- Download PDF - 

SEEFOR 2 (1): 35-40
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.11-04 

Preliminary communication


Forestry and Environment Legislation in Collision – Case Study Serbia

Radovan Nevenić 1*, Zoran Poduška 1, Renata Gagić-Serdar 1, Ljubinko Rakonjac 1

Institute of Forestry, Kneza Višeslava 3, 11030 Belgrade, Serbia

* Corresponding author: e-mail:  

NEVENIĆ R, PODUŠKA Z, GAGIĆ-SERDAR R, RAKONJAC LJ 2011 Forestry and Environment Legislation in Collision – Case Study Serbia. South-east Eur for 2 (1): 35-40. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.11-04

Cited by:        CrossRef        Google Scholar 


Background and Purpose: Conflicts in the Serbian forestry sector have not been very often used as a research topic in our country. This paper presents the results from a case study conducted in the National park 'Fruška gora'. The aim of the study was to explore the collision between forestry and environmental legislation and related institutions and organizations.
Material and Methods: Data were collected from primary and secondary sources. Primary data were collected through in-depth interviews. Interviews were conducted with the managers of the National park and the representatives of the scientific communities, private forest owners as well representatives from the relevant Ministry. The theoretical framework is a combination of the main conflict elements embedded in the structure of the main aspects like culture, conflict management and policy development.
Results and Conclusion: According to the interviewees` opinions the roots of the conflict can be found in overlapping jurisdictions of the institutions and organizations in the forestry sector as well as in the implementation of the legislative and management plans. Conflict management strategy is based on sustainable management of protected areas and better implementation of laws.

Keywords: conflict management, National Park Fruška gora, legislative, protected areas


  1. UNITED NATIONS 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity. Available at: http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf (Accessed 20 May 2010)
  2. FAO 2000 Conflict and natural resource management. In: Yasmi Y 2003: Understanding conflict in the co-management of forests: the case of Bulungan Research Forest. International Forestry Review 5 (1) p. 38
  3. WALKER GB, DANIELS SE 1997  Foundation of natural resource conflict: Conflict theory and public policy. In: Solberg B, Miina S (eds) Conflict management and participation in land management. European Forestry Institute Proceeding No. 14. Joensuu. Finland, p 7–36
  4. HELLSTRÖM E, REUNALA A 1995 Forestry conflicts from the 1950s to 1983. Research Report 3, European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland
  5. COSIER RA, DALTON DR 1990 Positive Effects of Conflict: A Field Assessment. Int J Confl Manage 1: 81-92. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb022674
  6. FAO 2000 Conflict management series: Proceedings electronic conference on addressing natural resource conflicts through community forestry (January–May 1996). Community Forestry Unit Forests, Trees and People Programme, Forestry Department. In: Yasmi Y 2003: Understanding conflict in the co-management of forests: the case of Bulungan Research Forest. International Forestry Review 5 (1), p 38
  7. PRUITT DG, KIM SH 2004 Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
  8. BARON R 1991 Positive effects of conflict: A cognitive perspective: The relative efficacy of four interventions. Employees Responsibilities and Rights Journal 4 (1): 25-36. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01390436 
  9. LEWIS C 1996 Managing Conflicts in Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK, p xii + 100
  10. HELLSTROM E 2001 Conflict cultures: Qualitative  comparative analysis of environmental conflicts in forestry. Silva Fennica 2: 1–109
  11. www.fruskagora.rs (Accessed 15 May 2011)
  12. VULETIĆ D, STOJANOVSKA M, AVDIBEGOVIĆ M,NEVENIĆ R, PETROVIĆ N, POSAVEC S, HASKA H, PERI L, BLAGOJEVIĆ D 2010 Forest Related Conflicts in the South-East European Region: Regional aspects and Case studies in Albania, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Serbia. EFI Proceedings  No. 58. ISSN 1237-8801; ISBN 978-052-5453-35-5.
  13. KROTT M 2005 Forest Policy Analysis. Springer – EFI. ISBN 1-4020-3478-4 (HB), p 15-20
  14. SHANNON M 2003 Cross-Sectoral Policy Impacts Between Forestry and other sectors. Chapter 5. Mechanisms for coordination. FAO Forestry Paper
  15. RANTALA T, PRIMMER E 2003 Value positions based on forest policy stakeholders’ rhetoric in Finland. Environ Sci Policy 6: 205-216. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(03)00040-6


© 2015 by the Croatian Forest Research Institute. This is an Open Access paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).