IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v89y2018icp87-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process

Author

Listed:
  • Tikkanen, Jukka

Abstract

The study draws a synthesis of participation in the regional forest programme process (RFP) in Finland, based on the science of planning theory and on the empirical findings on RFP process. The paper describes five eras of participation: (1) the participatory-turn, when post-Rio programme model was initiated; (2) the creation and (3) establishment of RFP as a policy instrument that applies forest councils as deliberative forum, and is conducted synchronously with National Programmes. Many scientific studies focused on the RFP process in earlier phases raised scepticism on the capability of the institution to fully serve its purposes. Reconsideration of programme practices started by (4) a search of an “ideal model” for participation procedures, but ended up to the ongoing era that can be labelled either as a (5) participatory downturn or as a strategic-turn, depending on the political position regarding to forest programme, i.e. if the programme is viewed from the implementation or social choice approach. A praxis story of the paper demonstrates sceptical findings on potentials of normative planning studies to contribute sustainable changes in participatory forest policy processes. The central role of power is to be more properly understood in the forthcoming studies and institutional developments.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:89:y:2018:i:c:p:87-97
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.04.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934117302459
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.04.009?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. Etzioni, Amitai, 1986. "Rationality is anti-entropic," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 17-36, March.
    2. Tore Sager, 2001. "Positive Theory of Planning: The Social Choice Approach," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(4), pages 629-647, April.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Primmer, Eeva, 2011. "Policy, project and operational networks: Channels and conduits for learning in forest biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 132-142.
    6. 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.
    7. Sotirov, Metodi & Memmler, Michael, 2012. "The Advocacy Coalition Framework in natural resource policy studies — Recent experiences and further prospects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 51-64.
    8. Johansson, Johanna, 2016. "Participation and deliberation in Swedish forest governance: The process of initiating a National Forest Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 137-146.
    9. Carvalho Mendes, Americo M.S., 2006. "Implementation analysis of forest programmes: Some theoretical notes and an example," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 512-528, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Peter Pelzer & Stan Geertman & Rob van der Heijden, 2015. "Knowledge in communicative planning practice: a different perspective for planning support systems," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(4), pages 638-651, July.
    12. Hens Runhaar & Peter P J Driessen & Laila Soer, 2009. "Sustainable Urban Development and the Challenge of Policy Integration: An Assessment of Planning Tools for Integrating Spatial and Environmental Planning in the Netherlands," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(3), pages 417-431, June.
    13. Faye, Papa, 2015. "Choice and power: Resistance to technical domination in Senegal's forest decentralization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 19-26.
    14. Malgorzata Blicharska & Karolina Isaksson & Tim Richardson & Chia-Jung Wu, 2011. "Context dependency and stakeholder involvement in EIA: the decisive role of practitioners," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(3), pages 337-354.
    15. Arts, Bas, 2012. "Forests policy analysis and theory use: Overview and trends," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 7-13.
    16. Leskinen, Leena A., 2004. "Purposes and challenges of public participation in regional and local forestry in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 605-618, October.
    17. Nathan Marom, 2014. "Planning as a Principle of Vision and Division: A Bourdieusian View of Tel Aviv's Urban Development, 1920s—1950s," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(8), pages 1908-1926, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Weber, Norbert, 2012. "Reflections on theories in forest policy: Testing, combining or building?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 102-108.
    20. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    21. P M McGuirk, 2001. "Situating Communicative Planning Theory: Context, Power, and Knowledge," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(2), pages 195-217, February.
    22. M Tewdwr-Jones & P Allmendinger, 1998. "Deconstructing Communicative Rationality: A Critique of Habermasian Collaborative Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 30(11), pages 1975-1989, November.
    23. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2012. "Forest owners and power: A Foucauldian study on Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 118-125.
    24. Saarikoski, Heli & Tikkanen, Jukka & Leskinen, Leena A., 2010. "Public participation in practice -- Assessing public participation in the preparation of regional forest programs in Northern Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 349-356, June.
    25. Aasetre, Jorund, 2006. "Perceptions of communication in Norwegian forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 81-92, January.
    26. Buizer, Marleen & Van Herzele, Ann, 2012. "Combining deliberative governance theory and discourse analysis to understand the deliberative incompleteness of centrally formulated plans," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 93-101.
    27. Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2012. "Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 71-80.
    28. Winkel, Georg, 2012. "Foucault in the forests—A review of the use of ‘Foucauldian’ concepts in forest policy analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 81-92.
    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. Tianyu Qin & Lijun Wang & Yanxin Zhou & Liyue Guo & Gaoming Jiang & Lei Zhang, 2022. "Digital Technology-and-Services-Driven Sustainable Transformation of Agriculture: Cases of China and the EU," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, February.
    2. Grundel, Ida & Christenson, Nina & Dahlström, Margareta, 2022. "Identifying interests and values in forest areas through collaborative processes and landscape resource analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    3. Takala, Tuomo & Lehtinen, Ari & Tanskanen, Minna & Hujala, Teppo & Tikkanen, Jukka, 2020. "Discoursal power and multi-objective forestry in the Finnish print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    4. Pietarinen, Niina & Harrinkari, Teemu & Brockhaus, Maria & Yakusheva, Natalya, 2023. "Discourses in Finnish forest policy: Cherry-picking or sustainability?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).

    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. 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. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2012. "Forest owners and power: A Foucauldian study on Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 118-125.
    3. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Johansson, Johanna, 2016. "Participation and deliberation in Swedish forest governance: The process of initiating a National Forest Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 137-146.
    7. 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.
    8. Kangas, Annika & Heikkilä, Juuso & Malmivaara-Lämsä, Minna & Löfström, Irja, 2014. "Case Puijo—Evaluation of a participatory urban forest planning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 13-23.
    9. Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2012. "Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 71-80.
    10. Weber, Norbert, 2018. "Participation or involvement? Development of forest strategies on national and sub-national level in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 98-106.
    11. Grundel, Ida & Christenson, Nina & Dahlström, Margareta, 2022. "Identifying interests and values in forest areas through collaborative processes and landscape resource analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    12. Lenka Halušková, 2022. "The Slovak forest policy arrangement: Post-1989 residues and changes," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(10), pages 395-412.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Stjernström Olof & Pettersson Örjan & Karlsson Svante, 2018. "How Can Sweden Deal with Forest Management and Municipal Planning in the System of Ongoing Land-Use and Multilevel Planning?," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 23-37, March.
    16. 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).
    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. Metodi Sotirov & Georg Winkel, 2016. "Toward a cognitive theory of shifting coalitions and policy change: linking the advocacy coalition framework and cultural theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(2), pages 125-154, June.
    19. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    20. Primmer, Eeva & Paloniemi, Riikka & Similä, Jukka & Tainio, Anna, 2014. "Forest owner perceptions of institutions and voluntary contracting for biodiversity conservation: Not crowding out but staying out," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-10.

    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:89:y:2018:i:c:p:87-97. 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.