首页> 外文期刊>Forest Policy and Economics >Do 'stakeholders' represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany.
【24h】

Do 'stakeholders' represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany.

机译:“利益相关者”代表公民利益吗?对德国国家森林计划中政策目标评估的实证研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Participatory National Forest Programmes (NFPs) intend to democratize forest sector policy, but they may suffer from a fundamental democratic legitimization deficit since the stakeholders involved are neither democratically authorized nor accountable to the population. In order to scrutinize the empirical relevance of this problem in the case of the German NFP, an analysis was conducted of how the German population on the one hand and the NFP participants on the other hand assess central forest policy aims of the NFP, and how far both assessments coincide. Two surveys based on identical questionnaires were used as the data base. The respondents assessed the importance of the respective aims as well as their implementation. Results show that the population considers the majority of the NFP aims to be generally relevant, but assesses the majority of the aims significantly differently from the stakeholders. The formal legitimization deficit of the German NFP therefore also matters in terms of content. Discussing the NFP among the elected representatives and in the public seems indispensable. Moreover, the differences in the assessment of some policy aims are significantly dependent on how people judge the image of forest enterprises between the opposing poles of profit orientation and nature protection. Public acceptance of those aims could be furthered more appropriately by adjusting the partly incorrect image of forestry rather than by providing more information about the particular aims and their background..
机译:参与性国家森林计划(NFP)旨在使森林部门政策民主化,但由于涉及的利益相关者既未获得民主授权也未对民众负责,它们可能会遭受根本性的民主合法化缺陷。为了检查该问题在德国NFP案例中的经验相关性,对一方面德国人口和另一方面NFP参与者如何评估NFP的中央森林政策目标以及如何进行分析进行了分析。到目前为止,两个评估是一致的。基于相同问卷的两次调查被用作数据库。受访者评估了各个目标及其实施的重要性。结果表明,人们认为NFP的大多数目标具有总体意义,但对大多数目标的评估与利益相关者有很大不同。因此,德国NFP的正式合法化赤字在内容上也很重要。在民选代表和公众中讨论NFP似乎是必不可少的。此外,在某些政策目标的评估上的差异在很大程度上取决于人们如何在利益导向和自然保护的相对两极之间判断林业企业的形象。通过调整部分不正确的林业形象,而不是通过提供有关特定目标及其背景的更多信息,可以更适当地促进公众对这些目标的接受。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号