IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v94y2020ics0264837718316843.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Back to the Forest’s future: Guiding principles of German forest stakeholders and their impact on the forestry sector

Author

Listed:
  • Hengst-Ehrhart, Yvonne
  • Schraml, Ulrich

Abstract

Long-term planning is an important aspect of forestry. The future-oriented guiding principles of forestry stakeholders impact their decisions and therefore the future of the sector. Forestry faces major challenges due to global changes. At the same time, the ability of traditional forestry stakeholders to manage uncertainty and ensure sustainable management is increasingly being questioned from both within and outside the sector. To study the shared and conflicting guiding principles followed by forestry stakeholders and how these might shape stakeholders’ actions, we conducted 49 semi-structured qualitative interviews with different German forestry stakeholders, mostly from Bavaria. We used a qualitative approach and linked the “Leitbild analysis” (Leitbild = German for guiding principles) and the sensemaking concept to derive a typology of six guiding principles followed by forestry stakeholders. Results show that the guiding principles of forestry stakeholders are mostly formed around policy conflicts between traditional forest users and nature conservationists. Differences were mainly based on the question of which side would dominate future forest management. In all the groups, the views reflected were mainly negative, and traditional forestry stakeholders saw themselves losing power and authority in the future. We argue that these negative future expectations might narrow stakeholders’ perspectives on potential chances and opportunities due to the low self-efficacy that we observed. In line with the assumption that by guiding today's actions, future images have a real-world impact, we find that current problems might be perpetuated through the expectation that they will remain unchanged in the future. Based on our findings, we emphasize the need for a stronger focus on potential future chances and shaping options within the German forestry sector and the need to embrace new ways of cooperation between stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Hengst-Ehrhart, Yvonne & Schraml, Ulrich, 2020. "Back to the Forest’s future: Guiding principles of German forest stakeholders and their impact on the forestry sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0264837718316843
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104496
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718316843
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104496?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. Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke A. & Hengeveld, Geerten M. & de Jong, Rutger, 2017. "Analysing scenario approaches for forest management — One decade of experiences in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 222-234.
    2. Oecd & Nea, 2012. "Intergovernmental organisation activities," Nuclear Law Bulletin, OECD Publishing, vol. 2012(1), pages 141-146.
    3. Ocde & Aen, 2012. "Activités des organisations intergouvernementales," Bulletin de droit nucléaire, Éditions OCDE, vol. 2012(1), pages 153-159.
    4. Oecd & Nea, 2012. "Intergovernmental organisation activities," Nuclear Law Bulletin, OECD Publishing, vol. 2011(2), pages 99-106.
    5. Sotirov, Metodi & Blum, Mareike & Storch, Sabine & Selter, Andy & Schraml, Ulrich, 2017. "Do forest policy actors learn through forward-thinking? Conflict and cooperation relating to the past, present and futures of sustainable forest management in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 256-268.
    6. Rupert Seidl & Dominik Thom & Markus Kautz & Dario Martin-Benito & Mikko Peltoniemi & Giorgio Vacchiano & Jan Wild & Davide Ascoli & Michal Petr & Juha Honkaniemi & Manfred J. Lexer & Volodymyr Trotsi, 2017. "Forest disturbances under climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 395-402, June.
    7. Hurmekoski, Elias & Hetemäki, Lauri, 2013. "Studying the future of the forest sector: Review and implications for long-term outlook studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 17-29.
    8. Maier, Carolin & Winkel, Georg, 2017. "Implementing nature conservation through integrated forest management: A street-level bureaucracy perspective on the German public forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 14-29.
    9. Ocde & Aen, 2012. "Activités des organisations intergouvernementales," Bulletin de droit nucléaire, Éditions OCDE, vol. 2011(2), pages 107-114.
    10. 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.
    11. Dörte Marie Peters & Ulrich Schraml, 2015. "Sustainability Frames in the Context of the Energy Wood Conflict in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-20, October.
    12. MacKay, R. Bradley & Parks, Ryan W., 2013. "The temporal dynamics of sensemaking: A hindsight–foresight analysis of public commission reporting into the past and future of the “new terrorism”," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 364-377.
    13. Hoogstra-Klein, M.A. & Brukas, V. & Wallin, I., 2017. "Multiple-use forestry as a boundary object: From a shared ideal to multiple realities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 247-258.
    14. Franken, Jason R.V. & Sykuta, Michael & E.Klein, Peter G., 2012. "Contract Use and Contract Terms in Organic Markets," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 30(1).
    15. Aggestam, Filip & Wolfslehner, Bernhard, 2018. "Deconstructing a complex future: Scenario development and implications for the forest-based sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 21-26.
    16. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    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. Huiyong Xu & Xuejiao Zhao & Dahong Zhang, 2023. "An Evolutionary Game Analysis of the Relationship between Core Stakeholders of Forest Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-14, July.
    2. Mack, Philipp & Kremer, Jakob & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2023. "Forest dieback reframed and revisited? Forests (re)negotiated in the German media between forestry and nature conservation," 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. Serel, Doğan A., 2017. "A single-period stocking and pricing problem involving stochastic emergency supply," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 180-195.
    2. Anton Sorin Gabriel, 2013. "Technical Efficiency in the Use of Health Care Resources: A Cross-Country Analysis," Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 60(1), pages 1-12, July.
    3. Heiskanen, Aleksi & Hurmekoski, Elias & Toppinen, Anne & Näyhä, Annukka, 2022. "Exploring the unknowns – State of the art in qualitative forest-based sector foresight research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    4. Petr Badura & Dagmar Sigmundova & Erik Sigmund & Andrea Madarasova Geckova & Jitse P. Dijk & Sijmen A. Reijneveld, 2017. "Participation in organized leisure-time activities and risk behaviors in Czech adolescents," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(3), pages 387-396, April.
    5. Aggestam, Filip & Wolfslehner, Bernhard, 2018. "Deconstructing a complex future: Scenario development and implications for the forest-based sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 21-26.
    6. Hurmekoski, Elias & Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Hetemäki, Lauri & Winkel, Georg, 2019. "Frontiers of the forest-based bioeconomy – A European Delphi study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 86-99.
    7. Liang Choon Wang, 2016. "The effect of high-stakes testing on suicidal ideation of teenagers with reference-dependent preferences," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 345-364, April.
    8. Asongu, Simplice A & Odhiambo, Nicholas M, 2019. "Governance,CO2 emissions and inclusive human development in Sub-Saharan Africa," Working Papers 25253, University of South Africa, Department of Economics.
    9. Simplice A. Asongu & Nicholas M. Odhiambo, 2019. "Inclusive development in environmental sustainability in sub‐Saharan Africa: Insights from governance mechanisms," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 713-724, July.
    10. Hengeveld, Geerten M. & Schüll, Elmar & Trubins, Renats & Sallnäs, Ola, 2017. "Forest Landscape Development Scenarios (FoLDS)–A framework for integrating forest models, owners' behaviour and socio-economic developments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 245-255.
    11. Hancic Maja Turnšek, 2013. "No Synonyms: Global Governance and the Transnational Public," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 19(69), pages 5-31, December.
    12. Philippa Howden-Chapman & Julian Crane & Ralph Chapman & Geoff Fougere, 2011. "Improving health and energy efficiency through community-based housing interventions," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 56(6), pages 583-588, December.
    13. Kinge, Jonas Minet & Morris, Stephan, 2015. "The impact of childhood obesity on health and health service use: an instrumental variable approach," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2015:2, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    14. Alarcón-Aguirre, Jaime S. & Aguirre-Mejía, Patricia M. & Palacios-Hinestroza, Hasbleidy & Sulbarán-Rangel, Belkis, 2020. "Evaluation of the forestry administrative system that regulates the activity of extracting wood from the Northern Ecuadorian amazon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Hallberg-Sramek, Isabella & Nordström, Eva-Maria & Priebe, Janina & Reimerson, Elsa & Mårald, Erland & Nordin, Annika, 2023. "Combining scientific and local knowledge improves evaluating future scenarios of forest ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. 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).
    17. Mike Metcalfe & Saras Sastrowardoyo, 2016. "Sense-making Innovative Systems: Prestigious MOOCs," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 437-451, May.
    18. Blattert, Clemens & Lemm, Renato & Thürig, Esther & Stadelmann, Golo & Brändli, Urs-Beat & Temperli, Christian, 2020. "Long-term impacts of increased timber harvests on ecosystem services and biodiversity: A scenario study based on national forest inventory data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    19. Stephane A. Regnier & Jasper Huels, 2015. "Assessing the Societal Value of Preventing Fetal Deaths by Using a Households Survey in the United States," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 5, pages 52-66, February.
    20. Sunday Azagba & Mesbah Sharaf & Christina Xiao Liu, 2013. "Disparities in health care utilization by smoking status in Canada," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 58(6), pages 913-925, December.

    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:lauspo:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0264837718316843. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.