Negotiating responsible forestry: forest owners’ understanding of responsibility for multiple forest values

References

• Adams, M., and J. Raisborough. 2010. “Making a Difference: Ethical Consumption and the Everyday.” The British Journal of Sociology 61 (2): 256–274. doi:10.1111/bjos.2010.61.issue-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appelstrand, M. 2012. “Developments in Swedish Forest Policy and Administration – From a ‘Policy of Restriction’ toward ‘A Policy of Cooperation’.” Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 27 (2): 186–199.
   Google Scholar
• Bickerstaff, K., and G. Walker. 2002. “Risk, Responsibility and Blame: An Analysis of Vocabularies of Motive in Air-Pollution(Ing) Discourses.” Environment and Planning A 34 (12): 2175–2192. doi:10.1068/a3521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickerstaff, K., P. Simmons, and N. Pidgeon. 2008. “Constructing Responsibilities for Risk: Negotiating Citizen — State Relationships.” Environment and Planning A 40 (6): 1312–1330. doi:10.1068/a39150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bixler, P. 2014. “From Community Forest Management to Polycentric Governance: Assessing Evidence from the Bottom Up.” Society & Natural Resources 27 (2): 155–169. doi:10.1080/08941920.2013.840021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boström, M. 2001. Miljörörelsens mångfald [The Diversity of the Environmental Movement]. Lund: Arkiv förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bulkeley, H., M. Paterson, and J. Stripple, Eds. 2016. Towards a Cultural Politics of Climate Change. Devices, Desires and Dissent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, L., and J. Agyeman. 2011. “Shifting the Balance in Environmental Governance: Ethnicity, Environmental Citizenship and Discourses of Responsibility.” Antipode 43 (5): 1773–1800. doi:10.1111/anti.2011.43.issue-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly, J., and A. Prothero. 2008. “Green Consumption: Life-Politics and Contradictions.” Journal of Consumer Culture 8 (1): 117–145. doi:10.1177/1469540507086422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dean, M. 1999. Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Death, C. 2010. “Counter-Conducts: A Foucauldian Analytics of Protest.” Social Movement Studies 9 (3): 235–251. doi:10.1080/14742837.2010.493655.
   Google Scholar
• Dupuits, E. 2015. “Transnational Self-Help Networks and Community Forestry: A Theoretical Framework.” Forest Policy and Economics 58: 5–11. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2014.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, L. 2014. “Risk Perception and Responses among Private Forest Owners in Sweden.” Small-Scale Forestry 13 (4): 483–500. doi:10.1007/s11842-014-9266-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsberg, M., 2012. “Skogen som livsmiljö: En rättsvetenskaplig studie om skyddet för biologisk mångfald” [The Forest Habitat: A Legal Study on the Protection of Biological Diversity]. Dissertation. Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Guest, G., A. Bunce, and L. Johnson. 2006. “How Many Interviews are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability.” Field Methods 18 (1): 59–82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, S. 1997. “The Work of Representation.” In Representations: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, edited by S. Hall, 13–74. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, V., J. Dibden, and C. Cocklin. 2008. “Neoliberalism and Natural Resource Management: Agri-Environmental Standards and the Governing of Farming Practices.” Geoforum 39 (5): 1776–1785. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.05.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hursh, D., and J. Henderson. 2011. “Contesting Global Neoliberalism and Creating Alternative Futures.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 32 (2): 171–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hysing, E. 2009. “From Government to Governance? A Comparison of Environmental Governing in Swedish Forestry and Transport.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions 22 (4): 647–672. doi:10.1111/gove.2009.22.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hysing, E., and J. Olsson. 2008. “Contextualising the Advocacy Coalition Framework: Theorising Change in Swedish Forest Policy.” Environmental Politics 17 (5): 730–748. doi:10.1080/09644010802421471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson, J. 2013. “Constructing and Contesting the Legitimacy of Private Forest Governance: The Case of Forest Certification in Sweden.” Research report 2013:1. Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• Kankaanpää, S., and T. Carter. 2004. An Overview of Forest Policies Affecting Land Use in Europe. Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Keskitalo, C. 2008. “Vulnerability and Adaptive Capacity in Forestry in Northern Europe: A Swedish Case Study.” Climatic Change 87 (1–2): 219–234. doi:10.1007/s10584-007-9337-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, M. 2013. “Därför behövs blandskogarna” [Therefore We Need Mixed Forests]. SkogsEko [Swedish Forest Agency’s magazine distributed to all owners of at least 5 ha of forest], 2013, No. 4.
   Google Scholar
• Lidskog, R., L. Soneryd, and Y. Uggla. 2005. “Knowledge, Power and Control—Studying Environmental Regulation in Late Modernity.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 7 (2): 89–106. doi:10.1080/15239080500338473.
   Google Scholar
• Lindahl, K. B., A. Sténs, C. Sandström, J. Johansson, R. Lidskog, T. Ranius, and J.-M. Roberge. 2015. “The Swedish Forestry Model: More of Everything?” Forest Policy and Economics 17: 44–55.
   Google Scholar
• Lockie, S., and V. Higgins. 2007. “Roll-Out Neoliberalism and Hybrid Practices of Regulation in Australian Agri-Environmental Governance.” Journal of Rural Studies 23 (1): 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.09.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Löfmarck, E., Y. Uggla, and R. Lidskog. 2017. “Freedom with What? Interpretations of ‘Responsibility’ in Swedish Forestry Practice.” Forest Policy and Economics 75: 34–40. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2016.12.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lövbrand, E., and J. Stripple. 2014. “Bringing Governmentality to the Study of Global Climate Governance.” In Governing the Climate: New Approaches to Rationality, Power and Politics, edited by J. Stripple and H. Bulkeley, 27–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, J. 2002. Qualitative Researching. 2nd ed. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Middlemiss, L. 2014. “Individualised or Participatory? Exploring Late-Modern Identity and Sustainable Development.” Environmental Politics 23 (6): 929–946. doi:10.1080/09644016.2014.943010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parkins, J. R., M. Dunn, M. G. Reed, and A. J. Sinclair. 2016. “Forest Governance as Neoliberal Strategy: A Comparative Case Study of the Model Forest Program in Canada.” Journal of Rural Studies 45: 270–278. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.04.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson, M., and J. Stripple. 2010. “My Space: Governing Individuals’ Carbon Emissions.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 28 (2): 341–362. doi:10.1068/d4109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. 2015. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Integrating Theory and Practice. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Pellizzoni, L. 2004. “Responsibility and Environmental Governance.” Environmental Politics 13 (3): 541–565. doi:10.1080/0964401042000229034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pulla, P., A. Schuck, P. Verkerk, B. Lasserre, M. Marchetti, and T. Green. 2013. Mapping the distribution of forest ownership in Europe. Joensuu: European Forest Institute. EFI Technical Report 88.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N. 2000. “Government and Control.” British Journal of Criminology 40 (2): 321–339. doi:10.1093/bjc/40.2.321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin, H., and I. Rubin. 2005. Qualitative Interviewing. The Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Rutherford, S. 2007. “Green Governmentality: Insights and Opportunities in the Study of Nature’s Rule.” Progress in Human Geography 31 (3): 291–307. doi:10.1177/0309132507077080.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SFA. 2015. Skogsstyrelsen. ÅRsredovisning 2014 [Swedish Forest Agency: Annual Report 2014]. Jönköping, Sweden: Swedish Forest Agency.
   Google Scholar
• SFA. 2017. “Swedish Forest Agency.” Accessed 20 June 2017. https://www.skogsstyrelsen.se/.
   Google Scholar
• SFI. 2011. Uppföljning 2011: Levande skogar. Om skogsindustrins arbete för att bevara den biologiska mångfalden. [Follow-Up 2011: Living Forests. About the Swedish Forest Industries’ Work on Conservation of Biodiversity]. Stockholm: Swedish Forest Industries Federation.
   Google Scholar
• SFS. 1979 No. 429. Skogsvårdslag [Swedish Forestry Act]. Swedish Code of Statutes.
   Google Scholar
• SFS. 1998. No. 808. Miljöbalk [Environmental Code]. Swedish Code of Statutes.
   Google Scholar
• SFS. 2009. No. 1393. Förordning (2009:1393) med instruktion för Skogsstyrelsen [Decree (2009:1393) with instruction for the Swedish Forest Agency]. Swedish Code of Statutes.
   Google Scholar
• Shamir, R. 2008. “The Age of Responsibilization: On Market-Embedded Morality.” Economy & Society 37 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/03085140701760833.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skill, K., and P. Gyberg. 2010. “Framing Devices in the Creation of Environmental Responsibility: A Qualitative Study from Sweden.” Sustainability 2 (7): 1869–1886. doi:10.3390/su2071869.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström, S., K. Kern, M. Boström, and M. Gilek. 2016. “‘Environmental Governance’ and ‘Ecosystem Management’: Avenues for Synergies between Two Approaches.” Interdisciplinary Environmental Review 17 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1504/IER.2016.074871.
   Google Scholar
• Soneryd, L., and Y. Uggla. 2015. “Green Governmentality and Responsibilization: New Forms of Governance and Responses to ‘Consumer Responsibility’.” Environmental Politics 24 (6): 913–931. doi:10.1080/09644016.2015.1055885.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SSNC. 2011. “Policy. Skogen” [Policy. The Forest]. The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation.” Accessed 28 August 2014. http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/sites/default/files/dokument-media/policy_skog.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• SSNC. 2014a. “Dags för en ny skogspolitik” [Time for a New Forest Politics]. The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation. Accessed 28 August 2014. http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/sites/default/files/dokument-media/rapporter/SkogpolitisktforslagLITEN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• SSNC. 2014b. “Ny vår för skogen. Naturskyddsföreningens förslag till ny skogspolitik och rättsliga förstärkningar” [A New Spring for the Forest. The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation’s Proposal for a New Forest Politics]. The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation. Accessed 28 August 2014. http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/sites/default/files/dokument-media/rapporter/skogspolitisktforslagSTOR.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Stridsman, M. 2015. “Vad Vill Du Med Din Skog?” [What Vision Do You Have for Your Forest?].” SkogsEko 2015. No. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Stripple, J., and H. Bulkeley, eds. 2014. Governing the Climate: New Approaches to Rationality, Power and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trnka, S., and C. Trundle. 2014. “Competing Responsibilities: Moving Beyond Neoliberal Responsibilisation.” Anthropological Forum 24 (2): 136–153. doi:10.1080/00664677.2013.879051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uggla, Y., M. Forsberg, and S. Larsson. 2016. ”Dissimilar Framings of Forest Biodiversity Preservation: Uncertainty and Legal Ambiguity as Contributing Factors.” Forest Policy and Economics 62: 36–42. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uggla, Y., and R. Lidskog. 2016. “Climate Risks and Forest Practices: Forest Owners’ Acceptance of Advice Concerning Climate Change.” Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 31 (6): 618–625. doi:10.1080/02827581.2015.1134648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wievorka, M. 1992. “Case Studies: History or Sociology?” In What Is a Case? edited by C. Ragin and H. Becker, 159–172. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winkel, G. 2012. “Foucault in the Forests—A Review of the Use of ‘Foucauldian’ Concepts in Forest Policy Analysis.” Forest Policy Economics 16: 81–92. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.11.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar