IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v63y2016icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation, public policy-making, and legitimacy in the EU Voluntary Partnership Agreement process: The Cameroon case

Author

Listed:
  • Wodschow, Astrid
  • Nathan, Iben
  • Cerutti, Paolo

Abstract

This paper discusses how participatory policy-making processes such as the Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) negotiations are and should be organised to foster political legitimacy and support. The VPAs are bilateral agreements between the European Union (EU) and timber producing countries. VPAs constitute a cornerstone in EU's Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) programme, the most important tool for the EU to address illegal logging problems. The EU requires that national VPA negotiations include participation by the relevant stakeholders. Based on primary data, we compare the VPA negotiations in Cameroon (2006–2009) with three different ‘ideal’ models of participatory policy-making: the rationalist, the communicative incremental and the mixed model, which we expect have different implications for legitimacy. We conclude that the Cameroonian process is closest to a rationalist model with elements of the mixed model, and that this has increased legitimacy and support only to a limited extent. For future processes in other countries, we recommend stronger elements of the mixed model, and more careful considerations about stakeholder identification processes; how to adapt policy-process to specific contexts; and how to strengthen communication and information flows. Considerations about these elements could also strengthen the applicability of the ideal models.

Suggested Citation

  • Wodschow, Astrid & Nathan, Iben & Cerutti, Paolo, 2016. "Participation, public policy-making, and legitimacy in the EU Voluntary Partnership Agreement process: The Cameroon case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-10.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:63:y:2016:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934115300745
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.12.001?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. Buttoud, Gerard & Yunusova, Irina, 2002. "A `mixed model' for the formulation of a multipurpose mountain forest policy.: Theory vs. practice on the example of Kyrgyzstan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 149-160, June.
    2. Heidbreder, Eva G., . "Civil society participation in EU governance," Living Reviews in European Governance (LREG), Institute for European integration research (EIF).
    3. Carodenuto, Sophia & Cerutti, Paolo Omar, 2014. "Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) in Cameroon: Perceived private sector benefits from VPA implementation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 55-62.
    4. Springate-Baginski, Oliver & Thein, Aung Kyaw & Neil, Anthony & Thu, Win Myo & Doherty, Faith, 2014. "Democratising timber: An assessment of Myanmar's emerging ‘Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade’ (FLEGT) process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 33-45.
    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. Mingshun Zhang & Ying Cui & Erik ter Avest & Meine Pieter van Dijk, 2018. "Adoption of voluntary approach: Can voluntary approach generate collective impacts for China achieving ambitious energy efficiency targets?," Energy & Environment, , vol. 29(2), pages 281-299, March.
    2. Brusselaers, Jan & Buysse, Jeroen, 2021. "Legality requirements for wood import in the EU: Who wins, who loses?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    3. Rose P. Kicheleri & Thorsten Treue & Martin R. Nielsen & George C. Kajembe & Felister M. Mombo, 2018. "Institutional Rhetoric Versus Local Reality: A Case Study of Burunge Wildlife Management Area, Tanzania," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.
    4. Tegegne, Yitagesu T. & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & FOBISSIE, KALAME & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Lindner, Marcus & Kanninen, Markku, 2017. "Synergies among social safeguards in FLEGT and REDD+ in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-11.
    5. Adams, Marshall Alhassan & Kayira, Jean & Tegegne, Yitagesu Tekle & Gruber, James S., 2020. "A comparative analysis of the institutional capacity of FLEGT VPA in Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Ghana, Liberia, and the Republic of the Congo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Cashore, Benjamin & Nathan, Iben, 2020. "Can finance and market driven (FMD) interventions make “weak states” stronger? Lessons from the good governance norm complex in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Tegegne, Yitagesu Tekle & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Kotilainen, Juha & Winkel, Georg & Haywood, Andrew & Almaw, Addisu, 2022. "What drives forest rule compliance behaviour in the Congo Basin? A study of local communities in Cameroon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    8. Yitagesu Tekle Tegegne & Mathias Cramm & Jo Van Brusselen, 2018. "Sustainable Forest Management, FLEGT, and REDD+: Exploring Interlinkages to Strengthen Forest Policy Coherence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    9. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    10. Satyal, Poshendra, 2018. "Civil society participation in REDD+ and FLEGT processes: Case study analysis from Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and the Republic of Congo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 83-96.
    11. Verhaeghe, Elke, 2021. "The (post)politicisation of timber trade: (Un)invited participation in the EU-Vietnam Voluntary Partnership Agreement," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    12. Nkemnyi, Mbunya Francis & De Herdt, Tom & Chuyong, George B. & Vanwing, Tom, 2016. "Reconstituting the role of indigenous structures in protected forest management in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 45-51.

    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. Nathan, Iben & Chen, Jie & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Xu, Bin & Li, Yan, 2018. "Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effecti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-180.
    2. Andong, Sandrine & Ongolo, Symphorien, 2020. "From global forest governance to domestic politics: The European forest policy reforms in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    3. Serge Mandiefe Piabuo & Peter A. Minang & Chupezi Julius Tieguhong & Divine Foundjem-Tita & Frankline Nghobuoche, 2021. "Illegal logging, governance effectiveness and carbon dioxide emission in the timber-producing countries of Congo Basin and Asia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14176-14196, October.
    4. Tomas Gabriel Bas & Jacques Gagnon & Philippe Gagnon & Angela Contreras, 2022. "Analysis of Agro Alternatives to Boost Cameroon’s Socio-Environmental Resilience, Sustainable Development, and Conservation of Native Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-28, July.
    5. Paing, Win Min & Han, Phyu Phyu & Ota, Masahiko & Fujiwara, Takahiro, 2023. "The state-private hybrid forest policy in Myanmar: The impact of neoliberalism on the forestry sector after the 1990s," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2010. "Visitors' satisfaction, perceptions and gap analysis: The case of Dadia-Lefkimi-Souflion National Park," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 163-172, March.
    7. Lara M. Lundsgaard-Hansen & Flurina Schneider & Julie G. Zaehringer & Christoph Oberlack & Win Myint & Peter Messerli, 2018. "Whose Agency Counts in Land Use Decision-Making in Myanmar? A Comparative Analysis of Three Cases in Tanintharyi Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-30, October.
    8. Andrei MORARU, 2016. "European Union Democratic Governance: A Case Study Of The European Citizens’ Initiative," Europolity – Continuity and Change in European Governance - New Series, Department of International Relations and European Integration, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 10(2), pages 1-31.
    9. Sanchez Badini, Olivia & Hajjar, Reem & Kozak, Robert, 2018. "Critical success factors for small and medium forest enterprises: A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 35-45.
    10. Yin, Zhonghua & Wang, Fang & Gan, Jianbang, 2020. "Spatial spillover effects of global forest product trade," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    11. Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Lovric, Marko & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2019. "Mapping policy actor networks and their interests in the FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreement in Lao PDR," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 128-148.
    12. Kouplevatskaya-Yunusova, Irina & Buttoud, Gerard, 2006. "Assessment of an iterative process: The double spiral of re-designing participation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 529-541, July.
    13. Brusselaers, Jan & Buysse, Jeroen, 2018. "Implementation of the EU-Cameroon Voluntary Partnership Agreement policy: Trade distortion, rent-seeking and anticipative behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 167-179.
    14. Tegegne, Yitagesu T. & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & FOBISSIE, KALAME & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Lindner, Marcus & Kanninen, Markku, 2017. "Synergies among social safeguards in FLEGT and REDD+ in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-11.
    15. Acar Kutay, 2017. "How Does the European Commission Create a European Civil Society with Words? A Discourse Theoretical Inquiry," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(5), pages 1094-1109, September.
    16. Brusselaers, Jan & Buysse, Jeroen, 2021. "Legality requirements for wood import in the EU: Who wins, who loses?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    17. Prasada, Imade Yoga & Nugroho, Agus Dwi & Lakner, Zoltan, 2022. "Impact of the FLEGT license on Indonesian plywood competitiveness in the European Union," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    18. Timothy Cadman & Lauren Eastwood & Federico Lopez-Casero Michaelis & Tek N. Maraseni & Jamie Pittock & Tapan Sarker, 2015. "The Political Economy of Sustainable Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15773.
    19. Stojanovska, M. & Miovska, M. & Jovanovska, J. & Stojanovski, V., 2014. "The process of forest management plans preparation in the Republic of Macedonia: Does it comprise governance principles of participation, transparency and accountability?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 51-56.
    20. Nielsen, Tobias Dan, 2016. "From REDD+ forests to green landscapes? Analyzing the emerging integrated landscape approach discourse in the UNFCCC," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 177-184.

    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:63:y:2016:i:c:p:1-10. 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.