Policies on economic use of natural resources require considerations to social and cultural values. In order to make those concrete in a planning context, this paper aims to interpret social and cultural criteria, identify indicators, match these with verifier variables and visualize them on maps. Indicators were selected from a review of scholarly work and natural resource policies, and then matched with verifier variables available for Sweden’s 290 municipalities. Maps of the spatial distribution of four social and four cultural verifier variables were then produced. Consideration of social and cultural values in the studied natural resource use sectors was limited. The spatial distribution of the verifier variables exhibited a general divide between northwest and south Sweden, and regional rural and urban areas. We conclude that it is possible to identify indicators and match them with verifier variables to support inclusion of social and cultural values in planning.

Translating policies about sustainable development as a social process and sustainability outcomes into the real world of social–ecological systems involves several challenges. Hence, research policies advocate improved innovative problem-solving capacity. One approach is transdisciplinary research that integrates research disciplines, as well as researchers and practitioners. Drawing upon 14 experiences of problem-solving, we used group modeling to map perceived barriers and bridges for researchers’ and practitioners’ joint knowledge production and learning towards transdisciplinary research. The analysis indicated that the transdisciplinary research process is influenced by (1) the amount of traditional disciplinary formal and informal control, (2) adaptation of project applications to fill the transdisciplinary research agenda, (3) stakeholder participation, and (4) functional team building/development based on self-reflection and experienced leadership. Focusing on implementation of green infrastructure policy as a common denominator for the delivery of ecosystem services and human well-being, we discuss how to diagnose social–ecological systems, and use knowledge production and collaborative learning as treatments.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13280-012-0372-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Swedish forest and environmental policies imply that forests should be managed so that all naturally occurring species are maintained in viable populations. This requires maintenance of functional networks of representative natural forest and cultural woodland habitats. We first review the policy implementation process regarding protected areas in Sweden 1991-2010, how ecological knowledge was used to formulate interim short-term and strategic long-term biodiversity conservation goals, and the development of a hierarchical spatial planning approach. Second, we present data about the amount of formally protected and voluntarily set aside forest stands, and evaluate how much remains in terms of additional forest protection, conservation management and habitat restoration to achieve forest and environmental policy objectives in the long-term. Third, a case study in central Sweden was made to estimate the functionality of old Scots pine, Norway spruce and deciduous forest habitats, as well as cultural woodland, in different forest regions. Finally, we assess operational biodiversity conservation planning processes. We conclude that Swedish policy pronouncements capture the contemporary knowledge about biodiversity and conservation planning well. However, the existing area of protected and set-aside forests is presently too small and with too poor connectivity. To bridge this gap, spatial planning, management and restoration of habitat, as well as collaboration among forest and conservation planners need to be improved.

The situation for governors and managers of natural resources has increased in complexity. Previously it was enough to sustain the yields of wood, food and energy. Today, maintenance of ecosystem services, conservation of biodiversity, rural development and human wellbeing are new additional objectives. At the same time there are new risks and uncertainties linked to climate change, economic globalisation, energy security and water supply. Consequently, adaptive and holistic research, governance and management are needed. Landscape is a concept and framework that can be used as an approach to enhance implementation of policies about sustainable development as a societal process and sustainability as outcomes on the ground. For our analysis to define the landscape approach we used a hierarchical framework consisting of principles, concepts and initiatives; and included three principles defining SD and sustainability and five international concepts to analyze its implementation for our analysis to define landscape approach. We propose a practical operationalization that consists of five core attributes, (1) a sufficiently large area that matches management requirements and challenges to deliver desired goods, services and values, (2) multi-level and multi-sector stakeholder collaboration that promotes sustainable development as a social process, (3) commitment to and understanding of sustainability as an aim among stakeholders, (4) integrative knowledge production, and (5) sharing of experience, results and information, to develop local or tacit to general or explicit knowledge. Finally, we discuss the need for integrative research to study landscape approach concepts and what local initiatives using different concepts deliver on the ground.

BackgroundThere are many ethnobotanical studies on the use of wild plants and mushrooms for food and medicinal treatment in Europe. However, there is a lack of comparative ethnobotanical research on the role of non-wood forest products (NWFPs) as wild food and medicine in local livelihoods in countries with different socio-economic conditions. The aim of this study was to compare the present use of wild food and medicine in three places representing different stages of socio-economic development in Europe. Specifically we explore which plant and fungi species people use for food and medicine in three selected rural regions of Sweden, Ukraine and the Russian Federation.MethodsWe studied the current use of NWFPs for food and medicine in three rural areas that represent a gradient in economic development (as indicated by the World Bank), i.e., Småland high plain (south Sweden), Roztochya (western Ukraine), and Kortkeros (Komi Republic in North West Russia). All areas were characterised by (a) predominating rural residency, (b) high forest coverage, and (c) free access to NWFPs. A total of 205 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with local residents in the three study areas. The collected NWFPs data included (1) the species that are used; (2) the amount harvested, (3) uses and practices (4) changes over time, (5) sources of knowledge regarding the use of NWFPs as wild food and medicine and (6) traditional recipes.ResultsIn Sweden 11 species of wild plant and fungi species were used as food, and no plant species were used for medicinal purposes. In Ukraine the present use of NWFPs included 26 wild foods and 60 medicinal species, while in Russia 36 food and 44 medicinal species were reported.ConclusionsIn the economically less developed rural areas of Ukraine and Russia, the use of NWFPs continues to be an important part of livelihoods, both as a source of income and for domestic use as food and medicine. In Sweden the collection of wild food has become mainly a recreational activity and the use of medicinal plants is no longer prevalent among our respondents. This leads us to suggest that the consumption of wild food and medicine is influenced by the socio-economic situation in a country.

No abstract

Policies at multiple levels pronounce the need to encompass both social and ecological systems in governance and management of natural capital in terms of resources and ecosystems. One approach to knowledge production and learning about landscapes as social–ecological systems is to compare multiple case studies consisting of large spaces and places. We first review the landscape concepts’ biophysical, anthropogenic, and intangible dimensions. Second, we exemplify how the different landscape concepts can be used to derive measurable variables for different sustainability indicators. Third, we review gradients in the three dimensions of the term landscape on the European continent, and propose to use them for the stratification of multiple case studies of social–ecological systems. We stress the benefits of the landscape concepts to measure sustainability, and how this can improve collaborative learning about development toward sustainability in social–ecological systems. Finally, analyses of multiple landscapes improve the understanding of context for governance and management.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13280-012-0368-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

While sustainable forest management (SFM) policy processes are well developed, implementation on the ground remains a challenge. Given the diversity of biophysical conditions, economic histories and governance systems on the European continent, regionally and temporally adapted and adaptive solutions are needed for both social and ecological systems. To illustrate this, we apply (1) a biographic forest and woodland history approach to central Sweden's Bergslagen region, where boreal sustained yield forestry was widely applied first and (2) a comparative case study approach using five European landscapes that represent different forest history phases in Scotland, Germany, Ukraine and Russia. Additionally, we illustrate the need to learn from reference landscapes for natural forest and cultural woodland systems such as in economically remote regions in Romania, Russia and on the Iberian Peninsula. We conclude that there is great opportunity for innovative knowledge production about both governance and management for different SFM dimensions based on comparisons among concrete landscapes. In addition, there is a need to develop local place-based social learning processes that are characterized by a focus on a geographical area, commitment to SFM policy visions and collaborative approaches to development that include both ecological and social systems.