While sustainable forestry in Europe is characterized by the provision of a multitude of forest ecosystem services, there exists no comprehensive study that scrutinizes their sensitivity to forest management on a pan-European scale, so far. We compile scenario runs from regionally tailored forest growth models and Decision Support Systems (DSS) from 20 case studies throughout Europe and analyze whether the ecosystem service provision depends on management intensity and other co-variables, comprising regional affiliation, social environment, and tree species composition. The simulation runs provide information about the case-specifically most important ecosystem services in terms of appropriate indicators. We found a strong positive correlation between management intensity and wood production, but only weak correlation with protective and socioeconomic forest functions. Interestingly, depending on the forest region, we found that biodiversity can react in both ways, positively and negatively, to increased management intensity. Thus, it may be in tradeoff or in synergy with wood production and forest resource maintenance. The covariables species composition and social environment are of punctual interest only, while the affiliation to a certain region often makes an important difference in terms of an ecosystem service's treatment sensitivity.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this paper, we refer to "forestry domain" in a broad sense, including activities, forest sector components, actors and policies connected with the use and management of forest resources. For example, "nature tourism" is included within the forestry domain if it is based on recreational or educational activities organized in a forest site or in relation to forest resources (e.g., Wilkes-Alleman, J., Ludvig, A., 2019). 2 More information about the EU-funded Horizon 2020 project SIMRA (Social Innovation in Marginalized Rural Areas) that is at the basis of this definition is available at: www.simra-h2020.eu. Such project involves scientists, NGOs and practitioners aimed at understanding how social innovation emerges, what its impacts are and how it can be supported through policy. 10 The GIZ Monitoring and Evaluation Unit does not distinguish between outputs, outcomes, impacts, but simply refers to 'results'.According to this model, any output, outcome, or impact is a goal, and anything that may be achieved, more or less directly or indirectly, is a result. 11 The identification of existing evaluation frameworks, approaches, methods and tools for analysis was carried out by expert teams each working on one of four main domains, namely the economic, social, environmental, and institutional aspects. They each followed common selection criteria and procedures defined by specific guidelines . Overall, 111 frameworks, approaches and methods were fully analysed through the use of 107 variables. They have been identified in the four domains and pre-analysed for the purposes of SIMRA project respectively by: ICRE8 (Greece) (economic aspects), University of Foggia (Italy) (social aspects), EFI (Finland) (environmental aspects) and DLO (The Netherlands) (governance/institutional aspects). The trans-disciplinary frameworks/approaches/methods and tools have been identified and pre-analysed by the University of Padova (Italy). More details are available on: Secco et al. 2017 (Deliverable 4.2; www.simra-h2020.eu). 12 These experts and stakeholders are the official members of the SIMRA Social Innovation Think Tank (SITT), created in 2016 by the SIMRA Consortium. Since its creation, SIMRA has carried out three consultations, two online (July 2016 and July 2017), and one face-to face workshop (held in Bratislava, Slovakia, October 26 to 28 2016). The SITT stakeholder consultation is one of the key elements of SIMRA project, carried out under main responsibility and coordination of IFE SAS (Slovakia), which arranged both the workshop in Bratislava and the two online consultations. In the various rounds, the SITT members were consulted on several different issues related to social innovation in marginalised rural areas, not only on methodology aspects. More information are available at: www.simra-h2020.eu.

Sustainable forest management is driving the development of forest decision support systems (DSSs) to include models and methods concerned with climate change, biodiversity and various ecosystem services (ESs). The future development of forest landscapes is very much dependent on how forest owners act and what goes on in the wider world, thus models are needed that incorporate these aspects. The objective of this study is to assess how nine European state-of-the-art forest DSSs cope with these issues. The assessment focuses on the ability of these DSSs to generate landscape level scenarios to explore the output of current and alternative forest management models (FMMs) in terms of a range of ESs and the robustness of these FMMs in the face of increased risks and uncertainty. Results show that all DSSs assessed in this study can be used to quantify the impacts of both stand and landscape-level FMMs on the provision of a range of ESs over a typical planning horizon. DSSs can be used to assess how timber price trends may impact that provision over time. The inclusion of forest owner behavior as reflected by the adoption of specific FMMs seems to be also in the reach of all DSSs. Nevertheless, some DSSs need more data and development of models to estimate the impacts of climate change on biomass production and other ESs. Spatial analysis functionality need to be further developed for a more accurate assessment of the landscape level output of ESs from both current and alternative FMMs.

No abstract

Mushrooms, berries and other Non-Wood Forest Products (NWFPs) are an important part of forest recreation, rural income and of cultural heritage. Due to poor data on their collection and use, they are often ignored in forest policy and management decisions, which could impair those livelihoods that depend on NWFPs as an income source. We conducted a survey involving 17,346 respondents from 28 European countries to estimate which and how much of these products are collected. Our results show that 26% of European households collect NWFPs and that collection rates and quantities increase from Western to Eastern Europe. Previous studies focused mainly on marketed NWFPs, but our findings suggest that marketed NWFPs represent only a small share and that 86% of the collected weight is selfconsumed. The total value of NWFPs collected each year amounts to 71% of the value of annual roundwood production, much more than previously estimated. Our results point to the need to consider co-production of wood and NWFPs, especially in Central Europe where their value per hectare is the highest.