Political theory in forest policy science
AbstractThe use of theory in forest policy studies has given a new face to forest policy science, as it matured from an applied academic field to a specialized sub-discipline. In addition to doing science to support policy, forest policy academics engage in research to expand policy sciences. The link to theory enables the forest policy researcher to generalize findings. The successful use of theory in analyzing a specific forest policy issue is a “test” of the theory and an important contribution to the general academic discussion of each theory. Existing theories can be adjusted and refreshed through forest policy studies. Forest policy studies have a tendency to follow trends, and choose theories that are in vogue to analyze forest policy cases. As such, forest policy science is well integrated into the broader field of policy sciences and political sciences in general. Apart from the modest contributions to the dominant policy theories, forest policy science has become internationalized over the last two decades and is thus perhaps more capable of serving as a vehicle for broad theory development and theory cross fertilization than political sciences sub-disciplines with a more narrow geographic focus.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Forest Policy and Economics.
Volume (Year): 16 (2012)
Issue (Month): C ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol
Forest policy; Political theory; Policy sciences; Positivist theory; Critical theory;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Benjamin Cashore & Elizabeth Egan & Graeme Auld & Deanna Newsom, 2007. "Revising Theories of Nonstate Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance: Lessons from the Finnish Forest Certification Experience," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 7(1), pages 1-44, 02.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.