Sinking into standing forests or timber for climate change mitigation: Instrument constituencies and policy preferences

Different policy instruments can pursue the same policy goal, such as climate change mitigation, while serving very different individual interests. The question of how carbon should be stored, e.g. as a standing stock (forest sink) or in timber for material use (timber sink) is a prime example of such a goal that can be pursued with different policy options and instruments. What is more, for stakeholders and policymakers there is no clear evidence-based recommendation for which sink to prioritize, which leads to diverging preferences for a policy. We argue that the differences in preferences are not based on the effectiveness of the policy instrument in achieving the (environmental) goal, but on two other factors: 1) the existence of an instrument constituency promoting one specific policy option and related policy instruments, and 2) the degree of governmental intervention associated with an instrument. We use the concept of an instrument constituency to explain the preference for one policy option with different instruments over another in the absence of an evidence-based recommendation for a solution. Using the case study of the Swiss constituent state (canton) of Lucerne, we analyse interest groups, politicians and public-administrative actors' core beliefs in relation to nature conservation and nature-use, their policy preferences regarding forest versus timber sink as well as their preferences for different policy instruments to promote the forest and/or timber sink. Using data from an online survey conducted in 2020, we find two coalitions of actors: one holding the core belief that nature conservation takes priority over nature-use, the other prioritizing nature-use and assuming that these objectives can be pursued simultaneously. In sum, we observe an instrument constituency forming around a timber sink instrument in the form of a certification scheme in this Swiss case. The instrument which was developed by the timber industry, is integrated into the national compliance carbon market and supported by a broad range of respondents both holding nature conservation and nature-use core beliefs. Whether our application of the instrument constituency concept can explain international cases where the certification for forest sinks has gained ground during the last years, is a question to be addressed in future research. • One coalition believes nature conservation takes priority over nature use • The other coalition prioritizes nature use, but believes both goals can be reached coevally • An instrument constituency forms around a timber sink instrument in this Swiss case