"My forest, my kingdom"-Self-referentiality as a strategy in the case of small forest owners coping with government regulations

Policy Sciences

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 63-81

  van Herzele, Ann ^a   Aarts, Noelle ^b  

^a RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND FOREST INBO   (Belgium)

^b WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Frame analysis; Interpretive policy analysis; Non industrial private forest owners; Policy implementation; Resemiotization; Resistance

Indexed keywords

AUTONOMY; COPING STRATEGY; FORESTRY POLICY; FUTURE PROSPECT; LANDOWNERSHIP; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; STATE ROLE;

EID: 84873523561     PISSN: 00322687     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11077-012-9157-7     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Aarts, N., & van Woerkum, C. (2006). Frame construction in interaction. In N. Gould (Ed.), Multi-organisational partnerships, alliances and networks (pp. 229-237). Pontypridd: University of Glamorgan.
2. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps toward an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.
3. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
4. Bergmann, S. A., & Bliss, J. C. (2004). Foundations of cross-boundary cooperation: Resource management at the public-private interface. Society and Natural Resources, 17, 377-393.
5. Bliss, J. C., & Martin, A. J. (1989). Identifying NIPF management motivations with qualitative methods. Forest Science, 35(2), 601-622.
6. Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., & Robson, K. (2001). Focus groups in social research. London: Sage Publications.
7. Brans, M., & Rossbach, S. (1997). The autopoiesis of administrative systems: Niklas Luhmann on public administration and policy. Public Administration, 75, 417-439.
8. Buizer, M., & van Herzele, A. (2012). Combining deliberative governance theory and discourse analysis to understand the deliberative incompleteness of centrally formulated plans. Forest Policy and Economics, 16, 93-101.
9. Cvetkovich, G., & Winter, P. L. (2003). Trust and social representations of the management of threatened and endangered species. Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 286-307.
10. Dewulf, A., Craps, M., & Dercon, G. (2004). How issues get framed when different communities meet: A multi-level analysis of a collaborative soil conservation initiative in the Ecuadorian Andes. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 177-192.
11. Dewulf, A., Gray, B., Putnam, L., Lewicki, R., Aarts, N., Bouwen, R., et al. (2009). Disentangling approaches to framing in conflict and negotiation research: A meta-paradigmatic perspective. Human Relations, 62(2), 155-193.
12. Drake, L. D., & Donohue, W. A. (1996). Communicative framing theory in conflict resolution. Communication Research, 23, 297-322.
13. Felstiner, W., Abel, W., & Sarat, A. (1980). The emergence and transformation of disputes: Naming, blaming and claiming. Law and Society Review, 15, 630-649.
14. Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, experts, and the environment: The politics of local knowledge. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
15. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy-Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Ford, J. D. (1999). Organizational change as shifting conversations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(6), 480-500.
17. Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & McNamara, R. T. (2002). Resistance and the background conversations of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 14(2), 105-121.
18. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper Colophon.
20. Hook, D. (2001). Discourse, knowledge, materiality, history: Foucault and discourse analysis. Theory & Psychology, 11(4), 521-547.
21. Iedema, R. (1999). Formalizing organizational meaning. Discourse & Society, 10(1), 49-65.
22. Iedema, R. (2001). Resemiotization. Semiotica, 137, 23-39.
23. Jessop, B. (2001). State theory, regulation, and autopoiesis: debates and controversies. Capital & Class, 25(3), 83-92.
24. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
25. Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale systeme: Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
26. Luhmann, N. (1990). Essays on self-reference. New York: Colombia University Press.
27. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
28. Luisi, P. L. (2003). Autopoiesis: A review and appraisal. Naturwissenschaften, 90, 49-59.
29. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Boston: Reidel.
30. Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
31. Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2004). Focus group practice. London: Sage.
32. Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, J., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 410-435.
33. Rickenbach, M. G., & Reed, A. S. (2002). Cross-boundary cooperation in a watershed context: The sentiments of private forest landowners. Environmental Management, 30(4), 584-594.
34. Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1990). Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. Journal of Politics, 52, 510-529.
35. Schön, D., & Rein, M. (1994). Frame reflection: Towards the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.
36. Serbruyns, I., & Luyssaert, S. (2006). Acceptance of sticks, carrots and sermons as policy instruments for directing private forest management. Forest Policy and Economics, 9(3), 285-296.
37. Siebert, R., Toogood, M., & Knierim, A. (2006). Factors affecting European farmers' participation in biodiversity policies. Sociologia Ruralis, 46(4), 318-339.
38. Teubner, G. (1989). How the law thinks: Toward a constructivist epistemology of law. Law & Society Review, 23(5), 727-758.
39. Teubner, G. (2009). Self-subversive justice: Contingency or transcendence formula of law? The Modern Law Review, 72(1), 1-23.
40. van Gossum, P., & De Maeyer, W. (2006). Performance of forest groups in achieving multifunctional forestry in Flanders. Small-Scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy, 5(1), 19-36.
41. van Herzele, A., Dendoncker, N., & Acosta-Michlik, L. (2011). Mobilisation capacity for agri-environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 1023-1032.
42. van Herzele, A., & van Gossum, P. (2008). Typology building for owner-specific policies and communications to advance forest conversion in small pine plantations. Landscape and Urban Planning, 87, 201-209.
43. van Herzele, A., & van Gossum, P. (2009). Owner-specific factors associated with conversion activity in secondary pine plantations. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(4), 230-236.
44. van Herzele, A., & van Woerkum, C. (2011). On the argumentative work of map-based visualisation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100, 396-399.
45. Verheyen, K., Lust, N., Carnol, M., Hens, L., & Bouma, J. J. (2006). Feasibility of forest conversion: Ecological, social and economic aspects (FEFOCON). Final Report MA/04, Belgian Science Policy, Brussels.
46. Wagemans, M. (2002). Institutional conditions for transformations. A plea for policy making from the perspective of constructivism. In C. Leeuwis & R. Pyburn (Eds.), Wheel barrows full of frogs-Social learning in rural resource management (pp. 245-255). Assen, The Netherlands: van Gorcum.
47. Walsh, K. C. (2004). Talking about politics: Informal groups and social identity in American life. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
48. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage Publications.
49. Yanow, D. (1993). The communication of policy meanings-Implementation as interpretation and text. Policy Sciences, 26(1), 41-61.
50. Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretive policy analysis. Qualitative research methods series 47. London: Sage Publications.