Reflections on theories in forest policy: Testing, combining or building?

Theories constitute an important part of science and contribute to its advancement. As a consequence of the variety of scientific approaches available, students of forest policy can choose between three alternatives: (i) relying on and applying an existing theory, (ii) attempting to combine several theories in a new context or (iii) creating a new theory based on their own experiences and findings from desk research and/or empirical surveys. Whereas alternatives (i) and (ii) have been chosen in the majority of scientific studies focusing on the relationship between forests and people, theory building has not as yet been commonly applied in forest policy research. Seeking to discern both the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches, the methodological aspects of each are emphasised in this paper. Subsequent to an outline of the general significance of theories for scientific research practised in the social sciences, and a depiction of the features of ‘good’ theories, the widespread procedure for testing existing theories is outlined. This is followed by descriptions of several techniques employed in theory building. Finally, some conclusions on the application of existing theories and on theory building in the context of forest policy are presented. It is argued that given its innovative potential, theory building should not be neglected in forest policy discipline.

Research Highlights
► In forest policy science, theory building has not been in the center of interest up to now.
► Instead, mainly theories from other disciplines were tested or applied.
► Deliberately building theories might increase the innovative qualities of forest policy science.