IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p3165-d167756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Nenad Šimunović

    (Wood K Plus (Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH), Market Analysis and Innovation Research Team, Feistmantelstraße 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Franziska Hesser

    (Wood K Plus (Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH), Market Analysis and Innovation Research Team, Feistmantelstraße 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Tobias Stern

    (Institute of Systems Sciences, Innovation and Sustainability Research, University of Graz, Merangasse 18/1, A-8010 Graz, Austria)

Abstract

Normative judgments on sustainability underpin concepts that shape the supply scenarios of timber consumption. The modern understanding of sustainable forest management is shaped by a diverse spectrum of social demands, going beyond the principle of sustainable yield management. Rival stakeholders compete to incorporate their ideas and interpretations of sustainable forest management into policy institutions. Environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) have emerged as one of the dominant stakeholders in the forest-based sector. We set out to explore ENGO-specific conceptualizations of sustainable forest management and investigate differences in understanding among various ENGOs. By conducting a frame analysis of ENGO press releases, we identified two master frames: environmental justice and environmentalist frames. A difference in the emphasis placed on procedural and distributive justice as well as a different standpoint in the commons versus commodity debate emerged as the main divergences between the master frames. The results of our study demonstrate how the differences between the master frames underpin different conceptualizations of sustainable forest management. On the one hand, the ENGOs associated with the environmental justice master frame advocate for the broader implementation of community forest management based on power-sharing. On the other hand, the ENGOs associated with the environmentalist master frame promote a wide range of approaches associated with ecosystem management and social forestry paradigms. Moreover, the ENGOs associated with the environmentalist master frame challenge the concept of sustainable forest management as defined by the Helsinki and Montreal process by advocating for ecosystem management. The ENGOs associated with the environmental justice master frame reject the mainstream concept of sustainable forest management in any guise. Future research on ethical issues underlying forestry concepts may provide more conceptual and operational clarity for both forest managers and policy-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Nenad Šimunović & Franziska Hesser & Tobias Stern, 2018. "Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3165-:d:167756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3165/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3165/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johanna Johansson, 2014. "Why do forest companies change their CSR strategies? Responses to market demands and public regulation through dual-certification," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(3), pages 349-368, March.
    2. Chelsea Batavia & Michael Paul Nelson, 2018. "Translating climate change policy into forest management practice in a multiple-use context: the role of ethics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 81-94, May.
    3. Löfmarck, Erik & Uggla, Ylva & Lidskog, Rolf, 2017. "Freedom with what? Interpretations of “responsibility” in Swedish forestry practice," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 34-40.
    4. Valkeapää, Annukka & Karppinen, Heimo, 2013. "Citizens' view of legitimacy in the context of Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 52-59.
    5. Viveca Sjöstedt & Daniela Kleinschmit, 2016. "Frames in environmental policy integration: Are Swedish sectors on track?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(3), pages 515-528, May.
    6. Sutterlüty, Andrea & Šimunović, Nenad & Hesser, Franziska & Stern, Tobias & Schober, Andreas & Schuster, Kurt Christian, 2018. "Influence of the geographical scope on the research foci of sustainable forest management: Insights from a content analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 142-150.
    7. Sadath, Nazmus & Kleinschmit, Daniela & Giessen, Lukas, 2013. "Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 37-41.
    8. Maier, Carolin & Abrams, Jesse B., 2018. "Navigating social forestry – A street-level perspective on National Forest management in the US Pacific Northwest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 432-441.
    9. Natalia Vidal & Gary Bull & Robert Kozak, 2010. "Diffusion of Corporate Responsibility Practices to Companies: The Experience of the Forest Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(4), pages 553-567, July.
    10. Anni Tuppura & Anne Toppinen & Kaisu Puumalainen, 2016. "Forest Certification and ISO 14001: Current State and Motivation in Forest Companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 355-368, July.
    11. Wang, Sen, 2004. "One hundred faces of sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 205-213, June.
    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. Devon C. Payne-Sturges & Thurka Sangaramoorthy & Helen Mittmann, 2021. "Framing Environmental Health Decision-Making: The Struggle over Cumulative Impacts Policy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Christine Pichler & Daniela Fürtner & Franziska Hesser & Peter Schwarzbauer & Lea Maria Ranacher, 2022. "The Role of the Social Licence to Operate in the Emerging Bioeconomy—A Case Study of Short-Rotation Coppice Poplar in Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.

    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. Sutterlüty, Andrea & Šimunović, Nenad & Hesser, Franziska & Stern, Tobias & Schober, Andreas & Schuster, Kurt Christian, 2018. "Influence of the geographical scope on the research foci of sustainable forest management: Insights from a content analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 142-150.
    2. Päivi Luoma & Romana Rauter & Esko Penttinen & Anne Toppinen, 2023. "The value of data for environmental sustainability as perceived by the customers of a tissue‐paper supplier," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 3110-3123, November.
    3. Bethmann, Stephanie & Simminger, Eva & Baldy, Jana & Schraml, Ulrich, 2018. "Forestry in interaction. Shedding light on dynamics of public opinion with a praxeological methodology," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 93-101.
    4. Anni Tuppura & Anne Toppinen & Kaisu Puumalainen, 2016. "Forest Certification and ISO 14001: Current State and Motivation in Forest Companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 355-368, July.
    5. Vainio, Annukka & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Hyvönen, Terho & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "The legitimacy of result-oriented and action-oriented agri-environmental schemes: A comparison of farmers’ and citizens’ perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Młynarski, Wojciech & Prędki, Artur & Kaliszewski, Adam, 2021. "Efficiency and factors influencing it in forest districts in southern Poland: Application of Data Envelopment Analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    7. Nichiforel, Liviu & Keary, Kevin & Deuffic, Philippe & Weiss, Gerhard & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Winkel, Georg & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Gatto, Paola & Gorriz Mi, 2018. "How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 535-552.
    8. Curtis, Keeli & Guillén, Luis Andrés & Brukas, Vilis, 2023. "Creating the landscape, one stand at a time: The dual roles of timber buyers in the nested domains of Swedish forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2011. "Green marketing is a sustainable marketing system in the twenty first century," MPRA Paper 50857, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Feb 2012.
    10. Wen-Hsien Tsai & Shang-Yu Lai & Chu-Lun Hsieh, 2023. "Exploring the impact of different carbon emission cost models on corporate profitability," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(1), pages 41-74, March.
    11. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nghiem, Nhung, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation by farm income levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 185-194.
    12. Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Huttunen, Suvi, 2018. "Linking practices of multifunctional forestry to policy objectives: Case studies in Finland and the UK," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 35-44.
    13. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Juutinen, Artti & Tyrväinen, Liisa & Karhu, Jouni & Kurttila, Mikko, 2018. "Participation and compensation claims in voluntary forest landscape conservation: The case of the Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 14-24.
    14. Park, Mi Sun & Shin, Seongmin & Lee, Haeun, 2021. "Media frames on urban greening in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    15. Morgan, Edward A. & Buckwell, Andrew & Guidi, Caterina & Garcia, Beatriz & Rimmer, Lawrence & Cadman, Tim & Mackey, Brendan, 2022. "Capturing multiple forest ecosystem services for just benefit sharing: The Basket of Benefits Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    16. Mangani, Andrea, 2021. "When does print media address deforestation? A quantitative analysis of major newspapers from US, UK, and Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    17. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Rahman, Sabrina, 2016. "Forest in crisis: 2 decades of media discourse analysis of Bangladesh print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 16-21.
    18. Renata Putkowska-Smoter & Krzysztof Niedziałkowski, 2021. "Street level bureaucracy in response to environmental pressure. Insights from forestry and urban green space governance in Poland," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(5), pages 900-918, August.
    19. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin & Phin, Sopheap, 2017. "Sustainable management of forest in view of media attention to REDD+ policy, opportunity and impact in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 10-21.
    20. Lawrence, Anna & Deuffic, Philippe & Hujala, Teppo & Nichiforel, Liviu & Feliciano, Diana & Jodlowski, Krzysztof & Lind, Torgny & Marchal, Didier & Talkkari, Ari & Teder, Meelis & Vilkriste, Lelde & W, 2020. "Extension, advice and knowledge systems for private forestry: Understanding diversity and change across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3165-:d:167756. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.