Abstract
This chapter provides an actor-centered assessment of the governance of forests and protected areas in Romania. It investigates the implementation of the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) and its effectiveness in addressing illegal timber logging and trade. We use an analytical framework based on the Europeanization theory and the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). In line with the Europeanization literature, we find that in the case of EU forestry policy, a non-acquis policy area partly characterized by a lack of clear EU legal basis and partly by EU policy and legal (dis)integration paradox, national decision-makers responded to pressures to integrate nature conservation into forestry. Domestic actors, allied in a social-environmental advocacy coalition, could use EU rules, strategic cooperation, and links with the broader EU good governance plan to improve domestic forest policy procedures and limit state capture. However, the practical implementation of the EUTR and the EU nature and biodiversity policy is jeopardized by forest overexploitation and illegal logging linked to weak law enforcement capacity, widespread corruption, unsolved policy and institutional deficiencies notably regarding private forest ownership, and counterproductive effects of “successful” EU market integration and foreign investment forces.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) and Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
- 2.
Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), “sinks” are defined as “any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere.” The world’s forests and other wooded lands as key terrestrial sinks present a significant global carbon stock, as they are estimated to sequester over 485 gigatons of carbon (UNFCCC 2020).
- 3.
- 4.
Another study concluded that 20 million m3 of wood were illegally harvested during 2013–2018, while state authorities only detected 1% thereof (Greenpeace Romania 2019).
- 5.
EUTR defines “operator” as any natural or legal person who places timber or timber products on the EU internal market and “trader” as any natural or legal person who sells or buys timber or timber products already placed on the market (EU 2010).
- 6.
In Romania, the competent authority is currently the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Forests (MMAP).
- 7.
The National Forest Administration (NFA), Romsilva, is in charge of the administration of state-owned forests and is functioning under the authority of the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Forests. It also manages some non-state forests on a (voluntary) contractual basis and provides a few extension services for small-scale private forest owners (Sotirov 2014).
- 8.
Two examples are the forest watch subsidies foreseen for private forests smaller than 30 ha and the payments for ecosystem services laid down already in the 1996 Forest Code (Drăgoi and Toza 2019).
- 9.
The forest management plan (FMP) is the main forest governance instrument in Romania. It is a set of top-down compulsory rules on timber harvesting. FMP is compulsory for all forests and applies for 10 years.
- 10.
The first land restitution law (18/1991) restored small forest tenures of up to 1 ha. In contrast, the third restitution law (247/2005) enabled the full restoration of private lands to former owners (Scriban et al. 2019).
- 11.
Under current legislation, FMPs are conducted for forests with a minimum area of 100 ha. All forest areas exceeding 10 ha need to be covered by an FMP.
- 12.
“An economic operator/group of economic operators cannot acquire/process more than 30% of the volume of an industrial assortment of wood of each species, established as an average of the last 3 years based on authorized exploitation documents and exploited at the national level, regardless of the form of ownership” (Romanian Parliament 2015).
- 13.
In spring 2020, a new Forest Code amendment proposal was being debated in the Parliament. Two possible revisions under discussion were treating “tree theft” as a crime regardless of the prejudice value and selling only harvested timber, as opposed to the current timber selling system of still-standing trees based on volume approximations (Greenpeace Romania 2020).
- 14.
For instance, Law 95/2016 regarding the establishment of the National Agency for Protected Natural Areas and the modification of the Government Emergency Ordinance 57/2007 regarding the regime of protected natural areas and conservation of natural habitats and of the flora and fauna (National Agency for Protected Areas 2020)
- 15.
The Ministry of Water and Forests was formerly in charge of forests and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change responsible for nature conservation, among other issues. The two ministries were reorganized into the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Forests (MMAP), which is organized through the governmental decision (HG) 43/2020.
- 16.
After intensive ENGO campaigns and civil society protests, FSC and the responsible Austrian certification body suspended the FSC certificate of a major Austrian-owned timber processing company. The company operates in Romania since the early 2000s and has a dominant market position. It has been linked to procuring illegally logged timber from Romanian harvesting companies and thus fuelling illegal logging in the country (EIA 2015).
- 17.
Europeanization is defined as the “emergence and the development at the European level of distinct structures of governance, that is, of political, legal, and social institutions associated with political problem-solving that formalizes interactions among the actors, and of policy networks specializing in the creation of authoritative European rules” (Risse et al. 2001).
- 18.
We consider a policy implementation successful when the policy achieves its goals to a large extent.
- 19.
During the designation process of Natura 2000 sites in Romania, the European Commission followed NGOs’ views, and it launched the first infringement procedure on environmental policy against Romania when the government excluded sites proposed by NGOs from the official Natura 2000 list (Dimitrova and Buzogány 2014).
- 20.
Concerning the major transition processes of the past (e.g., forest restitution) and current global challenges like climate change and globalized timber markets, there is a clear need for a strategic long-term action plan for the forest sector. In 2017, the former Ministry of Water and Forests launched the National Forest Strategy (NFS) for 2018–2027, with the overall objective to “harmonize forest functions with requirements to the present and future of the Romanian society through the sustainable management of national forest resources.” The scope and impact of the strategy remain uncertain. By merely naming them, however, the Ministry showed an increased effort to cope with current and future challenges of the sector. The NFS also suggests developing an effective awareness and public communication system for increased stakeholder participation (Ministry of Water and Forests 2017).
References
Abrudan, I.V., V. Marinescu, O. Ionescu, et al. 2009. Developments in the Romanian Forestry and its Linkages with other Sectors. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 37: 14–21. https://doi.org/10.15835/nbha3723468.
Andonova, L.B., and I.A. Tuta. 2014. Transnational Networks and Paths to EU Environmental Compliance: Evidence from New Member States: Transnational networks and paths to EU environmental compliance. Journal of Common Market Studies 52: 775–793. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12126.
Anfodillo, T., M. Carrer, E.D. Valle, et al. 2008. Current State of Forest Resources in the Carpathians. Università Degli Studi Di Padova. Legnaro: Dipartimento Territorio e Sistemi Agro-Forestali.
Angelova, E.H., D.L. Irimie, M. Sotirov, and G. Winkel. 2009. Bulgarien und Rumänien in der Europäischen Union – Forstpolitische Herausforderungen | Bulgaria and Romania in the European Union – Challenges for forest policy. Swiss Forestry Journal 160: 15–22. https://doi.org/10.3188/szf.2009.0015.
Berglund, S., I. Gange, and F. van Waarden. 2006. Mass production of law. Routinization in the transposition of European directives: A sociological- institutionalist account. Journal of European Public Policy 13: 692–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760600808550.
Borghetto, E., F. Franchino, and D. Giannetti. 2006. Complying with the transposition deadlines of EU directives: Evidence from Italy. Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche: 7–38.
Börzel, T.A. 2003. Shaping and Taking EU Policies: Member State Responses to Europeanization. Belfast: Queens University Belfast.
———. 2005. Mind the gap! European integration between level and scope. Journal of European Public Policy 12: 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500043860.
Börzel, T., and A. Buzogány. 2010. Environmental organisations and the Europeanisation of public policy in Central and Eastern Europe: The case of biodiversity governance. Environmental Politics 19: 708–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2010.508302.
Börzel, T., and T. Risse. 2003. Conceptualizing the Domestic Impact of Europe. In The Politics of Europeanization, ed. Kevin Featherstone and Claudio M. Radaelli. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bouriaud, L. 2005. Causes of illegal logging in Central and Eastern Europe. Small-scale Forestry 4: 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-005-0017-6.
Bouriaud, L., and A. Niskanen. 2003. Illegal logging in the context of the sound use of wood. Economic Commission for Europe, Timber Committee; Food and Agriculture Organization, European Forestry Commission, Poiana Brasov, Romania.
Bouriaud, L., and F. Schmithüsen. 2005. Allocation of Property Rights on Forests through Ownership Reform and Forest Policies in Central and Eastern European Countries. Swiss Forestry Journal 156: 297–305. https://doi.org/10.3188/szf.2005.0297.
Bouriaud, L., L. Nichiforel, G. Weiss, et al. 2013. Governance of private forests in Eastern and Central Europe: An analysis of forest harvesting and management rights. Annals of Forest Research 56 (1): 199–215.
Buzogány, A. 2009. Romania: Environmental Governance — Form without Substance. In Coping with Accession to the European Union: New Modes of Environmental Governance, ed. T.A. Börzel, 169–191. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
CC. 2017. The Competition Council makes some recommendations to strengthen competition on the primary timber market. Romanian Competition Council.
Cugleșan, N. 2019. Post accession compliance with EU environmental legislation in Romania and Bulgaria in the first ten years of EU membership. Conditionality and social learning, as drivers of success? Denver, Colorado.
Declic. 2017. 250,000 Europeans demand FSC withdrawal of Schweighofer certification. In: Declic. https://www.declic.ro/250-000-de-europeni-cer-fsc-retragerea-certificarii-schweighofer/. Accessed 3 Oct 2020.
Della Porta, D., and M. Caiani. 2009. Social Movements and Europeanization. Oxford University Press.
Dimitrova, A., and A. Buzogány. 2014. Post-Accession Policy-Making in Bulgaria and Romania: Can Non-state Actors Use EU Rules to Promote Better Governance?: Post-accession policy-making in Bulgaria and Romania. Journal of Common Market Studies 52: 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12084.
Drăgoi, M., and V. Toza. 2019. Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy. Land 8: 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/land8060099.
EC. 2019. The EU Environmental Implementation Review 2019 Country Report – ROMANIA. European Commission.
———. 2020a. European Commission: Letters of formal notice Forests: Commission urges ROMANIA to stop illegal logging. In: February infringements package: key decisions. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/INF_20_202.
———. 2020b. European Commission: July infringements package: Key decisions. Nature: The Commission is calling on ROMANIA to combat illegal logging and better protect forests in its Natura 2000 sites. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/bg/inf_20_1212.
ECA. 2017. Special Report. More efforts needed to implement the Natura 2000 network to its full potential. European Court of Auditors.
EIA. 2015. Stealing the last forest: Austria’s largest timber company, land rights and corruption in Romania. Environmental Investigation Agency.
———. 2016. Built on lies: New homes in Japan destroy old forests in Europe. Environmental Investigation Agency.
EU. 2010. Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market.
———. 2018. Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry in the 2030 climate and energy framework, and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 and Decision No 529/2013/EU.
Evans, D., A. Demeter, P. Gajdoš, and Ľ. Halada. 2013. Adapting environmental conservation legislation for an enlarged European Union: Experience from the Habitats Directive. Environmental Conservation 40: 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892912000422.
Falkner, G., and O. Treib. 2008. Three Worlds of Compliance or Four? The EU-15 Compared to New Member States. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 46: 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2007.00777.x.
FAO. 2014. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Country Report Romania. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Feiler, L. 2018. Understanding Forest Policy Change and Stability – Advocacy coalitions in the Romanian forest sector. Master-thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Forest Sciences. Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg, Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources. Chair of Forest and Environmental Policy.
Gavrilut, I., A.-F. Halalisan, A. Giurca, and M. Sotirov. 2015. The Interaction between FSC Certification and the Implementation of the EU Timber Regulation in Romania. Forests 7: 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7010003.
Grabbe, H. 2006. Europeanisation, Negotiations and Influence. In The EU’s Transformative Power. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Greenpeace Romania. 2012. Illegal logging cases in Romanian forests – 2012.
———. 2015. Illegal logging cases in Romanian forests 2015.
———. 2019. Illegal Logging in Romania. Report 2018.
———. 2020 Newsletter: The amendment of the Forest Code is being discussed in Parliament.
Griffiths, P., T. Kuemmerle, R.E. Kennedy, et al. 2012. Using annual time-series of Landsat images to assess the effects of forest restitution in post-socialist Romania. Remote Sensing of Environment 118: 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.11.006.
Halalisan, A., I. Abrudan, and B. Popa. 2018. Forest Management Certification in Romania: Motivations and Perceptions. Forests 9: 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9070425.
Hofmann, A. 2019. Left to interest groups? On the prospects for enforcing environmental law in the European Union. Environmental Politics 28: 342–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1549778.
Ioras, F., I.V. Abrudan, M. Dautbasic, et al. 2009. Conservation gains through HCVF assessments in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Romania. Biodiversity and Conservation 18: 3395–3406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9649-8.
Irimie, D.L. 2006 Property Rights in Romanian Forest Policy – An institutional analysis in the context of societal transformation. PhD Thesis, Albert-Ludwigs University of Freiburg.
Irimie, D.L., and H.F. Essmann. 2009. Forest property rights in the frame of public policies and societal change. Forest Policy and Economics 11: 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.10.001.
Kärkkäinen, A. 2008. EU-15 Foreign Direct Investment in the new Member States.
Karklins, R. 2005. The System Made Me Do It: Corruption in Post-Communist Societies. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe. Cambridge University Press.
Knorn, J., T. Kuemmerle, V.C. Radeloff, et al. 2012. Forest restitution and protected area effectiveness in post-socialist Romania. Biological Conservation 146: 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.12.020.
———. 2013. Continued loss of temperate old-growth forests in the Romanian Carpathians despite an increasing protected area network. Environmental Conservation 40: 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892912000355.
Kuemmerle, T., D. Müller, P. Griffiths, and M. Rusu. 2009. Land use change in Southern Romania after the collapse of socialism. Regional Environmental Change 9: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-008-0050-z.
Marinchescu, M., A.F. Halalisan, B. Popa, and I.V. Abrudan. 2014. Forest Administration in Romania: Frequent Problems and Expectations. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 42: 588–595. https://doi.org/10.15835/nbha4229738.
Marks, G., and D. McAdam. 1996. Social Movements and the Changing Structure of Political Opportunity in the European Union. In Governance in the European Union, ed. Gary Marks, Fritz W. Scharpf, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Wolfgang Streeck, 95–120. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
Mbaye, H.A. 2001. Why national states comply with supranational law: Explaining implementation infringements in the European Union, 1972–1993. European Union Politics 2: 259–281.
McDermott, C.L., and M. Sotirov. 2018. A political economy of the European Union’s timber regulation: Which member states would, should or could support and implement EU rules on the import of illegal wood? Forest Policy and Economics 90: 180–190.
Mihai, B., I. Săvulescu, M. Rujoiu-Mare, and C. Nistor. 2017. Recent forest cover changes (2002–2015) in the Southern Carpathians: A case study of the Iezer Mountains, Romania. Science of the Total Environment 599–600: 2166–2174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.226.
Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration. 2016. Romanian Government. The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration. Legislative Portal. http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/158885. Accessed 10 Mar 2020.
Ministry of Water and Forests. 2017 Strategia Forestiera Nationala 2018–2027.
Munteanu, C., M.D. Nita, I.V. Abrudan, and V.C. Radeloff. 2016. Historical forest management in Romania is imposing strong legacies on contemporary forests and their management. Forest Ecology and Management 361: 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.11.023.
National Agency for Protected Areas. 2020. ANANP Legislation. http://ananp.gov.ro/legislatie/. Accessed 10 Mar 2020.
Nichiforel, G. 2005. Stadiul aplicării legilor retrocedării privitoare la păduri. Bucovina forestiera 15: 21–43.
———. 2007. Current status in forest restitution. Bucovina forestiera: 21–43.
Nichiforel, R., and L. Nichiforel. 2011. Perception of relevant stakeholders on the potential of the implementation of the “Due Diligence” system in combating illegal logging in Romania. Journal of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology 15: 126–133.
Nichiforel, L., L. Bouriaud, M. Dragoi, et al. 2015. Forest land ownership change in Romania. European Forest Institute.
Parau, C.E. 2009. Impaling Dracula: How EU Accession Empowered Civil Society in Romania. West European Politics 32: 119–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380802509917.
Parliament of Romania. 2015. Law 133/2015 for amending and completing the Law no. 46/2008 – Forest Code, Article 60.
———. 2020. Law 197 of September 7, 2020 for the amendment and completion of Law no. 46/2008: Forest Code.
Pokorny, B., M. Sotirov, D. Kleinschmit, and P. Kanowski. 2019. Forests as Global Commons: International governance and the role of Germany, Report to the Science Platform Sustainability 2030. University of Freiburg.
Risse, T., M.G. Cowles, and J.A. Caporaso. 2001. Europeanization and Domestic Change: Introduction. In Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Romanian Court of Accounts. 2013. Summary of the Audit Report on “The patrimonial situation of the forestry fund in Romania, between 1990 and 2012”. Bucharest: Romanian Court of Accounts.
Romsilva. 2020. National Forestry Program of the National Forest Administration – Romsilva for 2020. http://www.rosilva.ro/noutati/program_national_de_impaduriri_al_regiei_nationale_a_padurilor_-_romsilva_pe_anul_2020__p_451.htm. Accessed 10 Apr 2020.
Sabatier, P.A. 1988. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences 21: 129–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136406.
Sabatier, P.A., and H. Jenkins-Smith. 1993. The Advocacy Coalition Framework: assessment, revisions, and implications for scholars and practitioners. In Policy Change and Learning. An Advocacy Coalition Approach, ed. P.A. Sabatier and H. Jenkins-Smith, 211–235. Boulder: Westview Press.
———. 1999. The Advocacy Coalition Framework. An Assessment. In Theories of the policy process, Theoretical lenses on public policy, ed. Paul A. Sabatier, 117–166. Boulder: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P.A., and C.M. Weible. 2007. The advocacy coalition framework: Innovations and clarifications. In Theories of the policy process, ed. Paul A. Sabatier, 189–220. Boulder: Westview Press.
Scriban, R.E., L. Nichiforel, L.G. Bouriaud, et al. 2017. Governance of the forest restitution process in Romania. An application of the DPSIR model. Forest Policy and Economics 99: 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.018.
———. 2019. Governance of the forest restitution process in Romania: An application of the DPSIR model. Forest Policy and Economics 99: 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.018.
Sedelmeier, U. 2014. Anchoring Democracy from Above? The European Union and Democratic Backsliding in Hungary and Romania after Accession: Anchoring democracy from above? Journal of Common Market Studies 52: 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12082.
Sotirov, M. 2014 Sustainable Management of Biodiversity. Final report. South Caucasus. A Policy and Institutional Analysis of Forest Sector Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. On behalf of GIZ.
———. 2017. Natura 2000 and forests: Assessing the state of implementation and effectiveness. What science can tell us. European Forest Institute.
Sotirov, M., and S. Storch. 2018. Resilience through policy integration in Europe? Domestic forest policy changes as response to absorb pressure to integrate biodiversity conservation, bioenergy use and climate protection in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. Land Use Policy 79: 977–989.
Sotirov, M., and G. Winkel. 2016. Toward a cognitive theory of shifting coalitions and policy change: Linking the advocacy coalition framework and cultural theory. Policy Sciences 49: 125–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9235-8.
Sotirov, M., M. Lovric, and G. Winkel. 2015. Symbolic transformation of environmental governance: Implementation of EU biodiversity policy in Bulgaria and Croatia between Europeanization and domestic politics. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 33: 986–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15605925.
Sotirov, M., M. Stelter, and G. Winkel. 2017. The emergence of the European Union Timber Regulation: How Baptists, Bootleggers, devil shifting and moral legitimacy drive change in the environmental governance of global timber trade. Forest Policy and Economics 81: 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.001.
Strimbu, B.M., G.M. Hickey, and V.G. Strimbu. 2005. Forest conditions and management under rapid legislation change in Romania. The Forestry Chronicle 81: 350–358. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc81350-3.
Taconni, L. 2007. Illegal logging: Law enforcement, livelihoods and the timber trade. London: Earthscan.
UN. 2016. Sustainable Development Goal 15. In: United Nations. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg15.
UNEP. 2007. Carpathians environment outlook. Geneva: United Nations Environment Programme.
UNFCCC. 2015. Paris Agreement.
———. 2020. Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF). https://unfccc.int/topics/land-use/workstreams/land-use%2D%2Dland-use-change-and-forestry-lulucf. Accessed 20 Feb 2020.
Veen, P., J. Fanta, I. Raev, et al. 2010. Virgin forests in Romania and Bulgaria: Results of two national inventory projects and their implications for protection. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 1805–1819. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9804-2.
Winkel, G., and M. Sotirov. 2016. Whose integration is this? European forest policy between the gospel of coordination, institutional competition, and a new spirit of integration. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 34: 496–514.
WWF. 2005. Illegal logging in Romania – a WWF analysis. WWF European Forest Programme and the Danube Carpathian Programme.
———. 2015. Thousands in Romania protest illegal logging.
———. 2019. WWF Calls for a Public Debate on the Results of the Romanian National Forest Inventory. https://www.wwfadria.org/?uNewsID=357022
———. 2020. The crisis of firewood for the population. https://www.wwf.ro/ce_facem/paduri/combaterea_taierilor_ilegale/criza_lemnului_de_foc_pentru_populaie/.
Zafonte, M., and P.A. Sabatier. 1998. Shared Beliefs and Imposed Interdependencies as Determinants of Ally Networks in Overlapping Subsystems. Journal of Theoretical Politics 10 (4): 473–505.
Zafonte, M., and P. Sabatier. 2004. Short-Term Versus Long-Term Coalitions in the Policy Process: Automotive Pollution Control, 1963–1989. Policy Studies Journal 32: 75–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0190-292X.2004.00054.x.
Acknowledgments
This research was partially supported by the COST Action FP1207-Orchestrating forest-related policy analysis in Europe (ORCHESTRA) and the FP-7 project on “Future-oriented and integrated management of European forest landscapes” INTEGRAL project (grant agreement No 282887). We are grateful to Liviu Nichiforel, Ramona Scriban, and Laura Bouriaud for their helpful insight and support with the stakeholder interviews. We also thank all the interview and survey participants for sharing their knowledge and experience with us.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gavrilut, I., Feiler, L., Sotirov, M. (2021). Synthetic Assessment of the Governance of Forests and Protected Areas, Related EU Policies, and Their Domestic Implementation. In: Todor, A., Helepciuc, F.E. (eds) Europeanization of Environmental Policies and their Limitations . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68586-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68586-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-68585-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-68586-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)