IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v49y2014icp12-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Learning from practices — implications of the “practice based approach” for forest and environmental policy research

Author

Listed:
  • Krott, Max
  • Giessen, Lukas

Abstract

With the book publication “Forest and Nature Governance — A practice based approach” (Arts et al., 2013, Eds.) the Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group of Wageningen University, The Netherlands demonstrates its high aspirations of developing a new research approach. This article aims at discussing the methodological and conceptual contributions of the book to the field of forest and environmental policy research and proposes perspectives for further developing this methodological approach. It finds the “practice based approach” being an innovative, theoretically sound concept, which is able to produce valuable and “thick” empirical results. The approach is also found offering a plethora of possibilities to link up to analytical policy research. Yet, the approach will require further elaboration, especially on questions regarding the role of definitions, its contribution towards explaining social phenomena, and concerning the use of normative orientations in some of the empirical cases. The future challenges of the approach lie in either moulding a niche for further developing it independent from other schools, or in influencing mainstream approaches through theoretical innovations or surprising empirical results.

Suggested Citation

  • Krott, Max & Giessen, Lukas, 2014. "Learning from practices — implications of the “practice based approach” for forest and environmental policy research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 12-16.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:12-16
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113001779
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.013?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. Storch, Sabine, 2011. "Forestry professionalism overrides gender: A case study of nature perception in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 171-175, March.
    2. Esther Turnhout & Bob Bloomfield & Mike Hulme & Johannes Vogel & Brian Wynne, 2012. "Listen to the voices of experience," Nature, Nature, vol. 488(7412), pages 454-455, August.
    3. Arts, Bas, 2012. "Forests policy analysis and theory use: Overview and trends," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 7-13.
    4. Mert, Aysem, 2009. "Partnerships for sustainable development as discursive practice: Shifts in discourses of environment and democracy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 109-122, March.
    5. de Jong, Wil & Arts, Bas & Krott, Max, 2012. "Political theory in forest policy science," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-6.
    6. Weber, Norbert, 2012. "Reflections on theories in forest policy: Testing, combining or building?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 102-108.
    7. Krott, Max, 2012. "Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 35-42.
    8. Stevanov, Mirjana & Böcher, Michael & Krott, Max & Krajter, Silvija & Vuletic, Dijana & Orlovic, Sasa, 2013. "The Research, Integration and Utilization (RIU) model as an analytical framework for the professionalization of departmental research organizations: Case studies of publicly funded forest research ins," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 20-28.
    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. Štěrbová, Martina & Stojanovski, Vladimir & Weiss, Gerhard & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2019. "Innovating in a traditional sector: Innovation in forest harvesting in Slovakia and Macedonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Schroeder, Heike & González P., Nidia C., 2019. "Bridging knowledge divides: The case of indigenous ontologies of territoriality and REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 198-206.
    3. Prabowo, Doni & Maryudi, Ahmad & Imron, Muhammad A. & Senawi,, 2016. "Enhancing the application of Krott et al.'s (2014) Actor-Centred Power (ACP): The importance of understanding the effect of changes in polity for the measurement of power dynamics over time," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 184-186.
    4. Beland Lindahl, Karin & Sandström, Camilla & Sténs, Anna, 2017. "Alternative pathways to sustainability? Comparing forest governance models," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 69-78.
    5. Marjolein L.J. Mooij & Sabina Dessartre Mendonça & Koen Arts, 2018. "Conserving Biocultural Diversity through Community–Government Interaction: A Practice-Based Approach in a Brazilian Extractive Reserve," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Böcher, Michael & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Forest Policy Analysis: Advancing the analytical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman & Lukas Giessen, 2019. "Regional economic regimes and the environment: stronger institutional design is weakening environmental policy capacity of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 19-52, February.
    8. Aurenhammer, Peter K., 2016. "Network analysis and actor-centred approach — A critical review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 30-38.

    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. Stevanov, Mirjana & Dobšinska, Zuzana & Surový, Peter, 2016. "Assessing survey-based research in forest science: Turning lemons into lemonade?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 105-117.
    2. 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.
    3. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    4. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Böcher, Michael & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Forest Policy Analysis: Advancing the analytical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-6.
    5. Arts, Bas & Behagel, Jelle & Turnhout, Esther & de Koning, Jessica & van Bommel, Séverine, 2014. "A practice based approach to forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 4-11.
    6. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    7. 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.
    8. Hasanagas, Nikolaos D., 2016. "Managing information in forest policy networks: Distinguishing the influential actors from the “postmen”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 73-80.
    9. Koch, Susanne & Tetley, Camilla, 2023. "What ‘counts’ in international forest policy research? A conference ethnography of valuation practice and habitus in an interdisciplinary social science field," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Edwards, David M. & Meagher, Laura R., 2020. "A framework to evaluate the impacts of research on policy and practice: A forestry pilot study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Do, Thi Huong & Krott, Max & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Multiple traps of scientific knowledge transfer: Comparative case studies based on the RIU model from Vietnam, Germany, Indonesia, Japan, and Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    12. Böcher, Michael, 2016. "How does science-based policy advice matter in policy making? The RIU model as a framework for analyzing and explaining processes of scientific knowledge transfer," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 65-72.
    13. Dobšinská, Zuzana & Živojinović, Ivana & Nedeljković, Jelena & Petrović, Nenad & Jarský, Vilém & Oliva, Jiří & Šálka, Jaroslav & Sarvašová, Zuzana & Weiss, Gerhard, 2020. "Actor power in the restitution processes of forests in three European countries in transition," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    14. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Enrique A. Mundaca & Mariana Lazzaro-Salazar & Lucas Pujol-Cols & María Teresa Muñoz-Quezada, 2021. "The Emotional and Cognitive Scale of the Human–Nature Relationship (ECS-HNR)," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.
    16. Creutzburg, Leonard & Lieberherr, Eva, 2021. "To log or not to log? Actor preferences and networks in Swiss forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    17. Yang, Shanlin & Bai, Yu & Wang, Sufeng & Feng, Nanping, 2013. "Evaluating the transformation of China’s industrial development mode during 2000–2009," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 585-594.
    18. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    19. Alejandro Esguerra & Sandra van der Hel, 2021. "Participatory Designs and Epistemic Authority in Knowledge Platforms for Sustainability," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 130-151, Winter.
    20. Beland Lindahl, Karin & Sandström, Camilla & Sténs, Anna, 2017. "Alternative pathways to sustainability? Comparing forest governance models," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 69-78.

    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:49:y:2014:i:c:p:12-16. 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.