Discourses of conflict and collaboration and institutional context in the implementation of forest conservation policies in Soria, Spain

Biodiversity and Conservation

Volumn 23, Issue 14, 2014, Pages 3483-3499

  Pecurul Botines, Mireia ^a   Di Gregorio, Monica ^a   Paavola, Jouni ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Collaboration; Conflict; Context; Discursive institutionalism; Forest conservation; Natura 2000; Path dependency; Policy outcomes

Indexed keywords

EID: 84914708136     PISSN: 09603115     EISSN: 15729710     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-014-0823-2     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Andersson K, Benavides JP, León R (2014) Institutional diversity and local forest governance. Environ Sci Policy 36:61–72
2. Arts B, Buizer M (2009) Forests, discourses, institutions: A discursive-institutional analysis of global forest governance. Forest Policy Econ 11:340–347
3. Berkes F (2004) Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv Biol 18(3):621–630
4. Beunen R, De Vries JR (2011) The governance of Natura 2000 sites: the importance of initial choices in the organisation of planning processes. J Environ Plan Manag 58:37–41
5. Bjorkell S (2008) Resistance to top–down conservation policy and the search for new participatory models the case of Bergo-Malax’ outer archipelago in Finland. In: Keulartz J, Leistra G (eds) Legitimacy in European nature conservation policy: case studies in multilevel governance. Springer, New York, pp 109–126
6. Buijs A, Arts B, Elands B, Lengkeek J (2011) Beyond environmental frames: the social representation and cultural resonance of nature in conflicts over a Dutch woodland. Geoforum 42(3):329–341
7. Campos-Fernandez S and Martín-Olmos J (2006) Enebrales de la sierra de Cabrejas (Soria): el valor social de la gestión participada en Natura 2000. In III Coloquio Internacional sobre sabinares y enebrales (género Juniperus): Ecología y gestión forestal sostenible 13–23
8. Cashore B, Hoberg G, Howlett M, Rayner J, Wilson J (2001) In search of sustainability: British Columbia forest policy in the 1990. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver
9. CESEFOR (2008) Estudio del régimen de propiedad del LIC Sabinar Sierra de Cabrejas. Aplicación a la gestión de Espacios pertenecientes a la Red Natura 2000. p 12
10. Cleaver F (2000) Moral ecological rationality, institutions and the management of common property resources. Dev Change 31:361–383
11. Commission European (2003) Natura 2000 and forests challenges and opportunities. European Communities, Luxemburg
12. Commission of the European Communities (2004) REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION on the implementation of the Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, Brussels, pp 1–32
13. Junta de Castilla y León. Consejería de Medio Ambiente (2007) Forest: signs of life in Castile and León
14. den Besten WJ, Arts B, Verkooijen P (2013) The evolution of REDD +: an analysis of discursive- institutional dynamics. Environ Sci Policy 35:1–9
15. Domínguez Lerena S (2007) Pinar grande. 100 años de gestión sostenible: 1907-2007. Mancomunidad de los 150 pueblos & Ayuntamiento de Soria, Eds., Soria, p 179
16. Europarc-España (2007) EnREDando. Herramientas para la comunicación y la participación social en la gestión de la red Natura 2000, Ed., Fundación Fernando González Bernáldez, Madrid, 216 pp
17. European Commission (2004) LIFE focus/LIFE-Nature: communicating with stakeholders and the general public – Best practice examples for Natura 2000. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 72 pp
18. Ferranti F, Beunen R, Speranza M (2010) Natura 2000 Network: a comparison of the Italian and Dutch implementation experiences. J Environ Plan Policy Manag 12(3):293–314
19. Ferranti F, Turnhout E, and Beunen R (2013) Shifting nature conservation approaches in Natura 2000 and the implications for the roles of stakeholders. J Environ Plan Manag, 1–16
20. Fischer A, Marshall K (2010) Framing the landscape: discourses of woodland restoration and moorland management in Scotland. J Rural Stud 26(2):185–193
21. Fischler R (2000) Communicative planning theory: a Foucauldian assessment. J Plan Educ Res 19:358–368
22. Forestiere C (2008) New institutionalism and minority protection in the national legislatures of Finland and Denmark. Scand Polit Stud 31(4):448–468
23. Hall A, Taylor RCR (1996) Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Polit Stud 44:936–957
24. Hiedanpaa J (2005) The edges of conflict and consensus: a case for creativity in regional forest policy in Southwest Finland. Ecol Econ 55(4):485–498
25. Hiedanpää J (2002) European-wide conservation versus local well-being: the reception of the Natura 2000 reserve network in Karvia, SW-Finland. Landsc Urban Plan 61(2–4):113–123
26. Hillier J (2003) Agonizing over consensus: why Habermasian ideals cannot be “real”. Plan Theory 2:37–59
27. Idrissou L, van Paassen A, Aarts N, Leeuwis C (2011) From cohesion to conflict in participatory forest management: the case of Oueme Superieur and N’Dali (OSN) forests in Benin. For Policy Econ 13(7):525–534
28. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (2010) INEbase/Demografía y población/Padrón. Población por municipios. Accessed 06 Oct 2014, from http://www.ine.es/inebmenu/mnu_cifraspob.htm
29. Julien B, Lammertz M, Barbier J, Jen S, Ballesteros M, de Bovis C (2000) VOicing interests and concerns: NATURA 2000: an ecological network in conflict with people. For Policy Econ 1:357–366
30. Keough HL, Blahna DJ (2006) Achieving integrative, collaborative ecosystem management. J Soc Conserv Biol 20(5):1373–1382
31. Kleinpenning G. (1962). La región pinariega. Estudio geográfico del noroeste de Soria y Sudeste de Burgos (España) The pinewood region. Geographic study of the northeast of Soria and Southeast of Burgos
32. Krott M, Julien B, Lammertz M, Barbier J-M, Jen S, Ballestreros M, de Bovis C (2000) Voicing interests and concerns: NATURA 2000: an ecological network in conflict with people. For Policy Econ 1:357–366
33. Laerhoven F Van, Ostrom E (2007) Tradit Trends Study Commons 1(1):3–28
34. Leach M (2008) Pathways to sustainability in the forest? Misunderstood dynamics and the negotiation of knowledge, power, policy. Environ Plan A 40(8):1783–1795
35. Leach M, Mearns R, Scoones I (1999) Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Dev 27(2):225–247
36. Leipold S (2014) Creating forests with words—a review of forest-related discourse studies. For Policy Econ 40:12–20
37. Lucas JA (2000) El modelo Soria: las suertes de pino y la ordenación forestal de la comarca pinariega Burgos-Soria, bases del desarrollo rural, de la conservación de los bosques y modelo de gestión sostenible del patrimonio natural
38. Lucas JA (1998) Gestión, Aprovechamiento y desarrollo sostenible de las masas de enebro, jabino o sabina albar (Juniperus thurifera L.) en Soria. Montes 52:121–130
39. Marraco-Solana S (1991) La política forestal española: evolución reciente y perspectivas. Rev Estudios Agro Soc 39(158):11–28
40. Montiel Molina C (2007) Cultural heritage, sustainable forest management and property in inland Spain. For Ecol Manag 249(1–2):80–90
41. North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
42. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
43. Ostrom E, Gardner R, Walker J (1994) Rules, games, and common-pool resources. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, p 369
44. Paavola J (2003) Protected areas governance: theory and the European’s unions habitats directive. Environ Sci 1(1):59–77
45. Peters BG, Pierre J, King DS (2005) The politics of path dependency: political conflict in historical institutionalism. J Polit 67(4):1275–1300
46. Pinton F (2001) Conservation of biodiversity as a European directive: the challenge for France. Soc Rural 41(3):329–342
47. Pistorius T, Schaich H, Winkel G, Plieninger T, Bieling C, Konold W, Volz K-R (2012) Lessons for REDD plus: a comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate. For Policy Econ 18:4–12
48. Raitio K (2012a) Discursive institutionalist approach to conflict management analysis—the case of old-growth forest conflicts on state-owned land in Finland. For Policy Econ 33:97–103
49. Raitio K (2012b) New institutional approach to collaborative forest planning on public land: methods for analysis and lessons for policy. Land Use Policy 29(2):309–316
50. Rojas-Briales E (2000) Socio-economics of nature protection policies in the perspective of the implementation of Natura 2000 network: the Spanish case. Forestry 73(2):199–207
51. Rydin Y (2003) Conflict, consensus, and rationality in environment planning. An institutional discourse approach. Oxford University Press, New York, p 200
52. Saarikoski H, Raitio K, Barry J (2013) Understanding “successful” conflict resolution: policy regime changes and new interactive arenas in the great bear rainforest. Land Use Policy 32:271–280
53. Sabin, P., & Fernández, A. (2006). Gestión de Sabinares: el caso del monte “El Enebral” (T:M: Cabrejas del Pinar, Soria, España). In III Coloquio Internacional sobre sabinares y enebrales (género Juniperus): Ecología y gestión forestal sostenible. pp 271–277
54. Schmidt VA (2010) Taking ideas and discourse seriously: explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth “new institutionalism”. Eur Polit Sci Rev 2(01):1
55. Segur M (2007) Documento de Bases Monte Modelo Urbión (Cuatro Ele.), Valladolid, p 94
56. Soini K, Aakkula J (2007) Framing the biodiversity of agricultural landscape: the essence of local conceptions and constructions. Land Use Policy 24(2):311–321
57. Somorin OA, Brown HCP, Visseren-Hamakers IJ, Sonwa DJ, Arts B, Nkem J (2011) The congo basin forests in a changing climate: policy discourses on adaptation and mitigation (REDD+). Global Environ Change Hum Policy Dimens 22(1):288–298
58. Sotirov M, Borrass L, Winkel G (2012) Chasing the change—theoretical frameworks of policy change and stability with a focus on the case of European union forest-relevant nature conservation policy. Allg Forst Und Jagdztg 182(11–12):215–230
59. Stoll-Kleemann S (2001) Barriers to nature conservation in Germany: a model explaining opposition to protected areas. J Environ Psychol 21(4):369–385
60. Tvrdonova J (2008) Gobernanza y logros territoriales en el enfoque Leader de la UE. Leader + Magazine, 31–37
61. Weber N, Christophersen T (2002) The influence of non-governmental organisations on the creation of Natura 2000 during the European policy process. For Policy Econ 4(1):1–12
62. Wurzel, R. K. W. (2008). European union environmental policy and Natura 2000 from adoption to revision. In: Keulartz J and Leistra G (Eds.), Legitimacy in European nature conservation policy: case studies in multilevel governance, pp 259–282