Although forestry is not a regulated area in the European Union (EU), numerous decisions in other policy areas are related to forestry. However, its position outside of formal policy-making can result in the fact that actors, such as those within the forest industry, may have a larger role when compared to other policy sectors where the state system has an integrated role. This explorative study reviews the ways in which the forest industry in Sweden, one of the EU states with the most forest land, tries to protect and promote its interests on an EU-level. It concludes that a main way to influence decision-making in the EU is through lobbying, through its own organisations and through the transnational trade association, The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI). The study shows that collectively conducted lobbying is largely preferred which means that internal communication is important since lobbying at the EU-level is potentially limited by the diverging positions of trade association members as well as among the different trade associations themselves.
References
[1]
European Commission. EU Forests and Related Policies. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/home_en.htm (accessed on 10 October 2012).
[2]
Pülzl, H. Evaluation of European Community Regulations and Policies Relevant to Forest Policy; Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management: Vienna, Austria, 2005.
[3]
Quittkat, C.; Kotzian, P. Lobbying via consultation—Territorial and functional interests in the commission’s consultation regime. J. Eur. Integrat. 2011, 33, 401–418, doi:10.1080/07036337.2011.582280.
[4]
Gornitzka, ？.; Sverdrup, U. Axess of experts: Information and EU decision-making. W. Eur. Polit. 2011, 34, 48–70, doi:10.1080/01402382.2011.523544.
[5]
Lobbying the European Union: Institutions, Actors and Issues; Coen, D., Richardson, J., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 1–390.
[6]
Eising, R. Interest groups and the European Union. In European Union Politics; Cini, M., Ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 192–177.
[7]
Mazey, S.; Richardson, J. The logic of organization: Interest groups. In European Union Power and Policy-Making; Richardson, J., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1996; pp. 217–237.
[8]
Communication to the European Parliament on an EU Forest Action Plan. European Commission Agriculture and Rural Development. 2006. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/fore/action_plan/index_en.htm (accessed on 10 December 2012).
[9]
Jutterstr？m, M. Att p？verka beslut—f？retag i EUs regels？ttande. Ph.D. Thesis, The Economic Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, March 2004.
[10]
Jutterstr？m, M. F？retagens EU-lobbying—en inblick i de horisontella relationerna. Tv？rsnitt 2006, 2, 28–31.
[11]
Constantelos, J. Interest groups strategies in multi-level Europe. J. Publ. Aff. 2007, 7, 39–53, doi:10.1002/pa.243.
[12]
Miard, K. Lobbying during the Revision of the European Emissions Trading System: Easier for Swedish Industrial Insiders than for Norwegian Outsiders? Master Thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, November 2010.
[13]
Bouwen, P. Corporate lobbying in the European Union: The logic of access. J. Eur. Publ. Pol. 2002, 9, 365–390, doi:10.1080/13501760210138796.
[14]
Bouwen, P.; McCown, M. Lobbying versus litigation: Political and legal strategies of Interest representation in the European Union. J. Eur. Publ. Pol. 2007, 14, 422–443, doi:10.1080/13501760701243798.
[15]
Cawson, A. Pluralism, corporatism and the role of the state. Govt. Oppos. 1978, 13, 178–198, doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.1978.tb00542.x.
[16]
Dahl, R.A. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 1961; pp. 1–355.
[17]
Rokkan, S. Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism. In Political Oppositions in Western Democracies; Dahl, R.A., Ed.; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 1966; p. 40.
[18]
Schmitter, P.C. Still the century of corporatism? Rev. Polit. 1974, 36, 85–131, doi:10.1017/S0034670500022178.
[19]
Smith, M.J. Pluralism, reformed pluralism and neopluralism: The role of pressure groups in policy making. Polit. Stud. 1990, 38, 302–322, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1990.tb01495.x.
[20]
Coen, D. The evolution of the large firm as a political actor in the European Union. J. Eur. Publ. Pol. 1997, 4, 91–108, doi:10.1080/135017697344253.
[21]
Coen, D. The European business interest and the nation state: Large-Firm lobbying in the European Union and member states. J. Pub. Pol. 1998, 18, 75–100, doi:10.1017/S0143814X9800004X.
[22]
Coen, D. Business Lobbying in the EU. In Lobbying the European Union, Institutions, Actors and Issues; Coen, D., Richardson, J., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009.
[23]
Eising, R. The access of business interests to EU political institutions: Towards elite pluralism? J. Eur. Publ. Pol. 2007, 14, 345–375.
[24]
Greenwood, J. Trade Associations, Change and the New Activism. In New Activism and the Corporate Response; John, S., Thomson, S., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, UK, 2003; pp. 49–65.
[25]
Janse, G. Characteristics and challenges of forest sector communication in the EU. Silva Fennica 2007, 41, 731–753.
[26]
Communications Strategy for Forest-based Industries in the EU; EU Forest-based Industries Working Group on Communications: Bruxelles, Belgium, 2004.
[27]
Janse, G. European Co-Operation and Networking in Forest Communication; European Forest Institute: Joensuu, Finland, 2005.
[28]
Dalfelt, S.; Falkheimer, J. PR-industrin, lobbyisterna & demokratin. Nordicom Information 2001, 23, 93–103.
[29]
Johnson, A. R？tt att lobba. Om politisk p？verkan efter korporatismens fall; Timbro: Stockholm, Sweden, 1999; pp. 1–106.
[30]
Jaatinen, M. Lobbying Political Issues. A Contingency Model of Effective Lobbying Strategies; Helsingin yliopiston verkkojulkaisut: Helsinki, Finland, 1999; p. 22.
[31]
Binderkrantz, A. Different Groups, different strategies: How interest groups pursue their political ambitions. Scand Polit. Stud. 2008, 31, 173–200, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.2008.00201.x.
[32]
Swedish Forest Industries Federation (SFIF). Available online: http://www.skogsindustrierna.org (accessed on 4 June 2013).
[33]
Andersson, T. En gemensam europeisk skogspolitik? En integrationsteoretisk studie av ett politikomr？de p？ tillv？xt. Ph.D. Thesis, Ume？ University, Ume？, Sweden, 2007.
[34]
Bj？rstig, T. The Swedish forest sector’s approach to a formalized forest policy within the EU. Forest Pol. Econ. 2013, 26, 131–137, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.08.005.
[35]
Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI). Available online: http://www.cepi.org (accessed on 22 October 2012).
[36]
Matthews, E.O. Should we go steady? Patterns of cooperative lobbying behaviour among forestry advocacy groups in France and Sweden. In Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (APSA), Toronto, Canada, 2–6 September 20; pp. 1–46.
[37]
Kvale, S. Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing; Sage Publications: London, UK, 1996.
[38]
Berkhout, J. Political Activities of Interest Organizations: Conflicting Interests, Converging Strategies. Ph.D. Thesis, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands, May 2010.
[39]
Eising, R. The Political Economy of State-Business Relations in Europe: Interest Mediation, Capitalism and EU Policy-Making; Routledge: London, UK, 2009; pp. 1–228.
[40]
Grote, J.R.; Lang, A.; Schneider, V. Organized Business Interests in Changing Environments: The Complexity of Adaptation; Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, UK, 2008; pp. 1–277.
[41]
Blom-Hansen, J.; Daugbjerg, C. Staten og de organiserede interesser: en teoretisk introduktion. In Magtens organisering: Stat og interesseorganisationer i Danmark; Systime: Aarhus, Denmark, 1999; pp. 6–21.
