Suchergebnisse

This thesis explores how the climate change-forest policy intersection is constituted in different contexts. Bringing together discourse analysis, feminist political theory and Governmentality studies, the thesis employs a critical governance approach and thus sheds light on indirect and subtle forms of governing. Embedded in the intergovernmental context of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Swedish national forest policy context, the analytical focus is on problematisations of climate change and forests, on (gendered) identity formations and how these overlap and differ in the two contexts. The thesis confirms how climate change entails a narrow conception of forests as carbon sinks, and demonstrates an ongoing categorisation of forests and forestry based on spatial locations that imply conservation of tropical forests, and intensive management of forests in countries like Sweden. In both contexts there is a rural-urban dichotomy that entails an implied difference between distant and immediate forest dependence that approaches a civilised/uncivilised differentiation. The associated steering techniques entail a focus on activating individuals such as female forest owners, on enabling poor forest dependent communities, or establishing global forest carbon trading, which distorts the contestable role of forests in climate change strategies. In the Swedish context, the analysis further demonstrates how climate change has become a forest production issue, how forests are abstracted from local contexts and an important part of the formation of a Swedish national identity. The image of consensus around Swedish forestry distorts domestic conflicts around forests. Finally, by drawing on feminist political theory this thesis bring attention to gendering practices in Swedish forest policy, and reveals deep rooted values in Swedish forest governance that continue to favor intensive forest production and economic revenues above publically defined goals connected to social and environmental concerns.

This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations.

This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s13280-020-01398-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Correction: Early Access FEB 2022 10.1007/s13280-022-01713-3 ; This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations. ; Peer reviewed

Adequate and accessible expert-based forest information has become increasingly in demand for effective decisions and informed policies in the forest and forest-related sectors in Europe. Such accessibility requires a collaborative environment and constant information exchange between various actors at different levels and across sectors. However, information exchange in complex policy environments is challenging, and is often constrained by various institutional, actor-oriented, and technical factors. In forest policy research, no study has yet attempted to simultaneously account for these multiple factors influencing expert-based forest information exchange. By employing a policy analysis from an actor-centred institutionalist perspective, this paper aims to provide an overview of the most salient institutional and actor-oriented factors that are perceived as constraining forest information exchange at the national level across European countries. We employ an exploratory research approach, and utilise both qualitative and quantitative methods to analyse our data. The data was collected through a semi-structured survey targeted at forest and forest-related composite actors in 21 European countries. The results revealed that expert-based forest information exchange is constrained by a number of compound and closely interlinked institutional and actor-oriented factors, reflecting the complex interplay of institutions and actors at the national level. The most salient institutional factors that stand out include restrictive or ambiguous data protection policies, inter-organisational information arrangements, different organisational cultures, and a lack of incentives. Forest information exchange becomes even more complex when actors are confronted with actor-oriented factors such as issues of distrust, diverging preferences and perceptions, intellectual property rights, and technical capabilities. We conclude that expert-based forest information exchange is a complex and challenging task. It is driven by actors' preferences/interests, perceptions, and capabilities, and is shaped by formal rules and social norms.

This study investigates how and by whom the Swedish (forest) bioeconomy has been shaped so far. We unpack emerging bioeconomies as discursive constructs and use the 'apparatus of capture' as a conceptual framework to understand and rethink the Swedish bioeconomy. Based on analysis of empirical data from multiple sources (e.g., online surveys, in-depth interviews, participatory observations), we identify a closed bioeconomy network structure that includes forest industries, major forest owner associations, regional councils and research institutes/universities. The network (re)produces three key storylines that appeal to the majority of parties in the national parliament, defines the boundaries of relevant expertise, and discredits environmental regulation and expertise. Through these storylines the Swedish bioeconomy is turned into an issue of innovation governance, which blurs the boundaries between public and private interests in forests. To counteract future capture, different types of knowledges and forest perspectives need further exploration in Swedish bioeconomy and forest governance.

The political project on bioeconomy strives to address multiple societal aspirations, namely combine economic growth with environmental sustainability in some socially acceptable manner. The contradictions between the goals and the concrete plans to increase production, processing, and consumption of forest biomass in Europe have however raised sustainability concerns within and beyond its borders. While political actors articulate such contradictions differently and compete for traction for their viewpoints in the public discourse, little is known about how citizens of urban areas perceive this discourse. Conceptualising perception as a multidimensional construct, data from eight European university cities (Bordeaux, Bratislava, Freiburg, Helsinki, Padua, St. Petersburg, Uppsala, Vienna) are statistically analysed to explore its dimensions, the communities of like-minded citizens forming across those dimensions, and the traits associating with membership in each such community. Five communities across six dimensions from biocentrism through distributional aspects to adherence to political goals are identified: adherent-environmentalist, adherent-governmentalist, critical-reformist, critical-agriculturalist, and indifferent. City of residence and perceived familiarity with bioeconomy clearly interact with perception. There is however considerable variation in communities within and across the eight cities, suggesting deeper social tension beyond the public discourse. Much of the within-community variation remains unexplained, though, calling for more work locally. Implications for forest policy are derived. ; Peer reviewed