The constitution of power in Norway's protected areas: on shore and in the sea

This article aims at comparing power resources that opponents to environmental policy apply in shaping and constructing discourses that contest the implementation of marine and terrestrial area protection. Document analyses and qualitative interviews have been undertaken with key actors and documents in two case areas to show how actors, knowledge, and financial and organisational capacities are introduced in the planning processes in order to contest the dominating environmental discourse established by environmental authorities. The results demonstrate how opponents to the terrestrial case were rather fragmented, consisting of a wide range of local and regional actors with various interests and agendas, and without substantial financial and organisational strength. Here, the environmental administration managed to create a partnership with local authorities that eventually proclaimed the national park as a win–win situation for local society. As a contrast, the opponents to the marine case had strong organisational, financial and even scientific capacities that were effectively unified with local authorities in the Skjerstad fjord. Here, the win–win situation was not accepted by the local parties. Together, these resources seemed to explain some of the variance in institutional responses in environmental administration, and finally different outcomes of the two cases.