March.
    29. Makkonen, Marika & Huttunen, Suvi & Primmer, Eeva & Repo, Anna & Hildén, Mikael, 2015. "Policy coherence in climate change mitigation: An ecosystem service approach to forests as carbon sinks and bioenergy sources," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 153-162.
    30. Aretino, Barbara & Holland, Paula & Matysek, Anna & Peterson, Deborah C., 2001. "Cost Sharing for Biodiversity Conservation: A Conceptual Framework," Staff Research Papers 31915, Productivity Commission.
    31. Pablo Cuenca & Juan Robalino & Rodrigo Arriagada & Cristian Echeverría, 2018. "Are government incentives effective for avoided deforestation in the tropical Andean forest?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fischer, Richard & Lippe, Melvin & Dolom, Priscilla & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Tamayo, Fabian & Torres, Bolier, 2023. "Effectiveness of policy instrument mixes for forest conservation in the tropics – Stakeholder perceptions from Ecuador, the Philippines and Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    2. Fischer, Richard & Tamayo Cordero, Fabian & Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & DeDecker, Maria & Torres, Bolier & Giessen, Lukas & Günter, Sven, 2021. "Interplay of governance elements and their effects on deforestation in tropical landscapes: Quantitative insights from Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    3. Chohan, Usman W., 2022. "Analyzing sound COVID-19 policy responses in developing countries: the case study of Pakistan," Studia z Polityki Publicznej / Public Policy Studies, Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Xieao Chen & Ping Huang & Zhenhong Xiao, 2022. "Uncovering the verticality and temporality of environmental policy mixes: The case of agricultural residue recycling in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 632-653, September.
    5. Giliberto Capano & Michael Howlett, 2020. "The Knowns and Unknowns of Policy Instrument Analysis: Policy Tools and the Current Research Agenda on Policy Mixes," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440199, January.
    6. Acciai, Claudia, 2021. "The politics of research and innovation: Understanding instrument choices in complex governance environments – the case of France and Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    7. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Sewerin, Sebastian, 2019. "Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    8. Mavrot, Céline & Hadorn, Susanne & Sager, Fritz, 2019. "Mapping the mix: Linking instruments, settings and target groups in the study of policy mixes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    9. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Regional governance by the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program (SACEP)? Institutional design and customizable regime policy offering flexible political options," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 454-470.
    10. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schleich, Joachim, 2018. "Do policy mix characteristics matter for low-carbon innovation? A survey-based exploration of renewable power generation technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1639-1654.
    11. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    12. Wurtzebach, Zachary & Casse, Thorkil & Meilby, Henrik & Nielsen, Martin R. & Milhøj, Anders, 2019. "REDD+ policy design and policy learning: The emergence of an integrated landscape approach in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 129-139.
    13. Karoline S. Rogge & Elisabeth Dütschke, 2017. "Exploring Perceptions of the Credibility of Policy Mixes: The Case of German Manufacturers of Renewable Power Generation Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    15. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    16. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Malhotra, Abhishek, 2022. "Trade-offs and synergies in power sector policy mixes: The case of Uttar Pradesh, India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    18. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    19. María José Dorado-Rubín & María José Guerrero-Mayo & Clemente Jesús Navarro-Yáñez, 2021. "Integrality in the Design of Urban Development Plans. Analysis of the Initiatives Promoted by the EU in Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    20. Ekawati, Sulistya & Subarudi, & Budiningsih, Kushartati & Sari, Galih Kartika & Muttaqin, Muhammad Zahrul, 2019. "Policies affecting the implementation of REDD+ in Indonesia (cases in Papua, Riau and Central Kalimantan)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-1.

    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:144:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122001514. 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.