Management of German national parks: The role of institutions and actors in defining goals and making decisions

Abstract

The process of defining goals and decision-making in German national parks (NLPs) takes place in the context of a large set of rules and a diversity of actors with different interests. As a result, unique management approaches and practices are applied in each of the 16 NLPs in Germany. This study investigates, how NLP administrations make these decisions.A conservation policy analysis based on the analytical framework of actor-centred institutionalism should identify the most salient drivers of goal setting and decision-making at the meso-level. Using a mixed-methods research approach, the range of influencing factors can be gathered from several perspectives. This study analyses 50 documents, 22 interviews with NLP managers, and an online survey of 179 actors within and associated with national park administration. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches were applied to analyse the generated data.The results show that broadly applicable institutions such as laws and decrees define the main goal to “let nature be nature” but do not determine specific actions for the national parks. The most important institutions for NLP managers are those that apply only to a single NLP, such as NLP laws or management plans. In addition to the existing rules, various interests of different actors have an impact on the decision-making process. Key actors around NLP management are politicians, ministries and scientists. Most contradictory perspectives and positions on non-intervention management are formulated by land users from the agricultural and forestry sectors who fear negative effects of this management approach.In this context, negotiations are a common governance approach to implement participatory elements; different actors have varying levels of importance within these participation processes.The large variety of influencing factors illustrates that policy outcomes do not singularly depend on legislative intervention. Besides actors and institutions, individual orientations and different contexts at a local level, as well as historical circumstance also need to be considered. To maintain or expand public acceptance, it is recommended that NLP administrations act with a high level of transparency and focus on expanded sharing of information.