[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v111y2020ics1389934118304775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Forest property rights under attack”: Actors, networks and claims about forest ownership in the Swedish press 2014–2017

Author

Listed:
  • Sténs, Anna
  • Mårald, Erland
Abstract
Sweden is a leading country in governance of property rights, according to global assessments, but Swedish landowners currently argue that their forest property rights are being eroded. Thus, the aim of this article is to investigate when and why the current debate on forest property rights came about, and its resemblance to discussion in an ‘echo-chamber’. This refers to an arena in which information is accessed from limited sources and a small number of actors with ideological homogeneity may exert substantial influence and reinforce established opinions. Hence, it may spread disinformation, increase polemic tensions, and hamper deliberative policy processes in society. We assess the resemblance by identifying where the issue is debated in printed news media, the active actors, the interests they represent and how they problematize property rights, i.e. the claims they make and the claims’ homogeneity. Our results show that the debate has intensified in recent years, but several issues are not new. The debate is mainly limited to the Swedish rural business press and rural conservative press. Moreover, the main claim-makers are representatives of land and forest owner organizations, and members of agrarian and conservative political parties, which have close organizational and individual connections, thereby forming a metaphorical ‘chamber’. The ‘echo’ consists of repetitive claims about withdrawal and management rights, with no efforts to examine and contextualize complex aspects of private property rights in a changing society. The debate about forest ownership in an echo-chamber is problematic in several ways. It hampers efforts of claim-makers in the chamber to reach out, undermines current systems’ legitimacy, and locks important questions about sustainable forestry and property rights into a narrow societal sphere.

Suggested Citation

  • Sténs, Anna & Mårald, Erland, 2020. "“Forest property rights under attack”: Actors, networks and claims about forest ownership in the Swedish press 2014–2017," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:111:y:2020:i:c:s1389934118304775
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934118304775
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102038?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    2. Harri Siiskonen, 2013. "From economic to environmental sustainability: the forest management debate in 20th century Finland and Sweden," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 1323-1336, October.
    3. Sikor, Thomas & He, Jun & Lestrelin, Guillaume, 2017. "Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 337-349.
    4. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    5. Lorien Jasny & Joseph Waggle & Dana R. Fisher, 2015. "An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy networks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 782-786, August.
    6. Elias Andersson & Gun Lidestav, 2014. "Gendered Resource Access and Utilisation in Swedish Family Farming," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Justin Farrell, 2015. "Echo chambers and false certainty," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 719-720, August.
    8. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521555838 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2012. "Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 71-80.
    10. Uggla, Ylva & Forsberg, Maria & Larsson, Stig, 2016. "Dissimilar framings of forest biodiversity preservation: Uncertainty and legal ambiguity as contributing factors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 36-42.
    11. Bergseng, Even & Vatn, Arild, 2009. "Why protection of biodiversity creates conflict - Some evidence from the Nordic countries," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 147-165, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    2. Poncian, Japhace & Jose, Jim, 2019. "National resource ownership and community engagement in Tanzania's natural gas governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. Rahmat Aris Pratomo & D. Ary A. Samsura & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Transformation of Local People’s Property Rights Induced by New Town Development (Case Studies in Peri-Urban Areas in Indonesia)," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Nichiforel, Liviu & Deuffic, Philippe & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Weiss, Gerhard & Hujala, Teppo & Keary, Kevin & Lawrence, Anna & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Górriz-, 2020. "Two decades of forest-related legislation changes in European countries analysed from a property rights perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Ali, Amjad & Zulfiqar, Kalsoom, 2018. "An Assessment of Association between Natural Resources Agglomeration and Unemployment in Pakistan," MPRA Paper 89022, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    6. Erbaugh, James T., 2019. "Responsibilization and social forestry in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Brobbey, Lawrence Kwabena & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Kyereh, Boateng, 2021. "The dynamics of property and other mechanisms of access: The case of charcoal production and trade in Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Akhmadiyeva, Zarema & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2021. "How does practice matches land laws in Central Asia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi, 2022. "Secure tenure or equal access? Farmers’ preferences for reallocating the property rights of collective farmland and forestland in Southeast China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Malin, Stephanie A. & Mayer, Adam & Crooks, James L. & McKenzie, Lisa & Peel, Jennifer L. & Adgate, John L., 2019. "Putting on partisan glasses: Political identity, quality of life, and oil and gas production in Colorado," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 738-748.
    11. Marc Audi & Amjad Ali & Yannick Roussel, 2021. "Aggregate and Disaggregate Natural Resources Agglomeration and Foreign Direct Investment in France," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 11(1), pages 147-156.
    12. McLain, Rebecca & Lawry, Steven & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Reed, James, 2021. "Toward a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: A proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration opportunities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    13. ’t Sas-Rolfes, Michael & Emslie, Richard, 2024. "African Rhino Conservation and the Interacting Influences of Property, Prices, and Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    14. Rana, Pushpendra & Miller, Daniel C., 2021. "Predicting the long-term social and ecological impacts of tree-planting programs: Evidence from northern India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    15. Espada, Ana Luiza Violato & Kainer, Karen A., 2024. "Decision making processes and power dynamics in timber production co-management: A comparative analysis of seven Brazilian Amazonian community-based projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    16. Krul, Kees & Ho, Peter & Yang, Xiuyun, 2020. "Incentivizing household forest management in China's forest reform: Limitations to rights-based approaches in Southwest China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    17. Punjabi, Bharat & Johnson, Craig A., 2019. "The politics of rural–urban water conflict in India: Untapping the power of institutional reform," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 182-192.
    18. Djenontin, Ida Nadia S. & Zulu, Leo C. & Richardson, Robert B., 2022. "Smallholder farmers and forest landscape restoration in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Central Malawi," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    19. Tucker, Catherine M. & Hribar, Mateja Šmid & Urbanc, Mimi & Bogataj, Nevenka & Gunya, Alexey & Rodela, Romina & Sigura, Maurizia & Piani, Lucia, 2023. "Governance of interdependent ecosystem services and common-pool resources," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Hasanbasri, Ardina & Koolwal, Gayatri & Kilic, Talip & Moylan, Heather, 2021. "Multidimensionality of Land Ownership Among Men and Women in Sub-Saharan Africa," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315317, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:111:y:2020:i:c:s1389934118304775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.