A viable indicator approach for assessing sustainable forest management in terms of carbon emissions and removals

Wood harvesting is a crucial element of sustainable forest management. Harvesting of wood and non-wood forest products has gained importance for increasing environmental services, economic development and sustainability of forests. The aim of this study was to reveal the efficiency values of regional forest directorates (RFD) for wood harvesting between 2015 and 2020 in Turkey using six input and two output variables. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) and k-means clustering analysis were used. From the results obtained, 35.7% of the 28 RFDs were efficient using the results of the input- and output-oriented Charnes, Cooper, and Rhodes (CCR) model. In the input-oriented CCR model, for inefficient decision-making units (DMUs) to become efficient, on average the variable that needs to be reduced the most is forest area, and the variable that needs to be reduced the least is allowable cutting. Conversely, in the output-oriented CCR model, an average potential increase of 23.84% in the harvest of industrial wood, and of 29.48% for fuelwood, was determined for the inefficient DMUs. In addition, according to the results of the k-means cluster analysis, it was found that the DMUs in the cluster distribution of inefficient DMUs were similar to each other in terms of location. It will make a positive contribution for inefficient DMUs to consider the efficient DMUs shown as references to reach the targeted input/output values to become efficient. In addition, the results of this study are important for enabling forest managers to make performance evaluations based on efficiency analyses.

The evolution of the concept of forest management, from its traditional focus on timber and wood harvesting toward more sustainable practices, has been attributed to changes in the social perception of nature (Sheil et al. 2004). Over the last decades, modern society has come to value and recognize that forests are not only sources of timber, but also critical ecosystems for water production, as sources of medicinal products, as carbon sinks and reservoirs, areas for recreation, and landscapes of great scenic beauty (Dawkins and Philip 1998). The multifunctional characteristic of forests has been recognized in several national and international forums, and is reflected by current definitions of sustainable forest management (Castaneda 2000). One of the most widely accepted definition was purported by the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO): “Sustainable forest management is the process of managing permanent forest land to achieve one or more clearly specified objectives of management with regard to the production of a continuous flow of desired forest products and services without undue reduction of its inherent values and future productivity and without undue undesirable effects on the biophysical and social environment” (ITTO 1992). Within the framework of a number of international efforts and agreements, initiated after the 1992 United Nations Conference for Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, a significant number of countries (from the developed and developing world) have generated principles, criteria and indicators (C&I) to assess and monitor their progress in implementing sustainable forest management (Castaneda 2000). Noteworthy, global-scale events that have engaged in this growing area of interest and

Forest ecosystems are a prime example of the heated debates that have arisen around how forests should be managed, and what services and benefits they should deliver. The European transitions in governance to and from communist regimes have had significant impacts on forests and their management. Unstable legislative and institutional changes prior to, during, and after a communist regime, combined with unique remnant areas of high-conservation-value forests, make Romania an ideal case study to explore the social–ecological transitions of forest landscapes. The aim of this paper is two-fold. First, we present the origins of, the evolution of, and the current state of forest management and ownership in Romania during transitions between the pre-communist (–1945), communist (1945–1989), and EU periods (2007–). Second, we focus on the enablers and barriers in Romania towards sustainable forest management as defined by pan-European forest policies. We used a semi-systematic, five-step scientific literature review on forest ownership, governance, and management in Romania. The analysis shows that both enablers (e.g., forest certification) and barriers (e.g., redundancy and the questionable effectiveness of the network of protected areas; illegal, unsustainable, and unreported logging; loopholes in the legislative framework) have contributed to the current approaches to interpreting forests, forestry, and forest management. The installation of the communist regime translated into sustained wood yield forest management under singular forest ownership, which opposed the previous system and forest ownership pluralism. In the post-communist period, forestland restitution led to significant legislative changes, but forest management must still confront remnant elements of the communist approach. Both communist and post-communist policies related to forests have shaped the evolution of forest landscape management in Romania, thus stressing the need to learn from the past towards securing sustainable forest management into the future. These lessons provide insights on both positive and negative drivers of forest management, which can contribute to smooth future transition towards more sustainable forest management practices.

Sustainable forest management (SFM) plays a critical role in maintaining ecological balance, supporting livelihoods, and mitigating climate change. This study was conducted to explore the management practices and user perspectives regarding sustainable forest management in Nepal, focusing on community forestry and government-led initiatives. Using a mixed-methods approach, data were collected through surveys, interviews, focus group discussions and field observations. A total of 180 user’s opinion were collected in 9 selected forest user groups from four district of Nepal (i.e. Ilam, Jhapa, Sarlahi, and Makawanpur). The study revealed that major forest management practices applied by community users’ are thinning, pruning, and improvement felling. Majority of the users (70.56%) were unsure about the forest management practices prescribed in the Operational plans (OPs). Accordingly, most users (92.78%) were agreed with the opinions that they need to be trained about forest management practices and its implementation. Majority of the users (92.00%) also agreed that participatory forest management modalities like Community Forest (CF), Collaborative Forest Management (CFM) and Leasehold Forest (LHF) area protecting biodiversity and reducing environmental risks. However, people believe that arbitrary policy changes was the main challenges for proper implementation of sustainable forest management practices. Therefore, strengthening capacity-building programs, enhancing government support, developing a consistent guideline, and promoting adaptive management practices are essential for improving sustainable forest resource management in Nepal.

This chapter presents an overview on historical and current forestry and forest management in China. Although China’s natural forests had greatly reduced over the past several centuries due mainly to agricultural development, over-exploration and wars, there has been a sustained growth in total forest area and volume for several decades partly because of the implementation of several national key forestry programs aiming at biodiversity conservation and sustainable forestry development. China’s forest resource today is still insufficient because of low quality and productivity, and inadequate forest management. The major problems of forest management in China include deficiency in linking forest management with end usage, inadequate forest health management, lack of integrated forest landscape management, and unbalanced consideration on economy over environment. Forest management must address increasing concerns on challenges and emerging global issues, of which climate change is identified as the most severe threat. To tackle the existing problems and cope with uncertainties in changing environmental conditions with climate change, landscape ecology can play a major role in facilitating sustainable forest management (SFM) by providing theories and management tools for forest restoration, biodiversity conservation, land and water resource management and forest landscape planning. Forest management practices that consider spatial heterogeneity, pattern-process, disturbance regime, scale and spatial-temporal context of forest landscapes beyond forest boundary are increasingly adopted by forest researchers and managers in China. However, more research is needed to enhance long-term forest ecosystem monitoring, develop cross-scale and multiple-purpose forest management guidelines, improve landscape decision support systems, and formulate integrated ecosystem management policies and practices so that forest landscape management can be adapted to climate change and landscape sustainability can be strengthened.

A growing world population and rapid expansion of cities increase the pressure on basic resources such as water, food and energy. To safeguard the provision of these resources, restoration and sustainable management of landscapes is pivotal, including sustainable forest and water management. Sustainable forest management includes forest conservation, restoration, forestry and agroforestry practices. Interlinkages between forests and water are fundamental to moderate water budgets, stabilize runoff, reduce erosion and improve biodiversity and water quality. Sweden has gained substantial experience in sustainable forest management in the past century. Through significant restoration efforts, a largely depleted Swedish forest has transformed into a well-managed production forest within a century, leading to sustainable economic growth through the provision of forest products. More recently, ecosystem services are also included in management decisions. Such a transformation depends on broad stakeholder dialog, combined with an enabling institutional and policy environment. Based on seminars and workshops with a wide range of key stakeholders managing Sweden’s forests and waters, this article draws lessons from the history of forest management in Sweden. These lessons are particularly relevant for countries in the Global South that currently experience similar challenges in forest and landscape management. The authors argue that an integrated landscape approach involving a broad array of sectors and stakeholders is needed to achieve sustainable forest and water management. Sustainable landscape management—integrating water, agriculture and forests—is imperative to achieving resilient socio-economic systems and landscapes.

Conservation, protection, and proper utilization of forests play an important role in environmental sustainability of the globe. The ultimate goal of sustainable forest management is to create a balanced and appropriate solution for human well-being and preservation of forest ecosystems. However, one of the prominent obstacles to achieve this goal is the gap existing between governmental development aims and the perspectives of local people and communities. Forest conservation requires an integrated management that works in partnership with local communities. Local and community-based forest management is a multi-dimensional approach to sustainable forest management in which different stakeholders with different interests play a part in achieving a common goal. However, little research has been done in this area. In this regard, the main purpose of this chapter was to examine the role of participation of local community in sustainable land and forest management. This purpose fulfilled through six steps. In the first step, the role of community participation in sustainable forest management and its typology were explained. I the second and third steps, the barriers and drivers of local communities’ participation were introduced, respectively. In the fourth step, techniques for participation of local communities in forest management were analyzed. In the fifth step, some practical experiences related to the participation of local communities in forest management were highlighted. In the sixtieth or final step, some social principles were introduced for agricultural system and interventions aiming at sustainable management of forests and lands.

This paper uncovers the importance of people’s place-values on sustainable forest management, and how such values can be incorporated into forest management actions and decision-making. Specifically, it focuses on mapping economic and cultural values on forest ecosystem services; assesses how non-materials and materials benefit from forest ecosystem cause landscape fragmentation; and how this information could assist in better forest planning and management. The data were collected from ten villages surrounding the Ngezi forest reserve in Pemba, Tanzania. Data were collected through participatory mapping, field observation, and focus group discussions. A map of place-values for each respondent was transferred from paper to digital format, digitized and coded using the GIS, and analysed using kernel density. Non-spatial data were processed and integrated into GIS-based spatial analysis. The results indicate that only 12 areas were identified as very high-valued and these require careful consideration for sustainable forest planning and management. About 4 out of 6 very high-valued areas for material services are found inside the reserve. The areas outside the reserve are undervalued and not utilized effectively for material services. Contrary to cultural services, only 1 out of 6 very high-valued places is located inside the reserve. Furthermore, economic situations, together with social driving forces, have been important determinants of forest values in the areas. Therefore, placevalues issues, particularly economic development outcomes, preservation of the aesthetics and improvement of recreational amenities should be considered when examining sustainable forest resource management.

ABSTRACTGlobal wood harvests have steadily increased over the last several decades and are projected to continue growing to match demand for wood products. How forest managers respond to changes in wood demand depends not just on timber prices and production costs but also on competition with other land uses, changes in forest productivity, and land use policies. Wood demand projections are sensitive to assumptions about socioeconomic development, including population growth, economic growth, and policy changes. Using a spatially detailed, process‐based land use model (LandSyMM), we simulate global wood demand, harvests, and forest management intensity under a range of future socioeconomic (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways; SSPs) and climate (Representative Concentration Pathways; RCPs) scenarios. Wood demand is projected for each country using a price‐elastic demand system that models changes in demand for industrial roundwood and wood fuel in response to changes in countries' incomes and endogenously modelled wood prices. Competition for land between forestry and agriculture, including for food and animal feed, is explicitly represented. We find that future wood harvests and forest management intensity vary considerably between scenarios. Different regions show heterogeneous responses to changes in wood demand, with global demand increasing between 27% (SSP1‐RCP2.6) and 102% (SSP3‐RCP7.0) by 2100. The results suggest that additional wood harvests will primarily be met through intensification of forest management and an increase in potential yields arising from climate change and CO2 fertilisation. However, interactions between extreme events, nutrient limitations, and CO2‐driven productivity gains remain uncertain and are not fully captured in the modelled results. Understanding how global forest management will change and its impact on forest structure, species composition, and carbon storage is critical in addressing climate change mitigation and biodiversity protection.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has stimulated much interest in the linkages between the state of ecosystems and human well-being, and resulted in a number of international and national initiatives. For example, the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UKNEA) is being widely discussed in research and land use policy communities, and has already influenced domestic policy (UK National Ecosystem Assessment 2011). The philosophy of ecosystem services is thought by many ecologists to be a good thing, leading to an expectation that their preferred landscapes or habitats will be conserved and that new resources will emerge to underpin and secure wider environmental benefits. Others are interested in particular markets that might develop the opportunities for new business enterprises and the new funding that might make land management more profitable. Our practitioners’ view stems from involvement in British forestry and in particular in the application of ecological research to the policy, planning and management of woodlands and forests. In the practitioner world, we inhabit, a common question is: How does the framework of ecosystem services compare with the prevailing one of sustainable forest management? Or, more prosaically, as a senior forest manager recently put it: What the heck is it all about? We reflect on the common ground and consider possible consequences for forestry and sustainable forest management of incorporating an ecosystem services approach. Our first perspective is that there is confusion around terminology and concepts. Many discussants appear to miss the subtle differences and use concepts from ecosystem services framework, an ecosystem approach, and sustainable forest management seamlessly and interchangeably. As a basis for our perspective, we start, therefore, with brief definitions. The ecosystem approach is considered to be ‘a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way’ (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2004). The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) adopted a definition for sustainable forest management as ‘The stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality, and their potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national and global levels, and that does not cause damage to other ecosystems’ (Helsinki Ministerial Conference 1993). The UKNEA suggested that ‘Ecosystem services are the benefits provided by ecosystems that contribute to making human life possible and worth living’ and that ‘The adoption of an ecosystems approach yields a requirement for an evidence base on ecosystem change and ecosystem service provision to inform decision-making’. Furthermore, the UKNEA sees change in ecosystems as a result of direct and indirect drivers and that, by understanding the important contribution to human well-being, a variety of societal responses may be adopted which lead to further change and possible improvements in ecosystems and their services. It is this operationalising of ecosystem services through the establishment of values and identification of societal responses which we consider as the ecosystem services framework. As a basis for our perspective, we now summarise sustainable forest management, making selective observations using the language of ecosystem services.

SUMMARY The African resource, and in particular the Congo Basin contains the world's second largest forest area, after the Amazon, and there is a global concern for it to be sustainably managed. Practical solutions are essential if sustainable forest management is to be achieved, considering the costs and technical capacity involved. However, a certain number of difficulties must be overcome such as ill-adapted forestry laws, lack of necessary technical capacity amongst the managers and the actual cost of management. Solutions for sustainable forest management therefore include training and negotiations to better adapt legislation as well as practical issues such as reduced impact logging and the promotion of secondary species which will not only have a positive effect on the regeneration and management of the forest, but which are also more efficient in terms of costs. Certification is also a means of achieving a premium to offset the increased costs of sustainable forest management.

This chapter defines and classifies various types of partnerships such as public-private, company-community, non-governmental organisation (NGO)-community, multi-sector or intersectoral, research and political partnerships. It analyzes how partnerships for sustainable forest and tree resource management fit in with mainstream forest management thinking, general development paradigms, Latin American forest policies and the broader academic debate on social movements and multi-spatial interactions. The goals of the partnerships are related to forest conservation, responsible forest use and/or the sustainable production of forest and tree resource products. The chapter also summarizes the lessons learned from the cases in Latin America with regard to the conditions under which partnerships for sustainable forest and resource management can reconcile multiple interests and contribute to pro-poor, socially just and environmentally-friendly forest governance.Keywords: company-community partnerships; environmentally-friendly forest governance; intersectoral partnerships; Latin American forest policies; non-governmental organization (NGO)-community partnerships; political partnerships; public-private partnerships; research partnerships; sustainable forest management; tree resource management

Forest communities (pl. leśne wspólnoty gruntowe) in Poland are an important part of the natural environment and play a significant role in sustainable forest management. They are a form of co-ownership of land, mainly forests, by village inhabitants. In the past, farmers used these common lands for their livelihoods by collecting firewood, grazing, and harvesting wood and undergrowth, initially forming communal structures based on unwritten norms. During the Partitions of Poland, their legal status varied: in the Austrian Partition, they were regulated (e.g. by Joseph II's patent of 1781); in the Prussian Partition, they were transformed into organised forest societies; and in the Russian Partition, they were largely tolerated but not regulated. After Poland regained independence, the decree of 1923 created a legal basis for the formal administration of these forests. While most forests were nationalised during the People's Republic of Poland, some communities survived, especially in mountain regions such as the Beskids and Podhale, due to strong traditions of communal forest management. After 1989, a restitution process based on the 1963 law began, with these communal forests often managed by forestry companies. They have statutes, elect boards of directors, implement forest management plans and participate in environmental projects. Due to the special nature of forest ownership and the need to conserve forest resources, the management of private forests, including community forests, is supervised by local government authorities (pl. starostwo). The public’s right to information, enshrined in Article 61 of the Polish Constitution, is regarded as a subjective right that ensures the transparency and efficiency of public authorities. This right is established in the Act on Access to Public Information of 2001. In forestry, public information includes all data on the activities of bodies supervising forest management. For state forests, supervision is the responsibility of the Ministry of Climate and Environment, while for private forests, including those owned by municipalities, local government authorities (pl. starostwo) are responsible for supervision. The right to public information is universal; anyone may request access regardless of citizenship, residence, age, or legal interest. Our study aimed to identify the key legal, organisational, and informational barriers that hinder the effective and sustainable functioning and management of forest communities in Poland by assessing their current legal status and actual functioning, with particular emphasis on recognising and evaluating these barriers. We collected public information on forest communities from local government authorities in six provinces with the largest share of private forests. We requested address data for the communities (especially those with management companies) and information on their land structure (forest, agriculture, meadows, pastures). Based on this data, a survey with 23 questions was sent to 670 municipalities with forests and registered management companies. The questions covered aspects such as location, year of foundation, land use, timber sales and profit distribution, fire insurance, inheritance, changes to statutes, land register status, and evaluation of the 1963 law. The survey results indicated a very low response rate: only 26 municipalities responded, of which 22 were ultimately analysed. The municipalities analysed were mainly from the Małopolskie (13) and Lubelskie (6) provinces. The area of these communes varied greatly, ranging from 1.67 ha to 1,267 ha, with an average of 196.5 ha. Some communes consisted exclusively of forests (7 out of 22), while others had mixed land use, including pastures and arable land. The largest forest areas were located in the Małopolskie Province, particularly in the municipalities of Sławków (1,170 ha), Siewierz (908 ha), and Zubrzyca Dolna (496 ha). The years of establishment of the municipalities also varied considerably. The oldest parish analysed, Wspólnota Leśno-Gruntowa w Siewierzu, was established in 1523, while 30% were established only after the 1963 Act. Most of the communes managed land for a single village, with an average of 183 members. Regarding timber management, seven communes did not harvest any timber, and only six sold timber on a large scale. For those that harvested timber, the annual timber yield per member ranged from 0.1 to 6 m³ for firewood and from 0.5 to 7.5 m³ for sawlogs. Only one municipality (Siewierz) expressed interest in online timber sales. The statutes of five forest communities provided for the distribution of profits from timber sales among members. Management measures included final felling, thinning, afforestation, and forest regeneration. Only four communities had regulated land registrations, and many reported changes in their managed area, most of which were declining. About 30% of the communities indicated that their statutes needed to be amended, for example, regarding the transfer of shares to family members. A significant number (nine) were interested in joining a provincial to access funding (e.g. for reforestation, road rehabilitation) or to address legal issues relating to shareholders. Nine municipalities also highlighted the need for amendments to the 1963 Act to enable more effective land management.

Forest communities play a vital role in the conservation of forest resources. Understanding communities’ use, attitudes and perceptions of forests and management measures is significant in attaining conservation goals and reducing forest resource use conflicts. This study sought to assess local community’ forest resources use and their perception towards forest status, use and management. Data was collected through household surveys using semi-structured questionnaires, participant observation, Key Informant Interviews (KII), and Focus Group Discussions (FGD). A total of 112 respondents from three adjacent villages within 5 km from the forest boundary were randomly sampled for the household survey while descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. Most (94.6%) of the households reported using products from forests. These products formed an integral part of the households’ energy needs, construction materials, medicine, income generation and daily dietary needs. Firewood was the most collected product from the forest (76.4%) whereas bush meat was the least (4.7%). There were mixed views on the forest management with more than half (54.5%) expressing dissatisfaction with the current management regime citing insecure land tenure system, inadequate integration of the community in forest management and corruption. There was perceived forest degradation due to illegal logging, illegal grazing, forest fires, climate change and encroachment for farming. For sustainable forest management practice therefore, there is a need for incorporating Indigenous knowledge (IK) in forest management plans and putting in place grievance address mechanisms to cater for the needs of local communities when designing forest policies and implementing forest restoration programs.   Key words: Cherang’any hills, Community Forest Association, non-timber forest products, indigenous knowledge, sustainable forest management, forest restoration.

Identifying key actors, barriers and opportunities to lead a transition towards sustainable forest management: an application to the Basque Country, Spain