Forestry Ideology in the Slovak Government’s Program Statements

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to analyse the government’s programme statements in Slovakia from 1992 to 2023 in relation to the professional forestry ideology and to identify the political parties that are most in line with this ideology. Methodologically, the research was based on a qualitative analysis of government programme statements, assessing compliance with the five principles of the professional forestry ideology: wood production primacy, sustainability, multifunctionality, longevity, and expertise. The results show that right-wing nationalist and conservative political parties in Slovakia have higher compliance with forestry values focused on wood production. In contrast, left-wing parties are more supportive of active forest protection measures. Parties such as the SDĽ (Slovak Democratic Left) and SNS (Slovak National Party) were identified as suitable allies in supporting the forestry professional ideology, whereas parties like the SMK (Slovak Hungarian Coalition) and Most-Híd (a Hungarian ethnic party) are less compatible with forestry values. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the relationship between political ideologies and forest policy in Slovakia, highlighting the influence of political affiliation on the formulation and implementation of forest policies.

1. Introduction

Forestry in Slovakia is on the edge of mainstream political parties’ interests. This lack of interest was discovered by extremist and populist parties that present themselves as supporters of traditional forestry values. They often manage to take advantage of the lack of interest of other parties or fight against their nepotism or, conversely, against their excessive progressivism [1]. However, parties of the traditional political spectrum and the forestry sector should seek a way to understand each other primarily through pragmatic solutions and discussions about their value orientations and ideologies.

Forest policy in Slovakia does not develop in isolation. As a member of the European Union and a signatory to the Forest Europe process, Slovakia is influenced by broader regional and international frameworks. These include commitments to sustainable forest management (SFM), biodiversity conservation, and climate adaptation, as outlined in various Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe (Forest Europe). The EU Green Deal, the Biodiversity Strategy, and the Forest Strategy for 2030 have also introduced new expectations toward multifunctionality, ecosystem-based approaches, and close-to-nature forestry. While national forestry ideologies retain specific historical and institutional characteristics, they increasingly interact with these supranational policy agendas.

The government’s policy statements (GPSs) are policy programmes adopted by the government and parliament including a government’s priorities for their term in office. For forestry, they are formulated by the minister in charge, who is highly hierarchically anchored in his political party and professionally close to agriculture. He consults very little with his colleagues with a forestry background, mainly only with the highest bureaucrats. The influence of other government coalition parties on creating the GPSs for forestry is negligible. As a policy document, it is suitable for identifying ideological intersections between forestry and political parties.

Research on political parties and their preferences is mainly focused on the issue of climate change and the positions of individual political parties regarding it [2,3,4,5,6,7,8] or on environmental policy [9]. Only a few works address the issue of forest use. Timofejevs [7] confirms that in Latvia, where the views on forests and forestry are that they comprise a traditional land management sector, they resist plans for further biodiversity conservation initiatives, thus asserting the view that forests are best kept cultivated and that cultivated, productive forests are the country’s national treasure, its “green gold”. Gohrs et al. [5] found that coalitions between right-wing parties increase the chance for policy outputs favouring forest interests. Hubo and Gohrs [6] also confirmed that ministers’ political affiliations impact the development of forest protection policies.

1.1. Forestry Professional Ideology

Ideology in this context is understood as a set of ideas, beliefs, and attitudes typical for a specific group of people [10,11,12,13]. In contrast to scientifically based knowledge, ideological beliefs are based on group interests. Their role is to maintain the group’s unity, justify its actions, and regulate the behaviour of its members. Shared ideological beliefs guide the actions of individuals in specific situations, because group members—consciously or subconsciously—know how to act, behave, or react. Ideology represents a significant power source for a group, which can be used externally to promote its goals and internally to strengthen cohesion. Ideological beliefs can be perceived as rational or irrational, true or false. However, their basis is not objective truth, but the group members believe in the ideas they defend against any challenge and use them to support their arguments.

Attempts to describe the elements of professional forestry ideology in the Central European area have been made in several works [14,15,16,17,18]. Later, these ideas were developed within the framework of the so-called beliefs in Sabatier and Jenkins’s theory of advocacy coalitions [19,20]. A synthetic and concise overview of forestry ideological beliefs was provided by Glück [21]. It is an ideology characteristic of the community of trained forestry professionals, socialized within this group, regardless of their current working status. This concept needs to be supplemented by Slovak authors dealing with the integrated and multifunctional forestry of socialist and post-socialist forestry ideologies such as the works of Papanek [22], Midriak [23], or Konôpka [24,25] and more recent Central European works such as those of Winkel et al. [26] or Borrass et al. [27]. Based on this literature, these beliefs were outlined in five principles, which remain valid today in the context of the Central European forestry tradition.

The first principle is the primacy of timber production. The forestry sector perceives forests as a national asset. The population economically dependent on forestry has in the past and still does derive most of its income from the market production of timber and other forest products and services [21]. Other forest ecosystem services represent predominantly positive externalities that generate only minimal income for economically interested groups. Producing non-market ecosystem services would jeopardise its economic sustainability, sacrificing income from market forestry in favour of uncompensated non-market ecosystem services [13]. Therefore, the bioeconomy concept was embraced with enthusiasm, as it highlights wood as a key renewable resource for replacing fossil fuels [28]. Ensuring the functioning of the market economy, even at the expense of other ecosystem services, should be financed through payments for non-market ecosystem services [29]. In a highly ideological understanding, based on the hinge theory, it is assumed that managing a forest primarily for wood production will automatically ensure all other ecosystem services [21,30].

The second principle is sustainable forest management. It is based on the principle of sustainable timber production, which is based on the rule that no more timber may be harvested than can be regenerated through natural biological processes. From an ideological perspective, however, forestry is primarily oriented towards the economic sustainability of forest assets, i.e., ensuring long-term income for the population economically linked to forest use. Accordingly, it promotes active measures for protecting and cultivating forests to maintain their sustainability [29]. Social sustainability issues are often the subject of ideological disputes regarding the distribution and redistribution of income from labour, natural resources, capital, and entrepreneurship. However, these aspects are often overlooked or deliberately suppressed [29,30]. Currently, there is growing pressure to strengthen ecological sustainability. Thus, the forestry sector presents its approach as balanced [26,27].

The third principle emphasizes multifunctionality and an integrated approach to forest management as the most effective way to ensure all forest ecosystem services [22,23,27]. In the socialist Eastern Bloc, Papánek’s theory [22] of integrating forest functions was considered inviolable, allowing for alternative, optimisable, and centrally controlled planning. From this perspective, passive nature protection was insufficient—only active measures in forest management could ensure the balanced provision of all ecosystem services [26]. In the context of climate change, this model enables adaptation to changing conditions while ensuring the provision of all forest ecosystem services [24,25,26].

The fourth principle concerns longevity, which is based on the naturally long-term horizon of forest growth. It is reflected in a cautious approach to forest management, since the consequences of today’s interventions will affect future generations of foresters and forest owners. Glück and Pleschberger [18] point to the conservatism of forestry, which stems from its longevity. The forestry sector is reluctant to adapt to changes and insists on historically proven and established practices. However, this conservatism can also have negative consequences, for example, when rigid management practices lead to forest disintegration, as was the case with the degradation of mountain spruce forests due to the proliferation of the bark beetle [31]. In post-socialist countries, the principle of long-termism was reflected in the rejection and inhibition of forest privatisation and the emphasis on the equality of all ownership forms. Despite the problems associated with public forest management, for example, in terms of efficiency, the forestry sector has difficulty accepting the idea of its privatisation [32].

The fifth principle emphasizes that the expertise of educated forestry graduates socialised within the forestry environment can effectively address professional forestry issues. The state administration often verifies their sufficient knowledge of forestry after completing additional practice after graduation [17,18]. In post-socialist countries, a strong state is seen as a key actor in promoting forestry expertise through regulations. Foresters are convinced that forest management must be guided by the most detailed plan possible, which is mandatory and financed by the state [33,34]. The forestry sector considers it necessary to support its beliefs through departmental and state-funded research [35]. As part of their professional identity, foresters often distinguish themselves from nature, landscape conservationists, and libertarian economists [24,25]. From an ideological perspective, they portray these groups as extremes and the forestry approach as a balanced alternative. Foresters’ scepticism towards the public’s participation and experts from other fields in planning and decision-making about forest resources is a significant aspect of this ideology. They acknowledge the need for public participation in these processes, while their actual approach remains ableist [1].

1.2. Slovak Political Parties’ Ideologies

Political parties and movements can operate under the Slovak Republic’s national and European legislative rules. The primary role of political parties is to gain, consolidate, or maintain political power [36]. Based on the parties’ different approaches to creating wealth and its distribution in society, the parties are divided into left, centre, and right. Left-wing parties represent the parties supporting social programs and more state intervention in the economy, emphasising the collective. Right-wing parties support the private sector, entrepreneurship, and minimising state intervention, emphasising the individual and their abilities. Ideologically, the parties of the centre are located between them [37]. Political parties can be categorised based on their organisational structure into elitist (cadre) parties, mass parties (mass-bureaucratic), and catch-all (all-people, electoral, universal) parties [38,39,40,41]. An elitist party is defined as institutionally weak; it is merely a political platform for a group of leaders without a territorial organisation or party apparatus. On the other hand, a popular party has built strong party institutions with a large membership, an extensive territorial organisational structure, a functioning party apparatus, and permanent ties to voters. A catch-all political party aims to address the broadest possible spectrum of voters while eschewing the concepts of right and left [42]. Political parties are oriented towards the so-called traditional political ideologies, forming an ideological triangle—liberalism, conservatism, socialism, and the “new” political ideologies that emerged mainly in the 1960s, such as environmentalism, feminism, etc. [43]. Nationalism, including its extreme forms—national socialism and fascism—is also considered a political ideology. Later, other political party ideologies, such as populism, were defined [44]. The overview is provided in

Table 1. Political ideologies overview.

Ideology	Typical Features	Typical Parties	References
liberalism	The individual has the greatest possible freedom. Where personal freedom begins, state power ends. It can only intervene when personal freedom is violated. Distrust of excessive state power.	liberal, partially environmental, and green	von Beyme [43]; Hess and Renner [4]; Howarth [45]
conservatism	Avoid radical change and preserve current conditions. Resistance to liberalism, socialism, and reforms. Emphasis on traditional values and a strong state.	conservative, Christian-democratic, agrarian, and national	von Beyme [43]; Pollex and Berker [9]
socialism	Emphasis on civil, political, and social rights. Efforts to eliminate poverty, solidarity, progressive taxation, and a welfare state.	social-democratic, socialist, and partially Christian-socialist	von Beyme [43]; Ferrera [46]; Hloušek and Kopeček [42]
nationalism	The interests of one nation are superior to others. Distrust and hostility towards other nations.	conservative, regional, ethnic, and far right	von Beyme [43]; Timofejevs [7]
environmentalism	Living modestly and in harmony with nature. Criticism of affluence; fight against pollution, climate problems, and the wasting of resources.	environmental and green, partially liberal	von Beyme [43]; Dalton [47]; Pollex and Berker [9]
populism	The division of society into “ordinary people” and “corrupt elite”. Politics should express the will of the people.	populist across the left–right spectrum	Mudde [44]; Havlík and Pinková [48]; Kriesi [49]; Stanley [50]

.

Based on the above, the forestry professional ideology and the ideological anchoring of political parties might influence how individual parties approach forestry. In the Slovak Republic, there is a lack of research focused on the value orientations of political parties concerning forest use. This paper aims to fill this research gap. This paper aims to analyse the government’s program statements from 1992 to 2023 in relation to the forestry professional ideology elements and how these elements are reflected in the ideologies of the political parties responsible for agriculture and forestry. Based on the analysis, the ideal ally for promoting forest policy will be identified, i.e., the party whose ideology mostly aligns with the professional forestry ideology.

Based on the theoretical assumptions, two hypotheses were formulated:

H1: 

The ideologies of the political parties in Slovakia have varying coincidence with the forestry ideology in Slovakia.

H2: 

According to the GPSs in Slovakia, it is possible to identify allies and opponents of the professional forestry ideology in political parties.

2. Materials and Methods

The applied methodology consisted of qualitative document analysis. Public policy programs—government program statements (GPSs)—were analysed. Public policy programs are understood as documents that contain statements at the societal level about goals and measures in a specific cross-sectoral or sectoral policy ([12], partially amended), in this case, forest policy. The documents served as the primary input, which was subsequently analysed. Qualitative analysis requires the compilation of criteria that will guide the analysis. In the text of the government program statements from 1992 to 2023, the elements of the forestry ideology were identified. The analysis took place in two phases (

Table 2. Methodological procedure of analysis.

Phase 1	Political party	parties responsible for forestry in 1992–2023
	Ideologies	-isms
	Party type	mass, elite, catch-all party
	Political spectrum	right–centre–left
Phase 2	Forestry ideology
	1 Primacy of Timber Production	−5, −4, −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points
	2 Sustainable Forest Management	−5, −4, −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points
	3 Integrated and Multifunctional Forest Management	−5, −4, −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points
	4 Longevity and Conservatism	−5, −4, −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points
	5 Expertise	−5, −4, −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points
Final Score		total point range

). First, the ideologies and positions of political parties on the right–centre–left spectrum were analysed, regardless of their forestry ideology (phase 1), based on the theoretical foundations presented in the introduction and the programs of the political parties responsible for forestry. In the second phase, the GPSs were analysed in term of how they reflect the forestry ideology. In phase two, each political party was assigned a score on a scale of −5 (fully against the ideology), −4 (strong conflict), −3 (moderate conflict), −2 (some conflict), −1 (weak conflict), 0 (neutral), 1 (weak alignment), 2 (some alignment), 3 (moderate alignment), 4 (strong alignment), and 5 (full alignment with the ideology), depending on how much the wording of the GPS on forestry is in line with the forestry ideology (phase 2). The final score reflects how the GPSs align with the forestry ideology and identifies which political parties are closest to this ideology through their programs.

3. Results

The following political parties and movements participated in the Slovak government’s program statements from 1992 to 2023: the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (ĽS-HZDS), the Democratic Left Party (SDĽ), the Hungarian Coalition Party (SMK), the Most—Híd, Smer—Social Democracy (SMER-SD), the Slovak National Party (SNS), and the Ordinary People and Independent Personalities (OĽANO).

Table 3. Number of words in government policy statements.

Year	1992	1994	1998	2002	2006	2010	2012	2016	2020	2023	2023
Political Party	ĽS HZDS	ĽS HZDS	SDĽ	SMK	ĽS HZDS	MOST HÍD	SMER SD	SNS	OĽANO	ÚV	SMER SD
Number of Words	103	126	181	66	216	227	253	179	925	7	223

illustrates the evolution of the number of GPS words related to forestry during the monitored period.

3.1. Ideological Outlets of the Parties Responsible for Forestry in 1992–2023

This chapter is divided into three subsections to describe (1) the consistency or inconsistency of the fundamental ideologies of political parties with the forestry ideology, (2) the ideological background of Slovak political parties and ministers who formulated the GPSs, and (3) the identification of the allies or opponents of forestry in the political parties in Slovakia.

3.1.1. Political Parties’ Ideologies and Forestry in Slovakia

From the theoretical description of the fundamental ideologies of the political parties that formulated the GPSs and the theoretical description of forestry ideologies, their consistency or inconsistency can be synthetized (

Table 4. Political spectrum and ideologies of political parties responsible for forestry in 1992–2023.

Political Parties	ĽS-HZDS	SDĽ	SMK	MOST-HÍD	SMER-SD	SNS	OĽaNO
Political Spectrum	centre	left	right-centre	right-centre	left	right	right-centre
Political Party Type	catch-all	mass	mass	mass	mass	mass	elite
Liberalism	+/−	−	+	+	−	−	−
Conservatism	+/−	−	+	+	+/−	+	+/−
Socialism	+/−	+	−	+/−	+	+/−	+/−
Nationalism	+	−	+	+/−	+/−	+	+/−
Environmentalism	−	+/−	−	+/−	+/−	−	+/−
Populism	+/−	−	−	−	+	+/−	+
	neutral	ally	opponent	opponent	neutral	ally	neutral

Legend: + compatible with forestry ideology; − conflicting with forestry ideology, +/− ambivalent.

).

Economic liberalism emphasizes the free market, private ownership, and minimal state intervention, which can have an impact on public forest management. It contrasts with the forestry ideology of balance, which limits the supply of wood, promotes equality of ownership in forest management, and enforces the strong regulation of forestry. Political liberalism emphasizes individual freedoms, transparency, and democratic decision-making, which can also impact public forest management, requiring increased participation and similar measures. However, these requirements contrast with the forestry idea of professional forest management. Environmental liberalism combines nature protection with the free market and personal responsibility. Forestry, with its ideology of balance, rejects excessive market influence and excessive nature protection, and does not believe in personal responsibility without strong state regulation.

Conservatism often promotes stability, continuity, and respect for public institutions, which is also reflected in professional forestry standards. This means that in forestry, a conservative approach can ensure rigorous education, adherence to regulatory and ethical rules, and respect for long-established methods. In forestry, conservatism as an ideology is a very interesting topic because it is naturally associated with tradition, stability, and long-term rigid planning, which are the fundamental ideological principles of this profession.

Socialism and forestry have historically been closely connected, especially in countries where this system was dominant. Socialism in forestry often promoted collective ownership, centralized planning, strong regulation, and an emphasis on equal access to all forests. Promoting a long-term vision and public interest corresponds to the ideological forestry concept. Finding a balance between market mechanisms and public interest is also a means for forestry to remain sustainable and resilient in the face of new challenges, such as climate change.

In general, nationalism in forestry refers to prioritising national interests in the protection and management of forests. Nationalism in forestry is focused on the use and protection of national resources, or even national isolation, and ignoring ecological principles. Moderate nationalism advocates for a balanced approach to forest management, combining the protection of national interests with sustainable management practices. Environmentalism and forestry have a very dynamic relationship—sometimes they are in harmony, sometimes they are in conflict. Both are concerned with natural ecosystems, but forestry has traditionally focused on sustainable timber production and active permanent management, while environmentalism often emphasizes the preservation of natural ecosystems and the protection of biodiversity. Environmentalism and forestry share the same goal: to preserve forests for future generations, but they do not always agree on how to achieve this. Forestry ideologically rejects radical environmental demands and seeks to ensure a balance between wood production, biodiversity protection, and climate stability through integrated and multifunctional management.

Forestry and populism can have different relationships, especially when forests and their management become a topic of public debate. Populism often involves simplistic solutions, appeals to emotions, and the opposition of “the people” and “the elites”, which can also influence forestry policy. In a positive case, populism can draw attention to important issues in forestry, such as transparency in public forest management or support for rural regions. However, if used for political struggle without respect for expertise, it can lead to chaotic and harmful decisions that will endanger the long-term sustainability of forests. Conservatism and socialism are most closely aligned with the concept of post-socialist forestry in Slovakia. Moderate nationalism is also very close to the forestry ideology. Environmentalism and liberalism, which have some common elements, do not align with the forestry ideology. Populism can align with or be at odds with forestry, depending on its specific manifestations.

3.1.2. Slovak Political Parties and Their Ideologies

The People’s Party—the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (ĽS HZDS)—was a classic example of a centrist populist party that combined nationalism, economic pragmatism, and authoritarian elements, placing it among the catch-all parties [42]. The HZDS lacked a clear foundation in environmentalism and, in practice, often prioritised industrial projects over environmental protection. Nevertheless, in the later stages of the government, it supported some environmental measures under pressure from the EU. It is in the middle of the political spectrum [51].

The Party of the Democratic Left (SDĽ), like most left-wing social democratic parties, had a program focused on social justice, solidarity, the protection of the socially weaker, and a reduction of social differences through progressive taxation and state redistribution [52]. Despite SDĽ emerging from the Communist Party of Slovakia and later becoming part of Smer-SD, and environmentalism not being its primary ideology, it more than the other parties in the 1990s supported ecological projects in accordance with European standards [51,52].

The Hungarian Coalition Party (SMK) represented a right-centre party, with an ideological program that combined the Christian-democratic and conservative aspects of its predecessors, combings values of the Hungarian Christian-Democratic Movement with the individualistic and liberal aspects of the Hungarian Civic Party and Coexistence [42]. Ideologically, it can be categorised among the liberal-conservative parties, characterised by a broad membership base based on national principles, and it can be classified within the family of ethnic and regional parties [51]. The SMK strongly advocated for a transition to a market economy and was closely aligned with economic liberalism. The SMK did not have a strong environmental stance, but it supported the EU’s ecological policies and sustainable development.

MOST–HÍD is a centre-liberal-conservative, regional, and civic right-wing political party operating in Slovakia. It declared itself a party of cooperation and sought reconciliation between Hungarians and Slovaks, among the Hungarians themselves, and between other national minorities and ethnic groups. It described mutual trust, tolerance, and understanding as its characteristic pillars. It perceived Slovakia as a multinational, multilingual, and multicultural country, which it then adapted its program and activities on the Slovak political scene [42]. Most-Hid, as a representative and follower of the SMK, was close to supporting market solutions based on economic liberalism. Most-Híd had a stronger anchoring in environmentalism than most other parties, supporting environmental protection and sustainable development.

Smer–Social Democracy (SMER–SD) officially identifies itself as a left-wing social democratic party, but its political practice also incorporates elements of populism, national conservatism, and a strong emphasis on state intervention in the economy. Its ideological orientation has evolved, moving towards social conservatism and national populism in recent years [53,54,55]. SMER-SD’s relationship to environmentalism is pragmatic and economically motivated. The party supports environmental measures if they do not threaten economic growth or the country’s strategic interests. Its policy ranges between formal support for EU climate goals and prioritizing industrial projects over environmental protection.

The Slovak National Party (SNS) is a right-wing, ideologically nationally conservative, populist, and Eurosceptic party that promotes nationalism and social conservatism. In practice, its policy often changes depending on political partners, but the main ideological pillars remain consistent [51]. Hloušek and Kopeček [42] classify the SNS as far right, while the radical nationalism that the SNS was supposed to represent was taken by some other political actors in the conditions of building Slovak statehood as a natural part of its political identity. The SNS perceives environmentalism mainly in the context of national interests. If Slovak natural resources are threatened, they reject ecological regulations that could hinder industrial and economic development.

Ordinary People and Independent Personalities (OĽaNO) is a centrist, elitist, conservative, pragmatic, and populist party that often adapts to public moods [44,56]. It primarily exhibits elements of conservatism and populism, emphasising Christian values, a focus on combating corruption, and direct communication with voters. Elements of liberalism, social democracy, nationalism, and environmentalism are less represented. OĽANO is not an ideologically stable party.

Ideological values, party type, and position on the political spectrum are summarized in Table 3. HZDS was a catch-all party, ideologically based on a combination of nationalism, pragmatism, and populism. SMK had ideologically nationalist, conservative, and liberal elements. Most-Híd had a more liberal approach than SMK, but its ideological background also contained conservative and environmentalist elements. Smer–SSD and SDĽ were typical left-wing social democratic parties, but later in SMER-SSD, conservative and populist ideological characteristics also prevailed. SNS is a right-wing conservative party with nationalist and populist tendencies. The elitist OĽaNO is ideologically a combination of right-wing populism, conservatism, and occasional social rhetoric, but lacks a clear ideology. Environmentalism as an ideology was not prominent in any of the analysed parties.

3.1.3. Political Parties as Ideological Allies or Opponents of Forestry

The popular Slovak political parties, such as HZDS, Smer-SD, and OĽANO, which formulated the GPSs through their ministers, have a combined and complicated ideological background. In connection with their efforts to attract a centrist voter, they have not been identified as significant allies or opponents of forestry. The exceptions are two parties on both edges of the political spectrum, SDĽ and SNS, which, based on their ideology, can be considered more allies than opponents of forestry. Based on their ideological orientation, the parties of the Hungarian minority, SMK, and Most-Híd present as opponents of the forestry ideology.

In the late 1990s, the ruling left-wing SDĽ corresponded to the post-socialist vision of Slovak forestry of a strong state to ensure professional and sustainable forestry through strong regulatory instruments, financial support for non-market forest ecosystem services, and mandatory consultancy in forest planning and management. Forest properties, regardless of ownership, must be subject to forestry’s strong command and the control vision of public policy. Balanced, integrated, and multifunctional forest management stemming from socialism without extreme market and ecological ideas corresponded to the foresters’ belief that a socialist system was ideal for forestry. In addition, wood production in the SDĽ vision ensures a livelihood for the socially weaker working class.

At the end of the second decade of the new millennium, the ruling right-wing SNS rejected excessive liberalism and environmentalism as progressive ideologies, which corresponds to the conservatism of a forestry state. According to the SNS, forestry in its traditional form best meets the ideas of sustainable and multifunctional management and cannot be the cause of the ecological disasters caused by anthropogenic influences. Forestry should take care of Slovakia’s natural wealth, and active forest management aligns with traditional life in the countryside, where SNS voters also live.

SMK and Most-Híd, with their economic liberalism and partly also environmentalism, are not in line with the ideology of forestry balance and the rejection of extremes in forest management. In the SMK, economic liberalism was also manifested in the rejection of “ineffective” subsidies or the promotion of outsourcing in public forestry administration, which the forestry class would rather see in a classic command and control system. Most-Híd, with its strong anchoring in regionalism and localism, often promoted other ecosystem services at the expense of wood production.

After confronting the forestry ideology with the ideological background of these parties, a high ideological consonance of SDĽ and SNS with the forestry ideology can be stated and, conversely, a very low compliance with the ideological focus of SMK and Most-Híd exists. SDĽ and SNS represent the best allies for the forestry ideology, and SMK and Most-Híd are not entirely suitable allies of the forestry ideology (Table 4).

3.2. Analysis of Government Policy Statements’ Compliance with Forestry Ideology

The interest of political parties in forestry has increased over time, as evidenced by the growing number of words in the program statements (Table 3). Two notable exceptions were the statements of the government formed by bureaucrats, who were in office for a short time during the interim period between the 2024 elections and the OLANO government. During their term, the minister of agriculture was a forester by profession, which is why this government program statement was the longest. This can also be documented by the increasing number of forestry ideology elements identified (

Table 5. Evaluation of government program statement compliance with the forestry ideology in the years 1992–2023.

Forestry Ideology/ Program Statement and Political Party	1992	1995	1998	2002	2006	2010	2012	2016	2020	2023	2023
	HZDS	HZDS	SDĽ	SMK	HZDS	MOST –HÍD	SMER –SD	SNS	OĽaNO	UV	SMER –SD
1 Primacy of Timber Production	1	0	4	0	0	1	1	3	5	0	1
2 Sustainable Forest Management	−1	−3	2	1	1	−3	−1	−1	1	1	−1
3 Integrated and Multifunctional Forest Management	4	2	2	−1	1	−1	1	5	4	0	2
4 Longevity and Conservatism	0	3	2	−2	1	−4	3	3	−4	0	1
5 Expertise	1	1	2	0	4	−2	2	2	2	0	0
Total	5	3	12	−2	7	−9	6	12	8	1	3

). The evaluation revealed varying degrees of compliance with the forestry ideology (Table 5). Some governments were more inclined towards forestry principles, while others preferred ecological or market-based reforms. The HZDS party (1992) emphasized the public benefit functions of forests, conservation, and state regulation, but without supporting wood production. The SDĽ party (1998) emphasized support measures in forestry, the productive function of forests, and the maintenance of post-socialist state regulations. The SMK party (2002) focused on balanced management and market reforms in forestry and partially supported the provision of non-market ecosystem services. The SMER party (2012) and the SNS party (2016) were closest to the forestry ideology because they supported wood production, a strong state favouring state regulation, and the financing of forestry from public sources. In 2020, there was a shift in the OĽaNO party towards ecological policy and the market, with weaker support for wood production but close-to-nature management being supported. As can be seen from Table 5, and in detail from Appendix A, the program statements most consistent with the forestry ideology were those of the SDĽ (1998) and SNS (2016). The least consistent with the forestry ideology were those of the SMK (2006), MOST-HÍD (2010), and OĽANO (2020) governments.

4. Discussion

Hypothesis 1 assumed that the political parties’ ideologies in Slovakia intersect in various ways with the ideological positions of the forestry sector. The findings support this assumption and are consistent with Batstrand [2] and McCright et al. [3], who suggest that right-wing political parties tend to be less inclined toward environmental regulations and favour the economic use of natural resources, and left-wing parties are more supportive of forest protection measures. This trend was also confirmed in this analysis, with the right-wing parties in Slovakia showing more support for forestry interests and more often promoting policies beneficial to the forestry sector.

An important context is also provided by the work of Göhrs et al. [5], which shows that environmental issues are often marginalized in political party programs. This tendency was also confirmed in this research—forestry issues were not among the main priorities of most political parties, which complicated the formulation of a long-term and consistent forestry policy. The findings show that the ideological starting points of the parties fundamentally influenced their position on forestry: the SDĽ and SNS were characterised by a high degree of alignment with the forestry ideology in this regard, while parties promoting liberalism and regionalism, such as the SMK and Most-Híd, deviated from this orientation.

Baranowski et al. [57] examined how political orientation influences environmental attitudes across European countries. They found that in Central and Eastern European countries, the relationship between left–right orientation and environmental attitudes is weaker, especially when political parties do not emphasize environmental issues.

Hess and Rener [4] examined the attitudes of conservative political parties towards energy transitions in Europe. They found that conservative parties tend to reject climate change and support fossil fuels, while some centre-right parties support renewable energy sources and energy efficiency The results confirm this, as some centre-right and left-wing parties support environmental issues.

Hypothesis 2 assumed that, according to the government program statements in Slovakia, it is possible to identify the allies and opponents of the forestry ideology in political parties. The forestry ideology in Slovakia is strongly influenced by traditional values, conservatism, and resistance to radical environmental measures. Parties such as the SDĽ and SNS were identified as allies of the forestry ideology, while parties such as the SMK and Most-Híd were perceived as less compatible with forestry values. The results are in line with the findings of [2,3,4,9], who confirmed the influence of ideology on environmental policy and forestry. The forestry sector is based on the principle of longevity, which leads to a conservative approach to forest management. This conservatism is manifested in the rejection of forest privatization and the persistence of traditional management methods [1]. A characteristic feature of the forestry ideology is also the belief that forestry activities should be carried out exclusively by professionals with a specific education, which is supported by strong regulation and state supervision. This aligns with the findings of Timofejevs [7], who studied the political parties in Latvia. Forests and forestry are considered a traditional sector that resists initiatives to protect biodiversity.

A strong preference for expertise and a rejection of sector liberalization characterizes the Slovak forestry environment. This aspect is not so strongly emphasized in foreign studies, which suggests specific conditions for Slovakia. For example, in countries such as the USA or Germany, political changes are quickly reflected in environmental policy [3], while in the Slovak context, the forestry ideology remains relatively stable even with a change of government. This phenomenon may be a consequence of the historically strong position of the state in forest management and the dominant influence of forestry institutions on policy [13].

An important challenge to the traditional forestry ideology is the pressure for greater greening in the context of climate change. This trend can create conflicts between the established practices and modern environmental demands. As Göhrs et al. [58] have shown, left-wing political parties tend to be more nature conservationist, while right-wing parties are more likely to defend traditional forestry interests. This dynamic suggests that the political representation of forestry plays a key role in shaping favourable policies and maintaining the long-term stability of the forestry sector. They identified the significant influence of the political affiliation of ministers on the direction of forestry policy. In Slovakia, some parties, such as the SDĽ and SNS, showed a higher degree of alignment with forestry interests, while others, such as the Most-Híd, tended to be more liberal in their approach, thus moving away from the traditional forestry ideology.

Right-wing political parties in Slovakia show more support for forestry interests, which is consistent with the trend identified in Turkey during the conservative AK Party government [59]. Both studies highlight that political ideology significantly influences the direction of forestry policy and can result in prioritising economic goals over environmental protection. These findings support the claim that political affiliation and ideology have a significant impact on the formulation and implementation of forestry policies, with economic interests often prevailing over environmental considerations.

Regarding the theoretical background, this article focuses on analysing political party ideology and its alignment with forest ideology. Other studies use different theoretical frameworks, such as the Advocacy Coalitions Framework, Critical Discourse Analysis, and Political Difference Analysis. Göhrs et al. [5] and Hubo and Göhrs [6] use the advocacy coalition theory of Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith [60]. This theory examines how different coalitions with different beliefs and values influence policymaking. They examine the influence of political parties on forest protection policy in Germany. The theoretical background in Timofejevs’s [7] study includes the concepts of populism and the radical right, focusing on how these parties perceive sustainable development and environmental policy. Forchtner’s [8] study uses critical discourse analysis to examine environmental communication regarding the far right in Europe and the USA. Theoretical foundations include the concepts of discourse, power and ideology, focusing on how far-right parties communicate their environmental visions, and positions on climate change. Pollex and Berker’s [9] draw on the literature in the field of pertinent policy analysis. The authors analyse how political parties perceive environmental issues and how these perceptions influence their policy positions.

The chosen methodological approach aligns with the approaches used in political party research. This article uses qualitative document analysis, while other studies combine qualitative and quantitative methods, such as content analysis, discourse analysis, and a quantitative analysis of political outcomes. Göhrs et al. [5] used a textual analysis of the election programmes of the political parties in Germany from 1990 to 2019. They analysed how different political parties approach forest policy and nature conservation, focusing on the differences between left-wing and right-wing parties. Hubo and Göhrs [6] used a quantitative analysis of political programmes to examine the influence of political parties on forest conservation policy in Germany, specifically on the implementation of Natura 2000, and tested the influence of different parties on supporting nature conservation or forest interests. Timofejevs [7] used a qualitative content analysis of official party documents to examine the attitudes of the Latvian populist radical right towards nature and the environment. Forchtner [8] used discourse analysis to examine the environmental communication of the far right in Europe and the USA. He focused on how these parties communicate their ecological visions and attitudes towards climate change. Pollex and Berker [9] analysed the election platforms of 20 political parties from three European countries.

This paper contains certain methodological and content limitations that affect its interpretation and general applicability. The methodological limitations arise from the subjectivity in the document analysis, as the interpretation of the individual elements of the forestry ideology depends on the research framework and the authors’ experience. Although a point scale was used for the assessment, different methodological approaches or different definitions of the forestry ideology could lead to different results. Although policy statements represent key government documents, their implementation in practice may be influenced by other factors, such as the legislative process, public debate, economic circumstances, and international obligations, that were not considered in this study. Ambiguous definitions of political ideologies are also problematic because political parties may shift their ideological orientation over time, and their actual policies may not always align with their declared values. Parties that formally adhere to a liberal or conservative ideology may, in practice, adopt measures that are closer to other ideological currents.

This study was primarily based on a qualitative analysis of texts, while a more detailed analysis of the influence of political parties on the actual outcomes of forest policy (e.g., changes in forestry laws, the forestry budget, and the implementation of measures) was not conducted.

The contextual limitations relate to the non-political factors that were not examined. Forest policy is influenced not only by political parties but also by other factors, such as environmental challenges (e.g., the climate crisis), economic factors (e.g., timber market development), and Slovakia’s international obligations (e.g., EU regulations, biodiversity protection policy).

The research primarily focuses on political parties and their program statements, but in practice, forestry policy is also shaped by pressure from interest groups, including forest owners, environmental organizations, forestry unions, and academic institutions. Their actual influence on the creation of the GPSs was not explicitly assessed.

Although a government program statement is a binding document of government policy, in practice, its content may not be fully implemented. Not all measures approved in the GPSs were later implemented or achieved the intended results. This study has a limited geographical scope, as it focuses exclusively on the Slovak Republic. The results may not be directly applicable to other countries with different political systems, legislative frameworks, and historical contexts of forest management. A comparison with foreign cases could provide a broader perspective.

This paper offers valuable insights into the relationship between the political parties and forestry policy in Slovakia. The methodological, contextual, and historical limitations mentioned suggest that the results should be interpreted with caution. To gain a more comprehensive picture, it would be appropriate to extend the research to include a deeper analysis of the implementation of measures, which would show to what extent program statements are implemented and what factors influence their success. These extensions could help to better understand the dynamics between political parties and policymaking, as well as identify the key factors for a successful implementation of forestry measures within the political environment.

5. Conclusions

The analysis of Slovak government program statements (GPSs) from 1992 to 2023 revealed a differentiated alignment of political party ideologies with the principles of the professional forestry ideology. The findings confirm that political ideology significantly influences the formulation of forest policy priorities in Slovakia.

Right-wing conservative and nationalist parties, particularly the Slovak National Party (SNS), demonstrated the strongest alignment with forestry ideology. This was evidenced by high scores in promoting timber production, traditional management methods, and strong state involvement—core components of the forestry ideology. Similarly, the left-wing SDĽ supported forestry interests, especially through technocratic approaches, sectoral regulation, and financial support for non-market ecosystem services. In contrast, centre-right liberal and regional parties such as SMK and Most-Híd exhibited low alignment with the forestry ideology. Their policies emphasized market liberalization, reduced subsidies, and greater ecological prioritization, which diverge from the forestry sector’s traditionalist and production-oriented stance.

The results confirm Hypothesis 1, demonstrating that Slovak political party ideologies vary in their alignment with forestry ideology. Hypothesis 2 is also confirmed: allies (e.g., SDĽ, SNS) and opponents (e.g., SMK, Most-Híd) of forestry ideology can be clearly identified based on the contents of their program statements and ideological characteristics. This study contributes to a better understanding of the relationship between political ideologies and forestry policy, thereby filling a research gap in the Slovak context.