Forest Policy and Economics 144 (2022) 102843 1389-9341/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Engaging or resisting? How forest–based industry and private forest owners respond to bioenergy policies in Aquitaine (Southwestern France) Vincent Banos a, * , Philippe Deuffc b , Elodie Brahic c a Human Geography, INRAE, ETTIS, F-33612 Cestas cedex, France b Sociology, INRAE, ETTIS, F-33612 Cestas cedex, France c Economics, INRAE, ETTIS, F-33612 Cestas cedex, France A R T I C L E INFO Keywords: Bioenergy policy Sustainable transition Practice changes Forest owners France ABSTRACT Since the mid-2000s, the critical role of biomass for achieving the French renewable energy objectives is viewed as a means to entice private forest owners to be more proactive in sustainable wood harvesting. However, how bioenergy policies are really implemented and lead (or not) to practice changes at the forest management level remains unclear. In this paper, we assume that these sustainable transition pathways depend on power relations, negotiations and trade-offs between policymakers and forest industry in the one hand and between forest in- dustry and forest owners on the other hand. To address this challenge, we develop a comprehensive and meso- micro level approach informed by theoretical insights from the Multi-Level Perspective of system innovation (MLP) and the Social Practice Theory (SPL). Monitoring the implementation process of two bioenergy policies in Aquitaine region (southwestern France), we show that forest industries are recognized as a progressive force in sustainable transition processes despite their underlying propensity to consider bioenergy policies as a new means to optimize their economic interests regarding forest resources. Conversely, even if forest owners often withstand implementing the most intensive forestry models, they may adopt new practices incrementally, pro- ceeding with caution and without completely abandoning their existing practices. Finally, by coupling the MLP and the STP models, we provide a more nuanced picture of both frms’ engagement and forest owners’ resistance in the dynamics of change. One of the main policy implication is that sustainable transition not only challenges the management capacity of reluctant or inexperienced forest owners but also the collective willingness of forest industries to really support transformative changes in wood mobilization processes. 1. Introduction Since the mid-2000s, an emphasis is put on the importance of the French forest sector for achieving renewable energy and climate pro- tection objectives through increased timber use (Sotirov and Storch, 2018; Arnould et al., 2021). Despite this ‘harvesting turn’ (Sergent, 2014), the ‘multifunctional forestry’ paradigm - enshrined in the na- tional legislation since 2001 - is not really challenged as diverse policies coexist: national strategies for biodiversity conservation (20112020), for biomass mobilization (2016–2023), for the bioeconomy (2018–2020), etc. In other words, French forest policy changes could be described as a process of layering as new goals and instruments are added without dropping previous ones (Sotirov and Storch, 2018). This process of layering purports to emphasize plausible synergies towards a sustainable transition and ‘win-win’ outcomes. Yet, such ‘sustainable capital’ narrative (Hausknost et al., 2017) is only seemingly innocuous, whilst latent transformative content could be still driven by existing and dominating actors in important and often mature industrial sector (Huttunen, 2014; Hellsmark and Hansen, 2020). Although energy transition is presented as a process of techno-political innovation (Geels, 2002), wood mobilization is an old challenge for established forest in- dustries as well as a traditional point of contention with private forest owners (PFOs). Thus, sustainable transition could be more a ‘reconf- guration’ process, including power relations, negotiations and trade-offs at multiple levels, than a “reformist” process, which focuses on frms pursuing green eco-innovations or, conversely, a ‘disruptive’ process, with deep societal changes (Geels et al., 2015; Rauschmayer et al., 2015). Contributing to this debate about sustainable transition path- ways, we analyze how woody biomass programs are implemented and which trade-offs in management practices are negotiated, in particular * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: Vincent.banos@inrae.fr (V. Banos), Philippe.deuffc@inrae.fr (P. Deuffc), Elodie.brahic@inrae.fr (E. Brahic). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Policy and Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102843 Received 29 September 2020; Received in revised form 31 August 2022; Accepted 6 September 2022