Search

Developments in the past 20 years have changed both the context and the goals of forest management in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries in general and Slovakia in particular. One might therefore wonder if introduced “integrative” forestry paradigms on the national level are able to provide assimilation of different forest management claims and what are the drivers behind these developments. Analysis of forest management and its context therefore requires a multilevel approach including decision-making at higher institutional levels down to the decisions of local natural resources users. In this paper, we use a politicized Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework that can link various institutional levels and allows for the simultaneous evaluation of a broad context of forest management decision-making and its outcome. The research problem is addressed by means of case studies and a qualitative methodology. The results of 50 in-depth interviews with forest managers, owners, and other actors revealed that both the role of power and institutional setup are the core drivers of the socioecological outcome. Although the behavior and relationship of forest managers and owners in various networks vary, it is against this background that distinct forest management approaches are employed. Each approach delivers a similar set of ecosystem services. As timber is the main source of income, the provisioning services have primary importance. Thus, an integration of various forest management claims is challenging due to current forestry paradigms and the amount of resources available.

Within forest governance research, the transfer of power from governmental actors to civil society and market actors has been subject to intense scientific debate. We move forward on this debate by analyzing how ongoing transformations and power shifts in forest governance affect the power relations of actors with interest in various ecosystem services (ESs) in nine countries (Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Turkey). In order to examine power resources of actors, we triangulated 220 qualitative interviews, document analysis, and participatory observations. Governmental actors (with various interests in ESs) were the most powerful actors in most countries, and thus drove forest management. Our analysis shows that the power relations of actors with interest in different forest ESs, varied within the nine countries, though many similarities existed. Governmental, market, and civil society actors differed in their capacity to apply the power strategies “coercion”, “(dis)incentives”, and “dominant information”, to realize their interests in ESs. In Lithuania, Slovakia and Turkey, governmental actors relied mostly on coercion; in the Netherlands on incentives; and in Sweden on dominant information. In Germany, Ireland, Italy and Portugal governmental actors relied on a mix of coercion, incentives, and dominant information. Market actors in all countries relied mostly on incentives, and civil society actors on dominant information as their power strategy.

Forests are of major importance to people, providing fundamental ecosystem services (ESs). Increasing the supply of an ES might negatively affect the supply of another ES. For example, increasing game densities might reduce timber production. Such trade-offs among ESs may lead to conflicts between actors interested in prioritizing different ESs. This study describes which actors dominated conflicts about ES trade-offs, and which power strategies they used to do so. Forest management practices and resulting trade-offs between ESs differ widely among the studied countries: Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Turkey. We triangulated 220 qualitative interviews, literature review, document analysis, and participatory observations. We mapped the interests of actors in ESs and identified conflicts between interests. We tested three hypotheses about which actors were more or less powerful, enabling them to be winners and losers in ES conflicts. Cultural and regulating and maintenance ESs played an important role in conflicts about forest ES trade-offs. We identified the power relations of actors with different interests in ES. Local interests often dominated national interests. Actors interested in provisioning ESs had strong power resources but because of specific bio-geophysical, political or economic conditions, actors with interest in regulating and maintenance ES or cultural ESs can have equal or stronger power resources. The study highlights the relevance of including power analysis in ES research.

The paper presents an application of structural analysis in search of key drivers and barriers of forest management in two Slovak regions: Podpoľanie and Kysuce. A comparison with factors identified in selected European regions is also presented. First, various relevant factors affecting forest management were selected for both regions. The selections draw on the pool of primary data (structured in-person interviews) and secondary data (qualitative analysis of national and European documents). Second, factors were grouped according to the STEEP categories (Society, Technology, Economy, Ecology, and Policy). Subsequently, factors were rigorously assessed by the regional stakeholders in participatory workshops, and their answers were analysed by structural analysis with the help of Parmenides EIDOS™ software. The results show that in both Slovak regions political, economic, and ecological factors dominated over social and technological factors. The comparison with selected European regions revealed that in the Slovak and other European regions, the Policy category dominated due to having the highest number of factors and their overall impact on forest management. In contrast, the least important societal domain was Technology in both the Slovak and other European regions. However, while stakeholders across the selected European regions perceived the Society domain as significant, stakeholders in both Slovak regions perceived the Economy and Ecology domains as more significant.

For forest sustainability and vulnerability assessment, the landscape scale is considered to be more and more relevant as the stand level approaches its known limitations. This review, which describes the main forest landscape simulation tools used in the 20 European case studies of the European project “Future-oriented integrated management of European forest landscapes” (INTEGRAL), gives an update on existing decision support tools to run landscape simulation from Mediterranean to boreal ecosystems. The main growth models and software available in Europe are described, and the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches are discussed. Trades-offs between input efforts and output are illustrated. Recommendations for the selection of a forest landscape simulator are given. The paper concludes by describing the need to have tools that are able to cope with climate change and the need to build more robust indicators for assessment of forest landscape sustainability and vulnerability. The INTEGRAL project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No. 282887. http://www. integral-project.eu/. Moreover, financial support by the Transnational Access to Research Infrastructures activity in the 7th Framework Programme of the EC under the Trees4Future project (No. 284181) for conducting the research is gratefully acknowledged. This research has also received funding from the European Union H2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 691149 (SuFoRun). Researcher Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo was supported by a “Ramon y Cajal” research contract from the MINECO (Ref. RYC-2013-14262) and has received funding from CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya. This paper could be achieved thanks to support of EFIATLANTIC donors: Conseil regional d’Aquitaine, Ministère de l’agriculture et de la forêt.