Politics of public interest: Finnish forest capital’s strategy in the Kaipola paper mill shutdown

ABSTRACT

Depoliticization has emerged as a key concept in analyzing the changing political dynamics of capitalist democracies. Yet, the concept of public interest has been relatively absent in depoliticization literature. This article argues for a more systematic inclusion of public interest politics in scrutinizing de- and repoliticization. The argument is advanced through strategic-relational theory by interpreting public interest as (1) a terrain of political struggles, (2) a mode of doing politics and (3) a method of enquiry. These dynamics are examined in the empirical context of Finnish forest industry’s political strategy in the Kaipola paper mill closure in August 2020. The forest conglomerate UPM-Kymmene politicized its paper mill shutdown by shifting the responsibility to the centre-left governmental coalition’s purportedly business-hostile policies. However, analyzing the case through UPM strategies and the paper production crisis, the closure falls in line with the forest industry’s long-term business strategy. The forest industry’s and UPM’s strategy is recognized as a forceful defense of a corporate polity where public interest is equated with the success of key economic actors. The article concludes with an argument for the politics of public interest as a vital research perspective for analyzing contradictions surrounding ‘the economy’.

KEYWORDS:

• Depoliticization
• public interest
• forest industry
• pulp and paper
• strategic-relational theory
• corporate polity

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Pia Bäcklund, Ari Lehtinen, Juho Luukkonen, Eija Meriläinen, and Sami Moisio for their invaluable comments on the manuscript. Two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments in developing the article further. Heikki Sirviö thanks the Academy of Finland project ‘Justification for agreement-based approaches in Nordic spatial planning: towards situational direct democracy?’ for the funding of his work.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 A fully fleshed out exegetic analysis of public/private (and general/particular) interests in Gramsci and Marx would merit a text of its own. In the context of this article, these figures are brought up to connect the analysis to its intellectual lineage and to demonstrate that the tripartite division developed can be developed out of this theoretical tradition.

2 Especially the sawmill industry has sounded the alarm on the unbalanced market of raw materials where the big conglomerates are able to dominate the wood purchases from forest-owners and control sawlog and pulpwood prices (Hänninen 2018; Järvinen 2020).

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Academy of Finland project ‘Justification for agreement-based approaches in Nordic spatial planning: towards situational direct democracy?’ (decision number 315772).