During the last decades, political parties have still appeared as an almost unknown factor within the substantial expansion of topics in forest policy research. While discriminating between green, state/protection and market/use orientated parties, this study aims to reveal the influence of different governing parties on forest nature conservation policy in Germany, contributing to partisan theory. The analysis covers 247 politically relevant cases between 1998 and 2018 in 15 German Bundesländer (regional level). The analysis model distinguishes between positive, negative and non-decisions, linking results of governing parties' activities in the agenda-setting and the policy-formulation phases of the policy process. It examines the manifestos of the governing parties and the results of the government's actions concerning four of the main conflict issues. Both the demands in manifestos and the policy outputs are evaluated using the interests of the forest and the nature conservation policy sector as a benchmark. As a result, two-thirds of the non-decisions arrived at during issue-relevant periods led to a status quo, as well as 6% of demands blocked, and 27% were positive decisions that led to a renewed policy output. Among these, only few corresponded to the interests of nature conservation. In proportion to their government participation, the Greens have contributed most frequently to policy outputs, and they have contributed the most to nature-conservation oriented outputs. The small liberal party, FDP, is the corresponding counterpart and fosters forest interests the most, but it has governed only seldom. The two major parties are more balanced. The SPD, as a state-orientated party, clearly leans towards nature conservation, whereas the CDU/CSU presents a market-orientated party, and prefers forest interests. In conclusion, political parties make a significant difference in German forest nature conservation policy. The details on the parties contribute empirical insight into partisan theory in environmental policy.

在过去的几十年中，政党仍然是森林政策研究主题的实质扩展中几乎不为人知的因素。在区分绿色，国家/保护和市场/使用为导向的各方的同时，本研究旨在揭示不同执政党对德国森林自然保护政策的影响，这有助于党派理论。该分析涵盖了1998年至2018年间15个德国联邦议院中的247个与政治相关的案例（区域级别）。该分析模型区分积极决策，否定决策和非决策决策，将执政党在议程制定和政策制定阶段的活动结果联系起来。它检查了执政党的宣言以及政府针对四个主要冲突问题采取的行动的结果。宣言的要求和政策产出均以森林和自然保护政策部门的利益为基准进行评估。结果，在问题相关期间做出的三分之二的非决策导致了现状，并且有6％的需求被阻止，而27％的积极决策导致了新的政策产出。其中，只有少数几个符合自然保护的利益。除了政府的参与外，绿党对政策产出的贡献最大，而对自然保护的产出的贡献最大。较小的自由党FDP是相对应的对应方，它最大程度地促进了森林利益，但很少执政。两大政党之间更加平衡。作为国家主导的政党，SPD显然倾向于自然保护，而CDU / CSU则提出了市场主导的政党，并且更倾向于森林利益。总之，各政党在德国森林自然保护政策中发挥了重要作用。有关各方的细节有助于对环境政策中的游击党理论进行实证研究。他们为以自然保护为导向的产出做出了最大贡献。较小的自由党FDP是相对应的对应方，它最大程度地促进了森林利益，但很少执政。两大政党之间更加平衡。作为国家主导的政党，SPD显然倾向于自然保护，而CDU / CSU则提出了市场主导的政党，并且更倾向于森林利益。总之，各政党在德国森林自然保护政策中发挥了重要作用。有关各方的细节有助于对环境政策中的游击党理论进行实证研究。他们为以自然保护为导向的产出做出了最大贡献。较小的自由党FDP是相对应的对应方，它最大程度地促进了森林利益，但很少执政。两大政党之间更加平衡。作为国家主导的政党，SPD显然倾向于自然保护，而CDU / CSU则提出了市场主导的政党，并且更倾向于森林利益。总之，各政党在德国森林自然保护政策中发挥了重要作用。有关各方的细节有助于对环境政策中的游击党理论进行实证研究。作为一个以国家为导向的政党，显然倾向于自然保护，而基民盟/基社盟则是一个以市场为导向的政党，并且更喜欢森林利益。总之，各政党在德国森林自然保护政策中发挥了重要作用。有关各方的细节有助于对环境政策中的游击党理论进行实证研究。作为一个以国家为导向的政党，显然倾向于自然保护，而基民盟/基社盟则是一个以市场为导向的政党，并且更喜欢森林利益。总之，各政党在德国森林自然保护政策中发挥了重要作用。有关各方的细节有助于对环境政策中的游击党理论进行实证研究。