AVRUPA’DA ORMAN SERTİFİKASYONU: ÜLKELER ARASI DEĞİŞKENLİĞİN BELİRLEYİCİ UNSURLARININ KEŞFİ

Yıl 2012, , 177 - 197, 20.06.2012

Jale Tosun

https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.131

Öz

Avrupa Devletleri uluslararası örgütlerce desteklenen çevre politikası
araçlarını benimseme konusunda genellikle görece homojen bir küme
oluşturmaktadır. Avrupa Birliği’nin sadece üye devletleri değil komşu ülkeleri de
etkileyen düzenleyici işbirliği ve uyuma yönelik çabaları göz önüne alındığında, söz
konusu göreli homojenlik şaşırtıcı değildir. Bu görece istikrarlı ampirik tablo
karşısında ise Avrupa ülkelerinin Orman Sertifikasyonu Onay Programı’na üyelik
açısından sergilediği farklılık oldukça şaşırtıcıdır. Bu makale ülkeler arası
değişkenliği açıklamak amacıyla olay tarihi analiziyle test edilen talep-yönlü teorik
bir argüman geliştirmektedir. Ampirik analiz Orman Sertifikasyonu Onay Programı’na üyeliğin en önemli iki iticisinin orman ürünlerinin değeri ve orman
alanlarının büyüklüğü olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupa Birliği, orman sertifikası, sürdürülebilir orman yönetimi

AVRUPA’DA ORMAN SERTİFİKASYONU: ÜLKELER ARASI DEĞİŞKENLİĞİN BELİRLEYİCİ UNSURLARININ KEŞFİ

Öz

Kaynakça

• Arts, B., and Buizer, M. (2009). Forests, Discourses, Institutions: A discursive-institutional Analysis of global Forest Governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(5/6), 340-347.
• Auld, G., Gulbrandsen, L.H. and McDermott, C.L. (2008). Certification Schemes and the Impacts on Forests and Forestry. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33(1), 187-211.
• Başkent, E.Z., Terzioğlu, S. and Başkaya, Ş. (2008). Developing and implementing multipleuse forest management planning in Turkey. Environmental Management, 42(1), 37-48.
• Box-Steffensmeier, J. and Jones, B. (2004). Event History Modeling: A Guide for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bowers, J. (2005). Instrument Choice for sustainable Development: An Application to the Forestry Sector. Forest Policy and Economics, 7(1), 97-107.
• Braun, D. and Gilardi, F. (2006). Taking Galton’s Problem Seriously – Towards a Theory of Policy Diffusion. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 18(3), 298-322.
• Cashore, B., Auld, G. and Newsom, D. (2003). Forest Certification (Eco-Labeling) Programs and their policy-making Authority: Explaining Divergence among North American and European case Studies. Forest Policy and Economic, 5(3), 225-247.
• Cashore, B., Egan, E., Auld, G. and Newsom, D. (2007). Revisiting theories of nonstate market driven (NSMD) governance: lessons from the Finnish forest certification experience. Global Environmental Politics, 7(1), 1-44.
• Cashore, B., Van Kooten, G.C., Vertinsky, I., Auld, G., and Affolderbach, J, (2005). Private or Self Regulation? A comparative Study of Forest Certification Choices in Canada, the United States and Germany. Forest Policy and Economics, 7(1), 53–69.
• Cerit Mazlum, S. (2009). Bir Sosyal Politika Sorunu Olarak Küresel İklim Değişikliği ve Yerel Yönetim Politikaları. Kamu’da Sosyal Politika, 3(9), 51-54.
• Environmental Technologies Action Plan (2007). Promotion of Sustainable Forestry in Germany and Romania. Retrieved 18.03. 2011, from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/etap/inaction/pdfs/feb07_sustainable_forestry. pdf
• Eriksson, L.O., Sallnas, O. and Stahl, G. (2007). Forest certification and Swedish wood supply. Forest Policy and Economics, 9(5), 452-463.
• FSC (2011). Global FSC Certificates: Type and Distribution. December 2011. Retrieved 28.12. 2011, from http://www.fsc.org/fileadmin/webdata/public/document_center/powerpoints_graphs/facts _figures/2011-11-15-Global-FSC-Certificates-EN.pdf.
• Gulbrandsen, L.H. (2004). Overlapping public and private governance: can forest certification fill the gaps in the global forest regime? Global Environmental Politics, 4(2), 75-99.
• Gulbrandsen, L.H. (2005). Sustainable Forestry in Sweden: The Effect of Competition Among Private Certification Schemes. The Journal of Environment and Development, 14(3), 338-355.
• Gulbrandsen, L.H. (2010). Transnational Environmental Governance: The Emergence and Effects of the Certification of Forests and Fisheries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Hickey, G.M., (2008). Evaluating sustainable Forest Management. Ecological Indicators, 8(2), 109-114.
• 196 FOREST CERTIFICATION IN EUROPE
• Holzinger, K. and Knill, C. (2008). ‘Theoretical framework: causal factors and convergence expectations’. K. Holzinger, C. Knill and B. Arts (eds). in Environmental Policy Convergence in Europe? The Impact of International Institutions and Trade, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 30-63.
• Holzinger, K., Knill, C. and Sommerer, T. (2008). Environmental Policy Convergence? The Impact of international Harmonization, transnational Communication and regulatory Competition. International Organization, 62(4), 533-587.
• Izci, R. (2005). ‘The Impact of European Union on Environmental Policy’. F. Adaman and M. Arsel (eds). Environmentalism in Turkey, Aldershot: Ashgate, 87-101.
• Jordana, J. and Levi-Faur, D. (2005). The Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism in Latin America: Sectoral and National Channels in the Making of New Order. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 598(1), 102-124.
• Klooster, D. (2005). Environmental certification of forests: the evolution of environmental governance in a commodity network. Journal of Rural Studies, 21(4), 403-417.
• Knill, C. and Tosun, J. (2009). Post-accession transposition of EU law in the new Member States: a cross-country comparison. European Integration online Papers Special Issue 2(13). Retrieved 12.11.2011, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/viewFile/2009_018a/134
• Knill, C., Tosun, J. and Heichel, S. (2008). Balancing Competitiveness and Conditionality: Environmental Policy-making in Low-regulating Countries. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(7), 1019-1040.
• Koleva, M. (2005) Forest Certification – Do Governments Have A Role? Retrieved 18.11. 2011, from http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/docs/dp/dp-44.pdf,
• Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
• Overdevest, C. (2010). Comparing forest certification schemes: the case of ratcheting standards in the forest sector. Socio-Economic Review, 8(1), 47-76.
• Radaelli, C. (2009). Measuring policy learning: regulatory impact assessment in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(8), 1145-1164.
• Rametsteiner, E., and Simula, M. (2003). Forest certification – an instrument to promote sustainable forest management? Journal of Environmental Management, 67(1), 87-98.
• Rose, R. (1991). What Is Lesson-Drawing? Journal of Public Policy, 2(1), 3-30.
• Sandulescu, E., Wagner, J.E., Pailler, S., Floyd, D.W. and Davis, C.J. (2007). Policy analysis of a government-sanctioned management plan for a community-owned forest in Romania. Forest Policy and Economics, 10(1/2), 14-24.
• Schimmelfennig, F., Sedelmeier, U. (eds.) (2005). Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• Simmons, B.A., and Elkins, Z. (2004). The globalization of liberalization: policy diffusion in the international political economy. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 171-189.
• Türkoglu, T. (2009). Türkiye Ormanlarının ve Orman Ürünlerinin Sertifikalandırılması. Retrieved 12.11.2011, from
• MARMARA JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES 197 http://sablon.sdu.edu.tr/fakulteler/orman/ormis/bildiriler/37.pdf Van Kooten, G.C., Nelson, H.W., and Vertinsky, I. (2005). Certification of sustainable Forest Management Practices: A global Perspective on why Countries certify. Forest Policy and Economics, 7(6), 857-867.
• Wijewardana, D. (2008). Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: The road travelled and the way ahead. Ecological Indicators, 8(2), 115-122.