The Challenge of Governance in Regional Forest Planning: An Analysis of Participatory Forest Program Processes in Finland

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 667-682

  Saarikoski, Heli ^a   Åkerman, Maria ^b   Primmer, Eeva ^a  

^a FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

forest policy; governance; institutional capacity; regional forest programs; stakeholder engagement

Indexed keywords

COLLECTIVE ACTION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY POLICY; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; REGIONAL PLANNING; STAKEHOLDER;

FINLAND;

EID: 84861516669     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2011.630061     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Åkerman, M., A. Kilpiö, and T. Peltola. 2010. Institutional change from the margins of natural resource use: The emergence of small-scale bioenergy production within industrial forestry in Finland. For. Policy Econ. 12 (3): 181-188.
2. Beckley, M., W. Nadeau, and B. Reimer. 2008. Multiple capacities, multiple outcomes: Delving deeper into the meaning of community capacity. J. Rural Commun. Dev. 3 (3): 56-75.
3. Collins, H., and R. Evans. 2002. The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Stud. Sci. 32 (2): 235-296.
4. Cubbage, F., P. Harou, and E. Sills. 2007. Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management. For. Policy Econ. 9: 833-851.
5. Davoudi, S., and N. Evans, N. 2005. The challenge of governance in regional waste planning. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 23: 493-517.
6. Di Maggio, P. J., and W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48: 147-160.
7. Donner-Amnell, J. 2000. To be or not to be Nordic? How internationalization has affected the character of the Nordic forest industry and forest utilization in the Nordic countries. Nordisk Samhällsgeogr. Tidsk. 33: 87-124.
8. Emery, M., and C. Flora. 2006. Spiraling-up: Mapping community transformation with community capitals framework. J. Commun. Dev. Soc. 37 (1): 19-34.
9. Finnish Forest Research Institute. 2008. Finnish statistical yearbook of forestry. Vantaa, Finland: Finnish Forest Research Institute.
10. Forester, J. 1999. The deliberative practitioner. Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Healey, P., C. De Magalhaes, and A. Madanipour. 1999. Institutional capacity-building, urban planning and urban regeneration projects. Futura 18 (3): 117-137.
12. Healey, P., C. de Magalhaes, A. Madanipour, and J. Pendelbury. 2003. Place, identity and local politics: Analyzing initiatives in deliberative governance. In Deliberative policy analysis. Understanding governance in the network society, ed. M. Hajer and H. Wagenaar, 60-87. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Hellström, E. 2001. Conflict cultures-Qualitative comparative analysis of environmental conflicts in forestry. Silva Fennica Monographs 2. The Finnish Forest Research Institute. Tampere, Finland: Tammerpaino Oy.
14. Hiedanpää, J. 2005. The edges of conflict and consensus: A case for creativity in regional forest policy in Southwest Finland. Ecol. Econ. 55: 485-498.
15. Innes, J., J. Gruber, R. Thompson, and M. Neuman. 1994. Co-ordinating growth and environmental management through consensus-building. Report to the California Policy seminar. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley.
16. Innes, J., and D. Booher. 1999. Consensus building as role playing and bricolage. Toward a theory of collaborative planning. J. Am. Plan. Assoc.65(1):9-25.
17. Kangas, A., N. Saarinen, H. Saarikoski, L. Leskinen, T. Hujala, and J. Tikkanen. 2010. Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland. For. Policy Econ. 12: 213-222.
18. Leskinen, L. 2006. Adaptation of the Regional Forestry Administration to national forest, climate change and rural development policies in Finland. Small-Scale For. Econ. Manage. Policy 5 (2): 231-247.
19. Mayer, A., and P. Tikka. 2006. Biodiversity conservation incentive programs for privately owned forests. Environ. Sci. Policy 9: 614-625.
20. Mielikäinen, K., and Hynynen, J. 2003. Silvicultural management in maintaining biodiversity and resistance of forests in Europe-boreal zone: Case Finland. J. Environ. Manage. 67: 47-54.
21. Ollonqvist, P. 2002. Collaboration in the forest policy arena in Finland-From neo-corporatist planning to participatory program preparation. In National Forest Programmes in a European Context, ed. G. Olav and N. Ine, 27-47. EFI Proceedings No. 44. European Forest Institute. Saarijärvi, Finland: Gummerus Printing.
22. Paloniemi, R., and V. Varho. 2009. Changing ecological and cultural states and preferences of nature conservation policy: The case of nature values trade in South-Western Finland. J. Rural Stud. 25 (1): 87-97.
23. Pfeffer, J., and G. R. Salancik. 2003. The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
24. Primmer, E., and S. Kyllönen. 2006. Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme. For. Policy Econ. 8 (8): 838-853.
25. Primmer, E., and S. A. Wolf. 2009. Empirical accounting of adaptation to environmental change: organizational competencies and biodiversity conservation in Finnish forest management. Ecol. Society 14 (2): 27. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art27 (accessed 28 December 2010).
26. Putnam, R. 1993. Making democracy work. Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
27. Rantala T., and E. Primmer. 2003. Value positions based on forest policy stakeholders' rhetoric in Finland. Environ. Sci. Policy 6 (3): 205-216.
28. Rhodes, R. 1996. The new governance: governing without government. Polit. Stud. 44: 652-667.
29. Rydin, Y., and E. Falleth. 2006. Networks and institutions in natural resource management. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
30. Rydin, Y. 2006. Institutions and networks: The search for conceptual research tool. In Networks and institutions in natural resource management, ed. Y. Rydin and E. Falleth, 15-33. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
31. Saarikoski, H., J. Tikkanen, and L. Leskinen. 2010. Public participation in practice-Assessing public participation in the preparation of regional forest programs in Northern Finland. For. Policy Econ. 12: 349-356.
32. Saglie, I.-L. 2006. Fragmented institutions: The problem of facing natural resource management. In Networks and institutions in natural resource management, ed. Y. Rydin and E. Falleth, 1-14. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
33. Scott, R. 2005. Institutions and organizations, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Stoker, G. 1998. Governance as theory: Five propositions. Int. Social Sci. J. 155: 119-131.
35. Van Gossum P., S. Luyssaert, I. Serbruyns, and F. Mortier. 2005. Forest groups as support to private forest owners in developing close-to-nature management. For. Policy Econ. 7: 589-601.
36. Wagner, C., and M. Fernandez-Gimenez. 2008. Does community-based collaborative resource management increase social capital? Society Nat. Resources 21: 324-344.
37. Wolf, S. A., and E. Primmer. 2006. Between incentives and action: A pilot study of biodiversity conservation competencies for multifunctional forest management in Finland. Society Nat. Resources 19: 845-861.