Challenging the dominant path of forest policy? Bottom-up, citizen forest management initiatives in a top-down governance context in Poland

Abstract

Forest governance in Poland is characterised by the dominance of public forest ownership and hierarchical, top-down policy-making. These governance arrangements, characteristic of post-socialist countries, have traditionally been challenged by environmental NGOs, advocating stronger protection of old-growths. Recently, institutional stability of the forest policy field has been increasingly influenced by numerous citizen initiatives responding to technocratic local forest management decisions. These initiatives, so far not analysed scientifically, vary in terms of the issues addressed, actions employed, and the local actors involved. In the paper we use a data base of 274 such initiatives to explore their manifestation, actors involved, main postulates, and the responses of forest managers. Based on this, we explored whether these initiatives pose challenges to the traditional forest management and, if so, what kind. We imply that the growth of bottom-up initiatives indicates a growing diversity of beliefs and values regarding forests and the increasing determination of local people to impact local environmental decisions. Furthermore, informed by the institutional theory, we argue that the growth of local initiatives, particularly during and after Covid-19 pandemics, suggests the eroding legitimacy of dominant rules and discourses. This process is particularly visible in sub-urban forests, which are increasingly seen through a ‘well-being discourse’ that highlights cultural, regulative and supportive functions of forests, while putting less emphasis on provisioning functions. We also identify a networking trend among the initiatives that unifies their discursive background and enhances their influence at the national level. Therefore, local activists can be seen as a new advocacy group in the Polish forest policy subsystem. In response to local demands public forest administration has introduced institutional changes enhancing participation but their impact is still to be assessed. We recommend establishing a monitoring programme to track new participatory practices and to identify and promote best practices.