Knowledge production and learning for sustainable forest management on the ground: Pan-European landscapes as a time machine

Abstract

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.

Green infrastructures and intensive forestry: Need and opportunity for spatial planning in a Swedish rural–urban gradient

“…Concepts based on the landscape approach include Biosphere reserve (Bridgewater, 2002;Elbakidze et al, in press), Model Forest (IMFN, 2008;Elbakidze et al, 2012) and LongTerm SocioEcological Research (Haberl et al, 2006). These concepts are organised as international networks with the opportunity for learning among landscapes with different histories and governance systems (Angelstam et al, 2011b).…”

Monitoring and management of Cerambyx cerdo in the Mediterranean region – a review and the potential role of citizen science

“…It has been shown several times that knowledge coming from non-professionals, either called citizen science (Silvertown 2009, Conrad and Hilchey 2010, Kosmala et al 2016, Burgess et al 2017, Casula et al 2017, McKinley et al 2017, Zapponi et al 2017 or local ecological knowledge (Anadón et al 2009, Irvine et al 2009, Angelstam et al 2011, Vignoli et al 2016 can be a reliable source of information for species conservation and management. Nevertheless, many studies involving non-professionals still emphasise the role of citizens as data collectors (Silvertown 2009, Kosmala et al 2016, Zapponi et al 2017, while from the social fields there have been calls to move away from using citizens on unequal terms and towards treating citizens as scientists to create learning networks with real transformative potential (Lakshminarayanan 2007, Feyerabend 2011, Bela et al 2016) to achieve conservation goals (Conrad andHilchey 2010, McKinley et al 2017).…”

What is the impact of active management on biodiversity in boreal and temperate forests set aside for conservation or restoration? A systematic map

“…This fact can be explained by (1) the prevailing non-intervention policy in Russian reserves, which are also much more intact than those in western Europe, and (2) a lack of experimental biodiversity research traditions in managed forests. Intact Russian forests could provide important reference areas for active management practices in the future, particularly for assessing the broad-scale effectiveness of interventions in impoverished European forests (see also [63]). Unfortunately, the development of experimental approaches for sustainable forest management remains a marginal issue for the Russian forestry sector [64].…”