Marko Lovrić

Symbolic transformation of environmental governance: implementation of EU biodiversity policy in Bulgaria and Croatia between Europeanization and domestic politics

In this paper, we explore how European and domestic factors have shaped environmental governance in the case of European Union biodiversity policy implementation in Bulgaria and Croatia. We argue that a ‘symbolic transformation’ of environmental governance in Bulgaria and Croatia has occurred, as the interplay between Europeanization and domestic politics has led to differential empowerment of state and non-state actors resulting in ineffective environmental governance. While proenvironment non-state groups (environmental non-governmental organizations, scientists) and European Union institutions were empowered in the phase of formal compliance, economic interest groups have held sway over the phase of practical (non-)compliance. At the same time, state actors have responded rationally to retain their power by adapting to opposing forces from above and below. We conclude by discussing the ‘symbolic transformation’ of environmental governance shifting between ‘command-and-control’ and ‘non-hierarchical’ coordination with regards to the transformative power of Europe in light of Europeanization research in old and new European Union member states.

Comparison of integrative nature conservation in forest policy in Europe: a qualitative pilot study of institutional determinants

In this pilot study, we examine the relationship between the organisation of property rights and the economic importance of forestry on the one hand and the degree to which integrative nature conservation is formally implemented in forest policy on the other hand. Further, we are interested in whether political institutions moderate this relationship. We first offer a conceptualization of integrative nature conservation in forests and how to measure its implementation in law, ordinances and private agreements for a sample of European national and sub-national jurisdictions (Austria, Croatia, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Flanders, Baden-Württemberg and Piedmont). We subsequently try to assess the implementation of these rules and to relate them both to the structural characteristics of forestry and to an appraisal of pluralism in forest policy. Our qualitative analysis reveals that among the jurisdictions with a more centralized and corporatist forest policy, integrative nature conservation in forests tend to be less formally implemented the more corporatism dominates decision-making. It also confirms the expectation that among the more consensual jurisdictions with a strong forestry sector, rules tend to be less formally implemented. Further, the suspicion prevails that in the latter case, such rules are either complemented with exceptions for private forests or higher compensation. A more in-depth comparative examination is needed to further corroborate these findings.

Farmers’ reasoning behind the uptake of agroforestry practices: evidence from multiple case-studies across Europe

Potential benefits and costs of agroforestry practices have been analysed by experts, but few studies have captured farmers’ perspectives on why agroforestry might be adopted on a European scale. This study provides answers to this question, through an analysis of 183 farmer interviews in 14 case study systems in eight European countries. The study systems included high natural and cultural value agroforestry systems, silvoarable systems, high value tree systems, and silvopasture systems, as well as systems where no agroforestry practices were occurring. A mixed method approach combining quantitative and qualitative approaches was taken throughout the interviews. Narrative thematic data analysis was performed. Data collection proceeded until no new themes emerged. Within a given case study, i.e. the different systems in different European regions, this sampling was performed both for farmers who practice agroforestry and farmers who did not. Results point to a great diversity of agroforestry practices, although many of the farmers are not aware of the term or concept of agroforestry, despite implementing the practice in their own farms. While only a few farmers mentioned eligibility for direct payments in the CAP as the main reason to remove trees from their land, to avoid the reduction of the funded area, the tradition in the family or the region, learning from others, and increasing the diversification of products play the most important role in adopting or not agroforestry systems.

Des bureaux régionaux pour des thèmes de recherche spécifiques aux régions

L’EFI dispose de cinq bureaux regionaux. Les bureaux repartis geographiquement en Europe sont un element a part entiere de l’institut et traitent de themes de recherche de pertinence regionale. L’une de leurs tâches principales est de traiter ces themes dans un contexte europeen par la mise en reseau des competences specialisees des organismes forestiers installes dans les regions, qui sont souvent des membres associes de l’EFI. DOSS I E R : L E S V I N G T A N S DE L ’ E F I