首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


“The man,the administration and the counter-discourse”: An analysis of the sudden turn in Dutch nature conservation policy
Institution:1. Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore;2. Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, Canada;1. The Ohio State University School of Environment and Natural Resources, 210 Kottman Hall, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, United States;2. Research Group Governance, Participation and Sustainability, Institute for Environmental and Sustainability Communication and Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststr. 1, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany;1. School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom;2. CENSE – Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal;1. Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Germany;2. Zentrum Technik und Gesellschaft, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany;3. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, Germany;1. School of Planning and Geography, Glamorgan Building, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom;2. School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Portland Square, Plymouth University, Plymouth, England, United Kingdom
Abstract:The Netherlands were at the forefront of European nature conservation policy until recently. For years, a stable ‘social contract’ around Dutch nature conservation existed. To the surprise of many, this stability suddenly disappeared and Dutch nature policy has taken a dramatic shift with changing discourses on nature conservation, the halting of implementation of several key-policies and budget cuts up to 70%. This paper engages with discursive-institutionalism to understand such abrupt institutional changes through emerging ideas and discourses that reshape and undermine existing institutional arrangements. We show how the institutionalization of policy not only engendered but also restricted the impact of critical discourses in the 1990s and 2000s. However, critical discourses eventually played an important role in the sudden turn in nature conservation policy. The rise of a general populist discourse and the economic crisis contributed to the credibility of critical discourses and their translation into popular frames and storylines. Authoritative actors such as a new State Secretary opened up popular media for the critical discourses and contributed to their resonance among larger audiences. As such, the man and his new administration successfully used already existing counter-discourses to de-legitimise nature policy and break down important institutional arrangements at a pace unseen in Dutch politics. Adding a discursive element to institutionalism provides for analytical tools to understand change from both external as well as internal forces. In turn, enriching discourse theory with insights from neo-institutionalism helps to evaluate which ideas and discourses become materialized in policy and practice.
Keywords:Nature conservation  Policy change  EU  Netherlands  Discursive institutionalism  Public participation
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号