Suchergebnisse

'Der Artikel beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, warum und auf welche Weise sich forschungspolitische Strategien im nationalstaatlichen Gefüge verändern. Zur Beantwortung dieser Fragen ziehen die Verfassser zwei Fallbeispiele aus der österreichischen Forschungspolitik heran: Die Verfasser behandeln die Neuregelung des Doktoratstudiums ('Doktorat neu') an den österreichischen Universitäten, und die institutionelle Umstrukturierung innerhalb der österreichischen Forschungsförderung durch die Errichtung der Österreichischen Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft (FFG). Mit Hilfe von Policy-Dokumenten und ExpertInnen-Interviews gehen die Verfasser dabei jeweils den Fragen nach, wie diese Entscheidungen - vom agenda setting bis hin zur (insoweit vorhandenen) Implementierung - zustande gekommen sind, welche AkteurInnen involviert waren, und insbesondere, woher die entscheidenden Impulse zur Veränderung gekommen sind. Diesen Wandel der forschungspolitischen Strategien analysieren die Verfasser unter der Zuhilfenahme von systemanalytischen und Netzwerk-orientierten Zugängen und nehmen dies zum Anlass zu Ausführungen darüber, welcher der beiden Ansätze fruchtbarere Einsichten liefert.' (Autorenreferat)

Forests and forest-relevant policies in Europe face a wide array of challenges in a rapidly changing world. Issues such as Brexit, the new European Parliament and European Commission, and the recent European Green Deal proposal are certain to affect policymaking, as are the as-yet unknown impacts of the coronavirus (COVID-19). A new science-policy study from EFI provides a timely look at forest governance in Europe, and offers insights into the potential way forward. Many of the forest-relevant policies currently in place have been targeted towards 2020, and while a final evaluation of their achievements is not yet possible, a look into the future is essential. Forest products and services are increasingly an inherent and integrated element of many other sectors, ranging from energy to food production to conservation and public health. This wide range of sectors and multiple interests, at different levels, leads to a complex multi-sectoral governance system. For example, within the EU, negotiations are currently ongoing on post-2020 EU policies on agriculture and rural development, biodiversity, climate, industry, food security, circular economy and new legislation on sustainable finance. All of them, and the EU Green Deal in particular, will have an important influence on forest-related decision-making processes. A strategic and coordinated policy direction will be required after 2020, not least to support the implementation of globally agreed policy targets such as the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Climate Agreement and Convention on Biological Diversity. In the global policy arena, trade developments related eg to China, Russia and North America will also have important implications for the European forest sector. This report reviews significant developments in the forest governance framework including EU and international developments, and discusses how coordination in other policy areas than forests can lead to policy integration. Based on evidence from a literature review, stakeholder interviews and workshop results, it outlines several potential pathways for future forest policymaking in Europe. Study coordinator Bernhard Wolfslehner said: "The European Green Deal puts the forest-based sector in a key position in climate change mitigation and biodiversity protection, and it is therefore important to emphasize forest policy integration and strengthen its implementation."

Forests and forest-relevant policies in Europe face a wide array of challenges in a rapidly changing world. Issues such as Brexit, the new European Parliament and European Commission, and the recent European Green Deal proposal are certain to affact policymaking, as are the as-yet unknown impacts of the coronavirus /COVID-19). A new science-policy study from EFI provides a timely look at forest governance in Europe, and offers insights into the potential way forward. Many of the forest-relevant policies currently in place have been targeted towards 2020, and while a final evaluation of their achievements is not yet possible, a look into the future is essential. Forest products and services are increasingly an inherent and integrated element of many other sectors, ranging from energy to food production to conseravtion and public health. This wide range of sectors and multiple interests, at different levels, leads to a complex multi-sectoral governance system. For example, within the EU, negaotiations are currently ongoing on post-2020 EU policies on agriculture and rural development, biodiversity, climate, industry, food security, circular economy and new legislation on sustainable finance. All of them, and the EU Green Deal in particular, will have an important influence on forest-related decision-making processes. A strategic and coordinated policy direction will be required after 2020, not least to support the implementation of globally agreed policy targets such as the SDGs, the Paris Climate Agreement and CBD. In the global policy arena, trade developments related to eg China, Russia and Northamerica will also have important implications for the European forest sector. This report reviews significant developments in the forest governance framework including EU and international developments, and discusses how coordination in other policy areas than forests can to to policy integration. Based on evidence from a literature review, stakeholder interviews and workshop results, it outlines several potential pathways for future fore policymaking in Europe.

The political project on bioeconomy strives to address multiple societal aspirations, namely combine economic growth with environmental sustainability in some socially acceptable manner. The contradictions between the goals and the concrete plans to increase production, processing, and consumption of forest biomass in Europe have however raised sustainability concerns within and beyond its borders. While political actors articulate such contradictions differently and compete for traction for their viewpoints in the public discourse, little is known about how citizens of urban areas perceive this discourse. Conceptualising perception as a multidimensional construct, data from eight European university cities (Bordeaux, Bratislava, Freiburg, Helsinki, Padua, St. Petersburg, Uppsala, Vienna) are statistically analysed to explore its dimensions, the communities of like-minded citizens forming across those dimensions, and the traits associating with membership in each such community. Five communities across six dimensions from biocentrism through distributional aspects to adherence to political goals are identified: adherent-environmentalist, adherent-governmentalist, critical-reformist, critical-agriculturalist, and indifferent. City of residence and perceived familiarity with bioeconomy clearly interact with perception. There is however considerable variation in communities within and across the eight cities, suggesting deeper social tension beyond the public discourse. Much of the within-community variation remains unexplained, though, calling for more work locally. Implications for forest policy are derived. ; Peer reviewed