ABSTRACT
This chapter has compared two high profile forest conflicts to show the important and constructive role conflicts can play as drivers of social change by improving the access of previously disadvantaged groups to decision-making processes. By comparing the conflict management responses adopted by the government forest agencies in Finland and British Columbia, the analysis has shown how the extent to which conflicts contribute constructively to change depends not only on the intention of those who challenge the system, but centrally on the response of those in power. For both policy-making and planning practice, the lesson from the cases is to think of protests as a message of something that needs attention and constructive engagement. The chapter draws on three different types of literatures and theoretical discussions that together contribute to a multi-causal analytical framework: policy regime framework, collaborative planning theory and conflict theory.
