IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i6p99-d241103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Marian Drăgoi

    (University Stefan cel Mare of Suceava, Faculty of Forestry, 720229 Suceava, Romania)

  • Veronica Toza

    (Green Advisers Ltd., 030018 Bucuresti, Romania)

Abstract

This paper shows how the slow process of forestland restitution, which is unfolding in Romania since 1991 has eroded the threads of sustainable forest management by an insidious institutional amnesia (IA). The four symptoms of this harmful process (frequent reorganization, transition from paperwork to electronic media, fewer people motivated to join public services, and popularity of radical changes) were analyzed from the legal standing point as well as from practitioners’ perspective. After having described the legal process and the relative dependencies between laws and government ordinances we also showed that the three laws on forestland restoration (three fully operational laws and two bills submitted in 2019, one year before general elections) were produced by unintended policy arrangements. The legal loopholes of forestland restitution were described in details as well as the challenges brought about by nature conservation policy (Natura 2000 management plans v traditional forest planning), and the overwhelming bureaucratic burden developed to deter illegal logging, instead of fully implementing a modern system of forest watching based on volunteering. However, the main cause of IA is institutional unsteadiness which was inherited from the communist regime, and cannot be alleviated unless more involvement of professional foresters in politics.

Suggested Citation

  • Marian Drăgoi & Veronica Toza, 2019. "Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-19, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:99-:d:241103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/99/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/99/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wilson, John K. & Damania, Richard, 2005. "Corruption, political competition and environmental policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 516-535, May.
    2. Buijs, Arjen & Lawrence, Anna, 2013. "Emotional conflicts in rational forestry: Towards a research agenda for understanding emotions in environmental conflicts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 104-111.
    3. Secco, Laura & Da Re, Riccardo & Pettenella, Davide Matteo & Gatto, Paola, 2014. "Why and how to measure forest governance at local level: A set of indicators," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 57-71.
    4. Popa, Bogdan & Niță, Mihai Daniel & Hălălișan, Aureliu Florin, 2019. "Intentions to engage in forest law enforcement in Romania: An application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 33-43.
    5. Cuneyt Koyuncu & Rasim Yilmaz, 2013. "Deforestation, corruption, and private ownership in the forest sector," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 227-236, January.
    6. Monica Vasile, 2009. "CORRUPTION IN ROMANIAN FORESTRY - MORALITY AND LOCAL PRACTICE IN THE CONTEXT OF PRIVATIZATION (English version)," Revista Romana de Sociologie, Revista Romana de Sociologie - actualizata si mentinuta de Editura Lumen/ Romanian Journal of Sociology, vol. 1, pages 105-120, february.
    7. Richard Damania & Erkan Yalcin, 2005. "Corruption and Political Competition," Microeconomics 0510012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Scriban, Ramona Elena & Nichiforel, Liviu & Bouriaud, Laura Gianina & Barnoaiea, Ionut & Cosofret, Vasile Cosmin & Barbu, Catalina Oana, 2019. "Governance of the forest restitution process in Romania: An application of the DPSIR model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 59-67.
    9. Georg Winkel & Metodi Sotirov, 2016. "Whose integration is this? European forest policy between the gospel of coordination, institutional competition, and a new spirit of integration," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(3), pages 496-514, May.
    10. Söderberg, Charlotta & Eckerberg, Katarina, 2013. "Rising policy conflicts in Europe over bioenergy and forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 112-119.
    11. Soloviy, Ihor P. & Cubbage, Frederick W., 2007. "Forest policy in aroused society: Ukrainian post-Orange Revolution challenges," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 60-69, December.
    12. Maes, Joachim & Egoh, Benis & Willemen, Louise & Liquete, Camino & Vihervaara, Petteri & Schägner, Jan Philipp & Grizzetti, Bruna & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Notte, Alessandra La & Zulian, Grazia & Bour, 2012. "Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 31-39.
    13. Dragoi, Marian & Popa, Bogdan & Blujdea, Viorel, 2011. "Improving communication among stakeholders through ex-post transactional analysis -- case study on Romanian forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 16-23, 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. Nichiforel, Liviu & Duduman, Gabriel & Scriban, Ramona Elena & Popa, Bogdan & Barnoaiea, Ionut & Drăgoi, Marian, 2021. "Forest ecosystem services in Romania: Orchestrating regulatory and voluntary planning documents," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Johanna Gisladottir & Sigurbjörg Sigurgeirsdottir & Ingrid Stjernquist & Kristin Vala Ragnarsdottir, 2022. "Transparency and Leverage Points for Sustainable Resource Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Johanna Gisladottir & Sigurbjörg Sigurgeirsdottir & Kristín Vala Ragnarsdóttir & Ingrid Stjernquist, 2021. "Economies of Scale and Perceived Corruption in Natural Resource Management: A Comparative Study between Ukraine, Romania, and Iceland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Nichiforel, Liviu & Deuffic, Philippe & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Weiss, Gerhard & Hujala, Teppo & Keary, Kevin & Lawrence, Anna & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Górriz-, 2020. "Two decades of forest-related legislation changes in European countries analysed from a property rights perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Alexandru Giurca & Liviu Nichiforel & Petru Tudor Stăncioiu & Marian Drăgoi & Daniel-Paul Dima, 2022. "Unlocking Romania’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Potential: Knowledge-Action-Gaps and the Way Forward," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    6. Andra-Cosmina Albulescu & Michael Manton & Daniela Larion & Per Angelstam, 2022. "The Winding Road towards Sustainable Forest Management in Romania, 1989–2022: A Case Study of Post-Communist Social–Ecological Transition," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-29, July.
    7. Chanrith Ngin & Andreas Neef, 2021. "Contested Land Restitution Processes in Cambodia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.

    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. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2018. "The impact of trade in environmental goods on pollution: what are we learning from the transition economies’ experience?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(4), pages 785-827, October.
    2. Divya Datt, 2016. "Inter-governmental political relations in a federation and illegal mining of natural resources," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 18(4), pages 557-576, October.
    3. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Viladecans-Marsal, Elisabet, 2012. "Lobbying, political competition, and local land supply: Recent evidence from Spain," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 10-19.
    4. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    5. Nicolli, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2012. "The Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy in OECD Countries: Aggregate Indicators and Determinants," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 130897, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. John K. Wilson & Martin P. Shanahan, 2012. "Did Good Institutions Produce Good Tariffs? Evidence From Tariff Protection In Colonial Victoria," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 52(2), pages 128-147, July.
    7. Gaoussou Diarra & Sébastien Marchand, 2011. "Environmental Compliance, Corruption and Governance: Theory and Evidence on Forest Stock in Developing Countries," Working Papers halshs-00557677, HAL.
    8. Gen-Fu Feng & Bo Sui & Min-Yi Dong & Chun-xia Jiang & Chun-Ping Chang, 2018. "Border is better than distance? Contagious corruption in one belt one road economies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1909-1928, July.
    9. Fuhai Hong & Tat-How Teh, 2019. "Bureaucratic Shirking, Corruption, and Firms’ Environmental Investment and Abatement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(2), pages 505-538, October.
    10. Akpalu, Wisdom & Eggert, Håkan & Vondolia, Godwin K., 2009. "Enforcement of exogenous environmental regulation, social disapproval and bribery," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 940-945, December.
    11. Kammerlander, Andreas & Schulze, Günther G., 2020. "Are Democracies Cleaner?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    12. Hermanns, Till & Helming, Katharina & König, Hannes J. & Schmidt, Katharina & Li, Qirui & Faust, Heiko, 2017. "Sustainability impact assessment of peatland-use scenarios: Confronting land use supply with demand," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 365-376.
    13. Marian Eabrasu, 2020. "Cheating in Business: A Metaethical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 519-532, March.
    14. Per G. Fredriksson & Eric Neumayer, 2016. "Corruption and Climate Change Policies: Do the Bad Old Days Matter?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(2), pages 451-469, February.
    15. Yajie Liu & Feng Dong, 2020. "Corruption, Economic Development and Haze Pollution: Evidence from 139 Global Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, April.
    16. Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2021. "Does an early start help or hurt? Statehood, institutions and modern climate change policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Grey, Felix, 2018. "Corporate lobbying for environmental protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 23-40.
    18. Edward B. Barbier, 2013. "Is a global crisis required to prevent climate change? A historical–institutional perspective," Chapters, in: Roger Fouquet (ed.), Handbook on Energy and Climate Change, chapter 28, pages 598-614, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Dapeng Cai & Jie Li, 2020. "Pollution for Sale: Firms’ Characteristics and Lobbying Outcome," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 539-564, November.
    20. Arminen, Heli & Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2019. "Corruption, climate and the energy-environment-growth nexus," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 621-634.

    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:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:99-:d:241103. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.