Towards sustainable forest management in the European Union through polycentric forest governance and an integrated landscape approach

Abstract

Context Achieving sustainable development as an inclusive societal process, and securing sustainability and resilience of human societies as well as the natural environment are wicked problems. Realising sustainable forest management (SFM) policy in local landscapes is one example. Objectives Using the European Union as a case study for the implementation of SFM policy across multiple governance levels in different contexts, we discuss the benefits of adopting an integrated landscape approach with place and space, partnership and sustainability as three pillars. Methods We map the institutional frameworks for implementing SFM policy within all EU member states. Next, we analyse whether or not there is EUlevel forest governance, and how power is distributed among EU, member state and operational levels. Results Mechanisms to steer a centralized forest governance approach towards SFM in the EU are marginal. Instead, there is a polycentric forest governance with 90 national and sub-national governments, which create and implement own and EU-wide SFMrelated policies. Additionally, both among and within regional governance units there is a large variation in governance arrangements linked to land ownership at the operational level. Conclusions To effectively translate EU-wide SFM and SFM-related policies into action in local landscapes, it is crucial to acknowledge that there are different land ownership structures, landscape histories and alternative value chains based on multiple ecosystem services. Therefore regionally adapted landscape approaches engaging multiple stakeholders and actors through evidence-based landscape governance and stewardship towards sustainable forest landscape management are needed. Model Forest, Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research platform and Biosphere Reserve are three of many examples. Keywords Ecosystem services Á European Union Á Land ownership Á Landscape history Á Region Á Value chain The authors stating that the contents represents only the authors' views.

European Union’s Last Intact Forest Landscapes are at A Value Chain Crossroad between Multiple Use and Intensified Wood Production

“…To effectively translate EU-wide sustainable forest management and related policies into action in local landscapes, it is crucial to acknowledge that there are different land ownership structures, landscape histories and alternative value chains based on multiple ecosystem goods and services. Therefore, regionally adapted landscape approaches engaging multiple stakeholders and actors through evidence-based landscape governance and stewardship towards sustainable forest landscape management are needed [23]. The mountain forest border represents an example of a regulatory policy instrument that in practice was successfully able to conserve mountain forests in Sweden, which according to Sayer [82], Chazdon et al [83] and Mansourian [84] is a rarely recognized outcome in practice for policy instruments with such intentions.…”

“…With respect to the future development of the Scandinavian mountain range green belt, two main and diverging trajectories in forest governance and management can be predicted. The first is an expanding focus on intensive wood and biomass production for provision of industrial raw material and implementation of so-called bio-economy, e.g., [21][22][23]. The second is an increased focus on conservation of the Swedish mountain forests as a "green belt" [24] and mainland for developing forest value chains based on multiple values linked to biodiversity, long-term carbon sequestration, wilderness, reindeer husbandry and amenity values.…”

The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis

“…High (30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45) think (long-term), maintain, (consider the) future, (be) capable or able Medium (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29) (meet) needs, provide, sustain, perpetuate, use, (ensure) quality…”

“…Outcomes from the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (the Earth Summit) in 1992 helped inspire a common understanding of sustainable forest management (SFM) as a system of management that seeks from a forest the sustained yields of several different products and services without diminishing future forest capacity [17][18][19][20], without causing damage to other ecosystems, and while maintaining vitality, Sustainability 2020, 12, 17 3 of 20 regenerative capacity, biodiversity, and productivity [4]. SFM has been put forward as a way to achieve sustainable development within society by addressing the needs of the present without affecting the needs of the future [21,22]. The International Tropical Timber Organization was perhaps the first to develop criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of SFM [17].…”

Landscape concepts and approaches foster learning about ecosystem services

“…Word cloud of landscape approaches as social innovations towards landscape stewardship, including the use of multiple landscapes as an integrative research infrastructure. To obtain this word-cloud we analysed the text of the abstracts of the papers in the SI addressing landscape approaches(Burton et al 2018;Spyra et al 2018;Fagerholm et al 2019;Lazdinis et al 2019;Plieninger et al 2019;Quintas-Soriano et al 2019;Rodríguez Sousa et al 2019;Sarkki et al 2019;Vialatte et al 2019;Zimmermann Teixeira et al 2019).…”