i n s t i t u t f Ü r s o z i o Ö k o n o m i k d e r f o r s t - u n d h o l z w i r t s c h a f...

I N S T I T U T F Ü R S O Z I O Ö K O N O M I K D E R F O R S T - U N D H O L Z W I R T S C H A F T

Karl Hogl, September 2003

National Forest ProgrammesNational Forest ProgrammesOpportunities and limits of co-ordination

in policy networks

Karl Hogl

Forest

TourismIndustry

Environment



Demands, Problems and Approach

Demands:Demands: National Forest Programmes shall ...--> co-ordinate several levels of

governance,--> co-ordinate all relevant sectors,--> involve private actors,--> proceed iterative, adaptive, long term

Problem:Problem: Decision systems comprising many interdependent actors and arenas tend towards deadlock

Question:Question: Approaches to co-ordinate–> Strengths / Weaknesses



Outline

• Theory, empirical evidence

• Meaning of „C-ordination“

• Co-ordination by hierarchy

• Co-ordination through negotiations

• Opportunities and Limits of Co-ordinationin actor networks



Theoretical Approach

TheoriesTheories

• Approaches of multi-level governance

• Joint-Decision Theory („joint-decision trap“; F. W. Scharpf)

• Generally, approaches about (policy-)co-ordination(e.g. negotiations-, administrations-, and organisation theories)



Empirical Approach

Empirical evidenceEmpirical evidence

• Own research and cases from literature

• NFP processes in European countries / regions; reports to this action

• EU policies, in particular regional policy and rural development policy



The meaning of „co-ordination“

• Redundancy• Incoherence, contradictory policies• Policy gaps

Forest

TourismIndustry

Environment

Fore

st

Envi

ronm

ent

Tour

ism

Indu

stry

Co-ordination

State / degree of c-ordination:State / degree of c-ordination:

Co-ordination as a process: Co-ordination as a process: sectors, time frame, stages, ...



How to co-ordinate ?

• (markets)• hierarchy• negotiations

Basically byBasically by



Hierarchy

Co-ordination by HierarchyCo-ordination by Hierarchy• Motivational problem (“misuse of power”)

• Informational problem

Risk: decision do not meet the problems

Limited range of coverage, in particular in case of complex problems that effect many different domains within hierarchical structures



Negotiations

Co-ordination through negotiationCo-ordination through negotiation

If• Side payments are allowed

• And transaction costs are ignored

Egoistic rational actors exploit the potential welfare gains

BUT: multi level problems / “joint-decision trap”

“negotiators’ dilemma”

“problem of high numbers”



Negotiations Negotiators’ dilemmaNegotiators’ dilemma

Actors shall at the same time

a) Find the best common solutionsb) and solve distributional problems

a) and b) evoke incompatible actor orientations (co-operative vs. competitive).

blockade

+ Problem of high numbers+ Problem of high numbers--> co-ordination through negotiations has narrow limits!



Negotiations

Solutions suggested by theory and political practice:Solutions suggested by theory and political practice:

a) negotiations embedded in hierarchies

b) negotiations in actor networks

a)a) Negotiations in the „Shadow of Hierarchy“Negotiations in the „Shadow of Hierarchy“• In principle, decisions would be finally taken by

a superior entity

• Archetypes of interaction

• “negative” co-ordination

• “positive” co-ordination



Negotiations

MoF

MoZ

MoY

MoX

NGOc

NGOb

NGOa

MoF

MoZ

MoY

MoX

NGOc

NGOb

NGOa

positive co-ordinationnegative co-oordination

central actor; low density; bilateral;-> Pareto Criterion; cumulation of

veto positions

„more co-operation“, high density, multilateral, -> Kaldor Criterion;

narrow limits as regards # of actors



Negotiations

b) Negotiations in actor networksb) Negotiations in actor networks

Governance theory

• Co-operation in actor networks as a certainkind of co-ordination

Networks

• Medium degree of coupling• Mutually dependent• stability over time• Regularly exchange



Negotiations

b) Negotiations in actor networksb) Negotiations in actor networks

within stable actor networks voluntary co-operation becomes rational („shadow of the future“)

Advantages of co-operation in actor networks

• Mutual trust can develop

• High density of information flow, good access to information --> mutual learning



Co-operation in networks

PreconditionsPreconditions

• depends on the kind and the number of topics

• common motive / problem reference

• “favourable” topics at the start with

• Number of topics (broad or narrow)



PreconditionsPreconditions

• Arena and sufficient opportunities for interaction

• Hardly occurs without „external“ incentives

• “weight” only if relevant actors participate

• legitimation needed




WeaknessesWeaknesses

• participation voluntary --> only if potential gains outweigh losses

• Costs are clear soon, benefits often arguable

• Fear for loosing autonomy and influence

• need to compromise

--> tendency towards symbolic results

--> conflicts adjourned




A Actor A

Actor B

Status Quo

Kaldor- Criterion

Pareto-Criterion

A

B

C

E

D

i n s t i t u t f Ü r s o z i o Ö k o n o m i k d e r f o r s t - u n d h o l z w i r t s c h a f...

Documents