IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v112y2020ics1389934119305283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politics of an EU forest information system: Unpacking distributive conflicts associated with the use of forest information

Author

Listed:
  • Baycheva-Merger, Tanya
  • Sotirov, Metodi

Abstract

The development of a forest information system on forest resources has been on the European Union (EU) policy agenda for the past 20 years. Yet, despite agenda setting and various supporting initiatives, an operational EU forest information system has not been built yet. We build upon the analytical concept of positive coordination in political sciences, and aim to explore whether and how distributive conflicts associated with the use of forest information are a factor hindering the development of a European forest information system. Empirically, the study builds upon a qualitative research approach and aims to explore and identify perceived gains and losses associated with the use of forest information. For this, we conduct a series of in-depth interviews with key actors relevant to the development of the information system. Two closely interlinked distributive conflicts emerged from our analysis. The first one shapes around the potential use of forest information as a tool for maintaining political authority or expanding competences over forest resources. The second one entails conflicting issues about the potential strategic use of forest information to serve wood production at the expense of forest protection interests, and vice versa. The study concludes that forest information is much more than a neutral and objective form of scientific and technical expertise. It is politicized and used as a political asset that can be framed or utilized strategically for political gains. This leads to distributive conflicts, which in turn hinder the establishment of collaborative relationships and the development of an operational EU forest information system.

Suggested Citation

  • Baycheva-Merger, Tanya & Sotirov, Metodi, 2020. "The politics of an EU forest information system: Unpacking distributive conflicts associated with the use of forest information," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:112:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119305283
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934119305283
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102110?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. Michael Mason, 2008. "Transparency for Whom? Information Disclosure and Power in Global Environmental Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 8-13, May.
    2. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2000. "Institutions in comparative policy research," MPIfG Working Paper 00/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Brandsma, Gijs Jan, 2013. "Bending the rules: Arrangements for sharing technical and political information between the EU institutions," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 17, July.
    4. Edwards, Peter & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2013. "Towards a European forest policy — Conflicting courses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 87-93.
    5. Philip Leifeld & Volker Schneider, 2012. "Information Exchange in Policy Networks," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(3), pages 731-744, July.
    6. Hogl, Karl, 2002. "Patterns of multi-level co-ordination for NFP-processes: learning from problems and success stories of European policy-making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 301-312, December.
    7. Alberdi, Iciar & Michalak, Roman & Fischer, Christoph & Gasparini, Patrizia & Brändli, Urs-Beat & Tomter, Stein Michael & Kuliesis, Andrius & Snorrason, Arnór & Redmond, John & Hernández, Laura & Lanz, 2016. "Towards harmonized assessment of European forest availability for wood supply in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 20-29.
    8. Krott, Max & Hasanagas, Nicolas D., 2006. "Measuring bridges between sectors: Causative evaluation of cross-sectorality," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 555-563, July.
    9. Maarten Hillebrandt, 2017. "Transparency as a Platform for Institutional Politics: The Case of the Council of the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 62-74.
    10. Janse, Gerben, 2008. "Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe -- A survey on both sides of the science/policy interface," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 183-194, January.
    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. Baulenas, Eulàlia & Sotirov, Metodi, 2020. "Cross-sectoral policy integration at the forest and water nexus: National level instrument choices and integration drivers in the European Union," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Leire Barañano & Olatz Unamunzaga & Naroa Garbisu & Siebe Briers & Timokleia Orfanidou & Blasius Schmid & Inazio Martínez de Arano & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2022. "Assessment of the Development of Forest-Based Bioeconomy in European Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.

    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. José A. Moseñe Fierro & M. Victoria Sanagustín-Fons & César Álvarez Alonso, 2020. "Accountability through Environmental and Social Reporting by Wind Energy Sector Companies in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Riedl, Marcel & Hrib, Michal & Jarský, Vilém & Jarkovská, Martina, 2018. "Media analysis in a case study of Šumava National Park: A permanent dispute among interest groups," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 71-79.
    3. 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.
    4. Maarten Hillebrandt, 2017. "Transparency as a Platform for Institutional Politics: The Case of the Council of the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 62-74.
    5. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.
    6. Simon Fink & Eva Ruffing & Tobias Burst & Sara Katharina Chinnow, 2023. "Emotional citizens, detached interest groups? The use of emotional language in public policy consultations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 469-497, September.
    7. Anatoli Segura & Javier Suarez, 2019. "Optimally Solving Banks' Legacy Problems," Working Papers wp2019_1910, CEMFI.
    8. Jungwon Yeo, 2023. "Interorganizational Coordination for Immigrant Integration into Local Society," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 567-585, June.
    9. Pistorius, Till & Reinecke, Sabine, 2013. "The interim REDD+ Partnership: Boost for biodiversity safeguards?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 80-86.
    10. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "EU Institutional Politics of Secrecy and Transparency in Foreign Affairs," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 1-5.
    11. Narisong Huhe & Daniel Naurin & Robert Thomson, 2018. "The evolution of political networks: Evidence from the Council of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(1), pages 25-51, March.
    12. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Niamh Hardiman, 2006. "Politics and Social Partnership - Flexible Network Governance," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 37(3), pages 343-374.
    15. Winkel, Georg & Lovrić, Marko & Muys, Bart & Katila, Pia & Lundhede, Thomas & Pecurul, Mireia & Pettenella, Davide & Pipart, Nathalie & Plieninger, Tobias & Prokofieva, Irina & Parra, Constanza & Pülz, 2022. "Governing Europe's forests for multiple ecosystem services: Opportunities, challenges, and policy options," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    16. Elomina, Jerbelle & Pülzl, Helga, 2021. "How are forests framed? An analysis of EU forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    17. Mogues, Tewodaj & Olofinbiyi Tolulope, 2017. "Institutions And Public Agricultural Investments: A Qualitative Study Of State And Local Government Spending In Nigeria," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259576, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    18. Axel Marx & Guillaume Van der Loo, 2021. "Transparency in EU Trade Policy: A Comprehensive Assessment of Current Achievements," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 261-271.
    19. Jan Beyers & Tom Donas, 2014. "Inter-regional networks in Brussels: Analyzing the information exchanges among regional offices," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 547-571, December.
    20. Guri Rosén & Anne Elizabeth Stie, 2017. "Not Worth the Net Worth? The Democratic Dilemmas of Privileged Access to Information," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 51-61.

    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:112:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119305283. 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.