Search

In Europe, private forest owners play an important role in achieving sustainability goals, such as those set by the European Green Deal. Efficient communication and coordination with these actors is therefore central. However, ongoing structural changes in forest ownership have in many cases silenced traditional communication channels, especially those involving owners of small forests. Their economic performance is often negligible at an individual level, yet collectively their forests play a pivotal role in a context of increasing demand for wood products. In this article, we analyse and compare forest campaigns in nine European countries. Specifically, we assess one-way and two-way communication models applying different techniques to engage (non-traditional) forest owners. Our analysis of 34 campaigns shows that (i) one-way communication models are still more widely used in the forest sector to engage non-traditional forest owners than two-way communication models; (ii) one-way communication aims at informing and is effective for short-term awareness raising, while two-way communication aims at persuading and is essential to trigger forest management activities over the long-term, (iii) interactive learning tools can play a crucial role for reaching and engaging (non-traditional) forest owners. We further conclude that campaigns could be improved by having 1) joint campaigns with public and private actors, 2) convincing narratives developed based on a good understanding of forest owners' motivations, 3) adapting the timing of campaigns to windows of opportunities and 4) developing intermediary associations (e.g. non-traditional forest owner associations) as connectors and trust builders between different actors as they play a crucial role in providing information to forest owners and supporting their engagement.

Restitution of private land ownership has been a major undertaking influencing the forest sector in many post-communist countries. The Czech Republic and Slovakia are typical representatives of the countries where major societal changes have taken place since the fall of communism in 1989, including the restitution process of the nationalized property. The aim of this article is to analyse the process of the forest land restitution with the emphasis on common and different features between the two countries. Based on a critical evaluation of published reports, articles and valid legislation, the course of the restitution process and its current state and situation in the Czech Republic and Slovakia are described. The restitution of the property collectivized by the communist regime, including forest property, was enabled by the federal law in both countries. Even after their split in 1993 the restitution process unfolded in a similar way in both states, with the notable exception of church property in the Czech Republic. Unlike Slovakia, a country with high religious predominance, where the church property restitution was resolved almost immediately, in the Czech Republic the legislation governing the church property restitution was not issued till 2012. In both countries the restitution process resulted in the differentiation of forest land ownership, now presenting challenges for the formulation of forestry policies. In terms of forest management and protection, the most problematic are small-scale forest owners who have lost ties to their restituted forest property and cannot or do not want to manage it.

Private forests are widespread in Europe providing a range of ecosystem services of significant value to society, and there are calls for novel policies to enhance their provision and to face the challenges of environmental changes. Such policies need to acknowledge the importance of private forests, and importantly they need to be based on a deep understanding of how property rights held by private forest owners vary across Europe. We collected and analysed data on the content of property rights based on formal legal requirements existing in 31 European jurisdictions. To allow a comparison across jurisdictions, we constructed an original Property Rights Index for Forestry encompassing five rights domains (access, withdrawal, management, exclusion and alienation). We documented substantial variation of the private forest owners’ rights, and notably to i) make decisions in operational management and the formulation of management goals, ii) withdraw timber resources from their forest, and iii) exclude others from the use of forest resources. We identified broad relations between the scope for decision making of private forest owners and jurisdictions’ former socio-political background and geographical distribution. The variation in the content of property rights has implications for the implementation of international environmental policies, and stresses the need for tailored policy instruments, when addressing European society’s rural development, the bioeconomy, climate change mitigation measures and nature protection strategies., Land Use Policy, 76, ISSN:0264-8377, ISSN:1873-5754

Natura 2000 is the core pillar in the European Union’s (EU) biodiversity conservation policy. It is an EU-wide ecological network of protected areas that cuts across countries’ borders, administrative levels, policy sectors and socio-economic contexts. The network is established and managed according to the legally-binding provisions of the 1979 EU Birds Directive (79/409/EEC, revised in 2009) and the 1992 EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC). Natura 2000 aims to achieve biodiversity conservation and to combine it with the sustainable development of land and natural resources. It can allow for continuation of land uses (eg agriculture, forestry) as long as they do not significantly compromise conservation objectives for habitats and species within and beyond the network. The Natura 2000 network now covers almost 18% of the EU’s territory. Forests are of crucial importance for Natura 2000 and vice versa. Almost 50% of the whole coverage of the network is comprised of forests. This means that nearly 25% of the total forest area in the EU-28 is part of the EU-wide network of protected areas. Yet knowledge about the implementation of Natura 2000 in forests and its effects on biodiversity, forest management and other land uses across the EU is fragmented. This science-based study aims to narrow the gaps in the scholarly, practical and policy- related knowledge. It looks from policy, economic and ecological perspectives at the monitoring of forest biodiversity in Europe, as well as the challenges, achievements, effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of Natura 2000 in forests in the EU- 28. The study provides conclusions and recommendations that can support decisionmaking in policy and practice.