IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v74y2017icp81-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Customizing elements of the International Forest Regime Complex in Poland? Non-implementation of a National Forest Programme and redefined transposition of NATURA 2000 in Bialowieza Forest

Author

Listed:
  • Logmani, Jacqueline
  • Krott, Max
  • Lecyk, Michal Tymoteusz
  • Giessen, Lukas

Abstract

The International Forest Regime Complex consists of a number of institutional elements aiming to regulate forests. Among them the main line of conflict runs between production-oriented and conservation-oriented elements. Voluntary National Forest Programmes as well as biodiversity conservation policies, such as the Convention on Biodiversity and the EU Natura 2000 policy, reflect the main institutional elements of the forest regime complex. The implementation of such individual regime elements as well as the resulting domestic political customizations and consequences in countries, however, so far received little scrutiny. Before this background, this article aims to analyses the political influence of implementing important production- as well as conservation-oriented elements of the International Forest Regime Complex in Poland alongside with important customizations in both processes. Theoretically, we draw on the framework of four pathways of international influences and combine it with bureaucratic politics theory. Empirically, the current study focuses on qualitative in-depths insights into the so far failed implementation of a National Forest Programme in Poland, as well as the implementation and transposition of the EU NATURA 2000 policy, using Bialowieza Forest as an exemplary case. Our results indicate that the Polish Ministry of Environment has driven both processes. Both regime elements were clearly customized by bureaucratic action during the implementation process. While Nature 2000 triggered international support for protection-oriented interests, the dominant production-oriented bureaucracy overweighed it. The forestry bureaucracy offered to accept additional restrictions of forestry for nature protection, but only because they were linked to a gain in territorial authority over Bialowieza National Park and reduced political expectations about Natura 2000 sites all over the country. This re-definition of a formerly conservation-oriented element into a useful tool for production interests can be seen as an intentional, strategic customization of a regime element. In contrast, the process of creating the National Forest Programme so far failed once and since then is under conflictive negotiation. It was drafted as a detailed, nation-wide management plan, rather than a vague and general symbolic policy document as in most other countries. This exceptional customization of the NFP element in the tradition of management planning eventually threatened the dominant forestry interests and, hence, is seen a case of policy non-implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Logmani, Jacqueline & Krott, Max & Lecyk, Michal Tymoteusz & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Customizing elements of the International Forest Regime Complex in Poland? Non-implementation of a National Forest Programme and redefined transposition of NATURA 2000 in Bialowieza Forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 81-90.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:74:y:2017:i:c:p:81-90
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116304142
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. König, Thomas & Luetgert, Brooke, 2009. "Troubles with Transposition? Explaining Trends in Member-State Notification and the Delayed Transposition of EU Directives," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 163-194, January.
    2. Gluck, Peter & Humphreys, David, 2002. "Research into National Forest Programmes in a European context," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 253-258, December.
    3. Krasner, Stephen D., 1982. "Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 185-205, April.
    4. Mbatu, Richard S., 2015. "Domestic and international forest regime nexus in Cameroon: An assessment of the effectiveness of REDD+ policy design strategy in the context of the climate change regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 46-56.
    5. G. Winkel & M. Sotirov & Marieke Blondet & L. Borras & F. Ferranti & G. Geitzenauer, 2013. "Natura 2000 and climate change--Polarisation, uncertainty, and pragmatism in discourses on forest conservation and management in Europe," Post-Print hal-01001540, HAL.
    6. Edwards, Peter & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2013. "Towards a European forest policy — Conflicting courses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 87-93.
    7. Lindstad, Berit H. & Solberg, Birger, 2010. "Challenges in determining national effects of international policy processes: Forest protection in Norway as a case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(7), pages 489-496, September.
    8. Dimiter Toshkov, 2010. "Taking stock: a review of quantitative studies of transposition and implementation of EU law," Working Papers of the Vienna Institute for European integration research (EIF) 1, Institute for European integration research (EIF).
    9. Elsasser, Peter, 2007. "Do "stakeholders" represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1018-1030, May.
    10. Juerges, Nataly & Newig, Jens, 2015. "How interest groups adapt to the changing forest governance landscape in the EU: A case study from Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 228-235.
    11. Weber, Norbert & Christophersen, Tim, 2002. "The influence of non-governmental organisations on the creation of Natura 2000 during the European Policy process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, May.
    12. Winkel, Georg & Sotirov, Metodi, 2011. "An obituary for national forest programmes? Analyzing and learning from the strategic use of “new modes of governance” in Germany and Bulgaria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 143-154.
    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. 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.
    2. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Regional governance by the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program (SACEP)? Institutional design and customizable regime policy offering flexible political options," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 454-470.
    3. Geitzenauer, Maria & Blondet, Marieke & de Koning, Jessica & Ferranti, Francesca & Sotirov, Metodi & Weiss, Gerhard & Winkel, Georg, 2017. "The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 3-13.
    4. Pecurul-Botines, Mireia & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni, 2019. "Multi-level processes and the institutionalization of forest conservation discourses: Insights from Natura 2000," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 136-145.
    5. Konczal, Agata A., 2020. "Why can a forest not be private? A post-socialist perspective on Polish forestry paradigms – an anthropological contribution," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    6. Siegner, Meike & Hagerman, Shannon & Kozak, Robert, 2018. "Going deeper with documents: A systematic review of the application of extant texts in social research on forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 128-135.
    7. 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.
    8. Stanzel, Jens & Krott, Max & Schusser, Carsten, 2020. "Power alliances for biodiversity—Results of an international study on community forestry," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Yakusheva, Natalya, 2019. "Managing protected areas in Central Eastern Europe: Between path-dependence and Europeanisation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    10. Singer, Benjamin & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Towards a donut regime? Domestic actors, climatization, and the hollowing-out of the international forests regime in the Anthropocene," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 69-79.
    11. Brescancin, Flavia & Dobšinská, Zuzana & De Meo, Isabella & Šálka, Jaroslav & Paletto, Alessandro, 2018. "Analysis of stakeholders' involvement in the implementation of the Natura 2000 network in Slovakia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 22-30.
    12. Joana Carlos Bezerra & Jan Sindt & Lukas Giessen, 2018. "The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian, Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 635-656, October.

    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. Juerges, Nataly & Newig, Jens, 2015. "How interest groups adapt to the changing forest governance landscape in the EU: A case study from Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 228-235.
    2. Winkel, Georg & Sotirov, Metodi, 2011. "An obituary for national forest programmes? Analyzing and learning from the strategic use of “new modes of governance” in Germany and Bulgaria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 143-154.
    3. Joana Carlos Bezerra & Jan Sindt & Lukas Giessen, 2018. "The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian, Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 635-656, October.
    4. Juerges, Nataly & Arts, Bas & Masiero, Mauro & Başkent, Emin Z. & Borges, José G. & Brodrechtova, Yvonne & Brukas, Vilis & Canadas, Maria João & Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa & Corradini, Giulia & Corrigan, E, 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services in power analysis in forest governance: A comparison across nine European countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    5. Singer, Benjamin & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Towards a donut regime? Domestic actors, climatization, and the hollowing-out of the international forests regime in the Anthropocene," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 69-79.
    6. Teder, Meelis & Kaimre, Paavo, 2018. "The participation of stakeholders in the policy processes and their satisfaction with results: A case of Estonian forestry policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-62.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Balest, Jessica & Hrib, Michal & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Paletto, Alessandro, 2018. "The formulation of the National Forest Programme in the Czech Republic: A qualitative survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 16-21.
    10. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Regional governance by the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program (SACEP)? Institutional design and customizable regime policy offering flexible political options," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 454-470.
    11. 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.
    12. Koetter, Michael & Krause, Thomas & Tonzer, Lena, 2019. "Delay determinants of European Banking Union implementation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-20.
    13. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    14. Nathan Jensen, 2007. "International institutions and market expectations: Stock price responses to the WTO ruling on the 2002 U.S. steel tariffs," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 261-280, September.
    15. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    16. Diana Tuomasjukka & Staffan Berg & Marcus Lindner, 2013. "Managing Sustainability of Fennoscandian Forests and Their Use by Law and/or Agreement: For Whom and Which Purpose?," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    17. Ronald Mitchell, 2013. "Oran Young and international institutions," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, March.
    18. 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.
    19. Wehkamp, Johanna & Aquino, André & Fuss, Sabine & Reed, Erik W., 2015. "Analyzing the perception of deforestation drivers by African policy makers in light of possible REDD+ policy responses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 7-18.
    20. Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(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:eee:forpol:v:74:y:2017:i:c:p:81-90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.