A view through the lens of policy formulation: the struggle to formulate Swedish moose policy

References

• Allen, A. M., Månsson, J., Sand, H., Malmsten, J., Ericsson, G., & Singh, N. J. (2016). Scaling up movements: From individual space use to population patterns. Ecosphere, 7(10), e01524. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beland Lindahl, K., Sténs, A., Sandström, C., Johansson, J., Lidskog, R., Ranius, T., & Roberge, J. M. (2016). The Swedish forestry model: More of everything? Forest Policy and Economics, 77, 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.10.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor books.
   Google Scholar
• Bjärstig, T., Sandström, C., Lindqvist, S., & Kvastegård, E. (2014). Partnerships implementing ecosystem-based moose management in Sweden. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 10(3), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2014.936508
   Google Scholar
• Cairney, P. (2012). Understanding public policy: Theories and issues. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Crabb, A., & Leroy, P. (2012). The handbook of environmental policy evaluation. Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Daugbjerg, C., & Swinbank, A. (2016). Three decades of policy layering and politically sustainable reform in the European Union’s agricultural policy. Governance, 29(2), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Directive 2005:142. Älgförvaltningen.
   Google Scholar
• Dobson, A. (2016). Environmental politics: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dressel, S. (2020). Social-ecological performance of collaborative wildlife governance: The case of Swedish moose management (Doctoral dissertation). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Dressel, S., Ericsson, G., & Sandström, C. (2018). Mapping social-ecological systems to understand the challenges underlying wildlife management. Environmental Science & Policy, 84, 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S. (1990). Discursive democracy. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezebilo, E. E, Sandström, C., & Ericsson, G. (2012). Browsing damage by moose in Swedish forests: assessments by hunters and foresters. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 27(7), 659–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2012.698643
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felton, A. M., Felton, A., Cromsigt, J. P., Edenius, L., Malmsten, J., & Wam, H. K. (2016). Interactions between ungulates, forests, and supplementary feeding: The role of nutritional balancing in determining outcomes. Mammal Research, 62(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-016-0301-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleischman, F., Ban, N., Evans, L., Epstein, G., Garcia-Lopez, G., & Villamayor-Tomas, S. (2014). Governing large-scale social-ecological systems: Lessons from five cases. International Journal of the Commons, 8(2), 428–456. http://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.416
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forestry Act. (1979). Skogsvårdslagen. SFS 1979:429.
   Google Scholar
• Governmental bill 1986/87:58. Om jaktlag, m.m. Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Governmental bill 1991/92:9. Om jakt och viltvård. Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Government Offices. (2015). Så styrs Sverige. Retrieved May 22, 2020, from https://www.regeringen.se/sa-styrs-sverige/
   Google Scholar
• Halperin, S., & Heath, O. (2017). Political research: Methods and practical skills. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, M., & Flø, B. E. (2017). Reconciling local control with appropriate scale in Norwegian moose management. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(2), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1188371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (2010). The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2019). Designing public policies: Principles and instruments. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2014). Policy design and non-design: Towards a spectrum of policy formulation types. Politics and Governance, 2(2), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v2i2.149
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2017). Policy formulation: Where knowledge meets power in the policy process. In M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (Eds.), Handbook of policy formulation (pp. 3–22). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Hunting Act. (1987). Jaktlag. SFS 1987:259.
   Google Scholar
• Inquiry report 2006:81. Mervärdesskog.
   Google Scholar
• Inquiry report 2007:63. En bättre viltförvaltning med inriktning på älg.
   Google Scholar
• IPBES. (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. S. Díaz, J. Settele, E. S. Brondízio E.S., H. T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, L. A. Garibaldi, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian, G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, S. Polasky, A. Purvis, J. Razzaque, B. Reyers, R. Roy Chowdhury, Y. J. Shin, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, K. J. Willis, & C. N. Zayas (Eds.), Bonn: IPBES secretariat. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3553579
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049500100301
   Google Scholar
• Lindqvist, S., Sandström, C., Bjärstig, T., & Kvastegård, E. (2014). The changing role of hunting in Sweden: From subsistence to ecosystem stewardship? Alces, 50, 35–51.
   Google Scholar
• Ljung, P. (2014). Traditional use of wildlife in modern society (Doctoral dissertation). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Ljung, P. E., Riley, S. J., Heberlein, T. A., & Ericsson, G. (2012). Eat prey and love: Game-meat consumption and attitudes toward hunting. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 36(4), 669–675. https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattsson, L, Boman, M., & Ezebilo, E. E. (2014). More or less moose: how is the hunting value affected?. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 29(2), 170–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2014.881545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mensah, J. T., & Elofsson, K. (2017). An empirical analysis of hunting lease pricing and value of game in Sweden. Land Economics, 93(2), 292–308. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.93.2.292
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mettler, S., & SoRelle, M. (2018). Policy feedback theory. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed., pp. 103–134). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orach, K., & Schlüter, M. (2016). Uncovering the political dimension of social-ecological systems: Contributions from policy process frameworks. Global Environmental Change, 40, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Owens, S. (2015). Knowledge, policy, and expertise: The UK royal commission on environmental pollution 1970–2011. OUP.
   Google Scholar
• Patashnik, E. (2003). After the public interest prevails: The political sustainability of policy reform. Governance, 16(2), 203–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0491.00214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfeffer, S. E., Spitzer, R., Allen, A. M., Hofmeester, T. R., Ericsson, G., Widemo, F., & Cromsigt, J. P. (2018). Pictures or pellets? Comparing camera trapping and dung counts as methods for estimating population densities of ungulates. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, 4(2), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.67
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2014). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2013). Towards a more comprehensive policy mix conceptualization for environmental technological change: A literature synthesis. Working Paper Sustainability and Innovation, No. S3/2013, Fraunhofer ISI. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/77924
   Google Scholar
• Sandström, C. (2012). Managing large ungulates in Europe: The need to address institutional challenges of wildlife management. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 17(5), 320–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2012.710710
   Google Scholar
• Sandström, C., Di Gasper, S. W., & Öhman, K. (2013). Conflict resolution through ecosystem-based management: The case of Swedish moose management. International Journal of the Commons, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (1990). Policy design: Elements, premises and strategies. In S. Nagel (Ed.), Policy theory and policy evaluation: Concept, knowledge, causes and norms (pp. 77–102). Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (1997). Policy design for democracy. University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, A. L., Ingram, H. M., & deLeon, P. (2014). Democratic policy design: Social construction of target populations. In P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (3rd ed., pp. 105–150). Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. (2004). The ecosystem approach, (CBD guidelines).
   Google Scholar
• SFS 1974:152. Regeringsformen.
   Google Scholar
• Sidney, M. (2007). Policy formulation: Design and tools. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 79–87). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sjölander-Lindqvist, A., & Sandström, C. (2019). Shaking hands: Balancing tensions in the Swedish forested landscape. Conservation and Society, 17(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_18_112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitzer, R., Churski, M., Felton, A., Heurich, M., Kuijper, D. P., Landman, M., & Widemo, F. (2019). Doubting dung: eDNA reveals high rates of misidentification in diverse European ungulate communities. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 65(2), 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-019-1264-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics Sweden. (2019). Sveriges export. Retrieved June 9, 2020, from https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/sverige-i-siffror/samhallets-ekonomi/sveriges-export/
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Forest Agency. (2020). Skogens roll för klimatet. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from https://www.skogsstyrelsen.se/miljo-och-klimat/skog-och-klimat/skogens-roll-for-klimatet/
   Google Scholar
• Turnpenny, J. R., Jordan, A. J., Benson, D., & Rayner, T. (2015). The tools of policy formulation: An introduction. In A. J. Jordan & J. R. Turnpenny (Eds.), The tools of policy formulation: Actors, capacities, venues and effects (pp. 3–30). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Van Lieshout, M., Dewulf, A., Aarts, N., & Termeer, C. (2017). The power to frame the scale? Analysing scalar politics over, in and of a deliberative governance process. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(5), 550–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2014.936581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallgren, M., Bergström, R., Bergqvist, G., & Olsson, M. (2013). Spatial distribution of browsing and tree damage by moose in young pine forests, with implications for the forest industry. Forest Ecology and Management, 305, 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.05.057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wegrich, K., & Jann, W. (2007). Theories of the policy cycle. In F. Fischer & G. J. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 69–88). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2018). Theories of the policy process (4th ed.). Westview Press.
   Google Scholar