oru.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 72) Show all publications
Boström, M., Uggla, Y. & Hansson, V. (2018). Environmental representatives: whom, what, and how are they representing?. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 20(1), 114-127
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Environmental representatives: whom, what, and how are they representing?
2018 (English)In: Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, ISSN 1523-908X, E-ISSN 1522-7200, Vol. 20, no 1, p. 114-127Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Literature on environment and representation in politics, management, and deliberation has paid little attention on the people involved: environmental representatives. The aim of this paper is to illuminate how environmental representatives in various organizational and professional contexts understand their role as representatives, and how they are shaped by their contexts. The paper argues that it is crucial to learn about the everyday reality of individual representatives to better understand the limitations and possibilities they face. The study is based on 19 interviews with environmental representatives from five organizational and professional contexts: the state, civil society, business, science, and media in Sweden. The paper concludes that some differences in experiences, for example, in freedom and constraint, can be understood in relation to the representatives’organizational and professional affiliation. Other experiences are common: (i) all categories stated the importance of being impartial and well read; (ii) complex layers of affiliation imply that representation requires sensitivity and adjustment between different situations; and (iii) the performative aspects of representation include the representatives’claims-making, others’attributions, and long-term learning of their role. The article contributes an understanding of organizational conditions and the often paradoxical, layered, multifaceted, and cautious representation these individual actors perform.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Routledge, 2018
Keywords
Environment; organization; profession; representation; representatives; role
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology) Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63810 (URN)10.1080/1523908X.2017.1332522 (DOI)000427056700008 ()2-s2.0-85019758213 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-01-03 Created: 2018-01-03 Last updated: 2018-04-13Bibliographically approved
Uggla, Y. (2018). Framing and visualising biodiversity in EU policy. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 15(1), 103-122
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Framing and visualising biodiversity in EU policy
2018 (English)In: Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, ISSN 1943-815X, E-ISSN 1943-8168, Vol. 15, no 1, p. 103-122Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This study seeks insights into how biodiversity is framed and visualised in EU policy. The paper presents analysis of both the visual content and written text of two brochures summarising two central EU biodiversity policy documents. The study illustrates how the two modes of communication differ. First, the written text primarily presents an anthropocentric and economic framing of biodiversity values, whereas the visual material generally features the beauty and wonders of nature. Second, the written text strongly emphasises the threats to biodiversity and the detrimental side of human activity, whereas the visual material generally shows close relationships between humans and nature, with humans engaged in small-scale outdoor activities. The analysis illustrates how various representations of biodiversity intersect in the same context, and that the visual representation decontextualises the issue of biodiversity loss from the human exploitation of natural resources and the concrete actions and processes causing it.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018
Keywords
Biodiversity, EU policy, nature, representations, visualisation
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology) Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-66780 (URN)10.1080/1943815X.2018.1455714 (DOI)000430940300001 ()
Funder
Swedish Research Council FormasMistra - The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental ResearchSwedish Research Council Formas
Note

Funding Agency:

Stiftelsen for Miljöstrategisk Forskning 

Available from: 2018-04-26 Created: 2018-04-26 Last updated: 2018-05-14Bibliographically approved
Boström, M., Lidskog, R. & Uggla, Y. (2017). A reflexive look at reflexivity in environmental sociology. Environmental Sociology, 3(1), 6-16, Article ID .
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A reflexive look at reflexivity in environmental sociology
2017 (English)In: Environmental Sociology, ISSN 2325-1042, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 6-16, article id Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Reflexivity is a central concept in environmental sociology, as in environmental social science in general. The concept is often connected to topics such as modernity, governance, expertise, and consumption. Reflexivity is presented as a means for taking constructive steps towards sustainability as it recognizes complexity, uncertainty, dilemmas, and ambivalence. Critical discussion of the conceptual meaning and usage of reflexivity is therefore needed. Is it a useful theoretical concept for understanding various sustainability issues? Is ‘more reflexivity’ relevant and useful advice that environmental sociologists can give in communicating with other disciplines, policymakers, and practitioners? This article explores the conceptual meaning of reflexivity and assesses its relevance for environmental sociology. In particular, it reviews its usages in three research fields; expertise, governance, and citizen-consumers. The paper furthermore discusses the spatial and temporal boundaries of reflexivity. It concludes by discussing how the concept can be a useful analytical concept in environmental sociology, at the same time as it warns against an exaggerated and unreflexive use of the concept.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Routledge, 2017
Keywords
Reflexivity, environmental governance, expertise, citizen, consumer
National Category
Sociology
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-54286 (URN)10.1080/23251042.2016.1237336 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-01-05 Created: 2017-01-05 Last updated: 2018-04-09Bibliographically approved
Lidskog, R., Löfmarck, E. & Uggla, Y. (2017). Forestry and the environment: Tensions in a transforming modernity. Sociologisk forskning, 54(4), 283-286
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Forestry and the environment: Tensions in a transforming modernity
2017 (English)In: Sociologisk forskning, ISSN 0038-0342, Vol. 54, no 4, p. 283-286Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Sweden is often described as an environmental forerunner and one of the most ecologically modernized countries in the world, one where social welfare, economic growth and environmental protection mutually support each other. Examining the case of Swedish forestry, we discuss a number of tensions in this sector that mirror some general tensions in Swedish society and explore how these tensions can be understood as part of a transforming modernity.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sweden: Swedish Sociological Association, 2017
Keywords
Ecological modernization, second modernity, Swedish forestry
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63889 (URN)000419291200004 ()
Available from: 2018-01-05 Created: 2018-01-05 Last updated: 2018-01-23Bibliographically approved
Löfmarck, E., Uggla, Y. & Lidskog, R. (2017). Freedom with what?: Interpretations of “responsibility” in Swedish forestry practice. Forest Policy and Economics, 75, 34-40
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Freedom with what?: Interpretations of “responsibility” in Swedish forestry practice
2017 (English)In: Forest Policy and Economics, ISSN 1389-9341, E-ISSN 1872-7050, Vol. 75, p. 34-40Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Responsibility is a key aspect of all regulation, and forest regulation is no exception. Howshould responsibility be understood and used in a time characterized by complexity and uncertainty? This paper develops a typology that distinguishes six notions of responsibility and then employs it in analyzing interpretations of responsibility in Swedish forestry practice. The Swedish forest management system is a deregulated system structured by the governing principle of “freedom with responsibility.” By investigating how responsibility is understood and enacted by forest consultants and forest owners, we demonstrate the practical fluidity of the responsibility concept. We emphasize the need for an understanding of responsibility that fosters sensitivity and adaptiveness to external issues and actors in the face of uncertainty, and identify obstacles in current forestry policy and practice to enacting such an understanding.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 2017
Keywords
Responsibility, regulation, norms, forest governance, forest policy
National Category
Sociology Forest Science
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-54518 (URN)10.1016/j.forpol.2016.12.004 (DOI)000393263700004 ()2-s2.0-85006507884 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Mistra - The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research
Note

Funding Agencies:

Forestry Research Institute of Sweden (Skogforsk)

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU)

Umeå University

Available from: 2017-01-12 Created: 2017-01-12 Last updated: 2017-11-29Bibliographically approved
Uggla, Y. & Soneryd, L. (2017). Green governmentality, responsibilization and resistance: International ENGOs’ issue framing of future energy supply and climate change mitigation. Socijalna Ekologija, 26(3), 87-104
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Green governmentality, responsibilization and resistance: International ENGOs’ issue framing of future energy supply and climate change mitigation
2017 (English)In: Socijalna Ekologija, ISSN 1330-0113, E-ISSN 1849-0360, Vol. 26, no 3, p. 87-104Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

The starting point for this paper is the increasing shift towards green governmentality as a particular mode of governance in the Western world, implying a shift from state-centered regulation to market-based mechanisms. In this paper, we are particularly interested in the role of environmental nongovernmental organizations (ENGOs) in this form of governance. The central question concerns how international ENGOs’ approaches to energy supply and climate mitigation can be understood as aligned with or dissenting from green governmentality. To approach this issue, we analyze the major energy reports of three international ENGOs –i.e. Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and WWF –focusing on their issue framings of future energy supply and climate change mitigation. We conclude that these ENGOs’ issue framings are aligned with green governmentality to varying degrees, involving the economization of environmental issues and the responsibilization and moralization of economic actions. Th ese ENGOs also to varying degrees express opposition or resistance to this mode of governance, for example, by opening up the discussion of various aspects of responsibility, including both remedy and culpability.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Croatian Sociological Society, Institute of Sociology at Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb, 2017
Keywords
green governmentality, responsibilization, politics of responsibility, ENGOs, energy supply, climate change
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63740 (URN)10.17234/SocEkol.26.3.2 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-01-02 Created: 2018-01-02 Last updated: 2018-03-19Bibliographically approved
Uggla, Y. (2017). Negotiating responsible forestry: forest owners’ understanding of responsibility for multiple forest values. Environmental Sociology
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Negotiating responsible forestry: forest owners’ understanding of responsibility for multiple forest values
2017 (English)In: Environmental Sociology, ISSN 2325-1042Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

The governance trend toward decentralization, which implies transfer of responsibility to market actors to voluntarily respond to socio-environmental issues, is evident in forest policy. Parallel to this trend, mandatory environmental legislation circumscribes forest owners’ scope of action. Drawing on the example of Sweden and based on qualitative interviews, this study examined how non-industrial private forest owners understand and construct their responsibility for multiple forest values in an ambiguous policy situation. By juxtaposition of the concepts of governmentality and discursive negotiation of responsibility, the study contributes insights into not only how people are governed but also how they express dissent or resistance. The results of this study clearly elucidate that individuals are never fully controlled by discourse and that responsibilization of individual forest owners cannot guarantee a certain outcome. Additionally, the study contributes some insights into the predicament of being simultaneously addressed as an autonomous, capable actor and subject to direction and mandatory rules.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Routledge, 2017
Keywords
Forest policy, forest values, governmentality, responsibility, Sweden
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63311 (URN)10.1080/23251042.2017.1414659 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-12-12 Created: 2017-12-12 Last updated: 2017-12-13Bibliographically approved
Boström, M. & Uggla, Y. (2016). A sociology of environmental representation. Environmental Sociology, 2(4), 355-364
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A sociology of environmental representation
2016 (English)In: Environmental Sociology, ISSN 2325-1042, Vol. 2, no 4, p. 355-364Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The environment cannot plead its own case but must be represented. The aim of this paper is to elaborate on the concept of representation and demonstrate its relevance for environmental sociology. Drawing on Pitkin’s classic work on representation, we discuss representation as both ‘acting for’ and ‘standing for’. We also make a distinction between actors (representatives) and devices used as representations (e.g. descriptions, graphs and images), while discussing the intertwinement of these two aspects in representative practices. This paper stresses the performativity dimension and social embeddedness of representative practices. It sheds light on different meanings and implications of environmental representation, examining issues of claimmaking and what it means to represent the environment in various instances. Given the complex, durable and transboundary character of many topical environmental problems, the paper argues that it is essential to recognize and understand environmental representation in all its variety. It is moreover argued that a sociological elaboration of the concept of representation provides a basis for understanding the conditions for environmental politics, governance, management and

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge, 2016
Keywords
claims-making, environment, environmental communication, performativity, practices, representation, representatives, visibility
National Category
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-53656 (URN)10.1080/23251042.2016.1213611 (DOI)
Available from: 2016-11-25 Created: 2016-11-25 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved
Uggla, Y. & Uggla, F. (2016). CHANGE: The European Commission's Climat Campaign as a Technique of Government. In: H. Bulkeley, M. Paterson och J. Stripple (Ed.), Towards a cultural politics of climate change: devices, desires, and dissent (pp. 24-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>CHANGE: The European Commission's Climat Campaign as a Technique of Government
2016 (English)In: Towards a cultural politics of climate change: devices, desires, and dissent / [ed] H. Bulkeley, M. Paterson och J. Stripple, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016, p. 24-36Chapter in book (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016
National Category
Sociology
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-52502 (URN)9781107166271 (ISBN)
Available from: 2016-09-26 Created: 2016-09-26 Last updated: 2017-10-17Bibliographically approved
Uggla, Y. & Lidskog, R. (2016). Climate risks and forest practices: Forest owners' acceptance of advice concerning climate change. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 31(6), 618-625
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Climate risks and forest practices: Forest owners' acceptance of advice concerning climate change
2016 (English)In: Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, ISSN 0282-7581, E-ISSN 1651-1891, Vol. 31, no 6, p. 618-625Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Based on qualitative interviews with Swedish forest owners this study focuses on climate change, risk management and forest governance from the perspective of the forest owners. The Swedish forest governance system has undergone extensive deregulation, with the result that social norms and knowledge dissemination are seen by the state as important means of influencing forest owners' understandings and practices. Drawing on Foucault's concept of governmentality this study contributes knowledge on how forest owners understand and manage climate-related risk and their acceptance of advice. From the interview study, three main conclusions can be drawn: (1) forest owners' considerations largely concern ordinary forestry activities; (2) knowledge about forest management and climate adaptation combines experiences and ideas from various sources; and (3) risk awareness and knowledge of “best practices” are not enough to ensure change in forestry practices. The results of this study show that the forest owners have to be selective and negotiate about what knowledge to consider relevant and meaningful for their own forest practice. Accordingly, local forest management can be understood as situated in a web of multifarious interests, claims, concerns and knowledges, where climate change adaptation is but one of several aspects that forest owners have to consider.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis Group, 2016
Keywords
Forestry, governmentality, advisory practices, risk, climate change, adaptation
National Category
Sociology
Research subject
Sociology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-51706 (URN)10.1080/02827581.2015.1134648 (DOI)000380544600009 ()2-s2.0-84955095168 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2016-08-19 Created: 2016-08-19 Last updated: 2017-11-28Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-9274-3634

Search in DiVA

Show all publications