Nilsson Jens, Sandström Annica
Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts, Luleå University of Technology, 971 87, Luleå, Sweden.
Ambio. 2025 May;54(5):899-911. doi: 10.1007/s13280-024-02117-1. Epub 2024 Dec 20.
Our study explores governing of European eel in Sweden. The paper aims to analyze and tentatively explain the degree of policy coherence between different political levels and discuss implications for management. The study focuses on the Advocacy Coalition Framework and a qualitative methodology. Results show that EU and Swedish eel fishery policies are based on partly different beliefs about prioritized groups, problem descriptions, and policy preferences. Swedish policy is more considerate of fishery, attentive to the problems of hydropower, and hesitant toward fishery closures, than is the EU. These differences can be understood by the positions and power of the two advocacy coalitions competing for influence at the national level. National decisions align more with the coalition that includes fishery organizations, the Swedish Board of Agriculture, and coastal municipalities than with the beliefs of the coalition involving environmental-and sport fishing organizations and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
我们的研究探讨了瑞典对欧洲鳗鲡的管理。本文旨在分析并初步解释不同政治层面之间的政策连贯程度，并讨论其对管理的影响。该研究聚焦于倡导联盟框架和一种定性研究方法。结果表明，欧盟和瑞典的鳗鱼渔业政策在优先群体、问题描述和政策偏好等方面部分基于不同的信念。与欧盟相比，瑞典政策更考虑渔业，关注水电问题，对渔业关闭持犹豫态度。这些差异可以通过在国家层面争夺影响力的两个倡导联盟的立场和权力来理解。国家决策与包括渔业组织、瑞典农业委员会和沿海市政当局的联盟的信念更为一致，而非与涉及环境和休闲钓鱼组织以及瑞典环境保护局的联盟的信念一致。
