| 1. |
- Lindahl, Karin Beland, et al.
(författare)
-
The Swedish forestry model : more of everything?
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Forest Policy and Economics. - : Elsevier. - 1389-9341 .- 1872-7050. ; 77, s. 44-55
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- "The Swedish forestry model" refers to the forest regime that evolved following the 1993 revision of the Swedish Forestry Act. It is key to Swedish forest politics and used to capture the essence of a sustainable way of managing forests. However, the ideas, institutions and practices comprising the model have not been comprehensively analyzed previously. Addressing this knowledge gap, we use frame analysis and a Pathways approach to investigate the underlying governance model, focusing on the way policy problems are addressed, goals, implementation procedures, outcomes and the resulting pathways to sustainability. We suggest that the institutionally embedded response to pressing sustainability challenges and increasing demands is expansion, inclusion and integration: more of everything. The more-of-everything pathway is influenced by ideas of ecological modernization and the optimistic view that existing resources can be increased. Our findings suggest that in effect it prioritizes the economic dimension of sustainability. While broadening out policy formulation it closes down the range of alternative outputs, a shortcoming that hampers its capacity to respond to current sustainability challenges. Consequently, there is a need for a broad public debate regarding not only the role of forests in future society, but also the operationalization of sustainable development.
|
|
| 2. |
- Sténs, Anna, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
From ecological knowledge to conservation policy : a case study on green tree retention and continuous-cover forestry in Sweden
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Biodiversity and Conservation. - : Springer. - 0960-3115 .- 1572-9710. ; 28:13, s. 3547-3574
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The extent to which scientific knowledge translates into practice is a pervasive question. We analysed to what extent and how ecological scientists gave input to policy for two approaches advocated for promoting forest biodiversity in production forests in Sweden: green-tree retention (GTR) and continuous-cover forestry (CCF). GTR was introduced into forest policy in the 1970s and became widely implemented in the 1990s. Ecological scientists took part in the policy process by providing expert opinions, educational activities and as lobbyists, long before research confirming the positive effects of GTR on biodiversity was produced. In contrast, CCF was essentially banned in forest legislation in 1979. In the 1990s, policy implicitly opened up for CCF implementation, but CCF still remains largely a rare silvicultural outlier. Scientific publications addressing CCF appeared earlier than GTR studies, but with less focus on the effects on biodiversity. Ecological scientists promoted CCF in certain areas, but knowledge from other disciplines and other socio-political factors appear to have been more important than ecological arguments in the case of CCF. The wide uptake of GTR was enhanced by its consistency with the silvicultural knowledge and normative values that forest managers had adopted for almost a century, whereas CCF challenged those ideas. Public pressure and institutional requirements were also key to GTR implementation but were not in place for CCF. Thus, scientific ecological knowledge may play an important role for policy uptake and development, but knowledge from other research disciplines and socio-political factors are also important.
|
|
