Article, 2024

The priorities in managing forest disturbances to enhance forest resilience: A comparison of a literature analysis and perceptions of forest professionals

Forest Policy and Economics, ISSN 1389-9341, 1872-7050, Volume 158, Page 103119, 10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103119

Contributors

Nikinmaa, Laura 0000-0003-4020-1045 (Corresponding author) [1] [2] De Koning, Johannes H C [3] Derks, Jakob [4] Grabska-Szwagrzyk, Ewa Maria 0000-0001-6783-3355 [5] Konczal, Agata Agnieszka [4] Lindner, Marcus 0000-0002-0770-003X [1] Socha, Jarosław Franciszek 0000-0002-9568-5764 [6] Muys, Bart 0000-0001-9421-527X [2]

Affiliations

  1. [1] European Forest Institute
  2. [NORA names: Germany; Europe, EU; OECD];
  3. [2] KU Leuven
  4. [NORA names: Belgium; Europe, EU; OECD];
  5. [3] University of Copenhagen
  6. [NORA names: KU University of Copenhagen; University; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  7. [4] Wageningen University & Research
  8. [NORA names: Netherlands; Europe, EU; OECD];
  9. [5] Jagiellonian University
  10. [NORA names: Poland; Europe, EU; OECD];

Abstract

Climate change alters the operational environment of forest management. The need to increase forest resilience and manage forests based on the best available knowledge is urgent. However, it is unclear to what extent scientific knowledge is integrated into practical forest management guidance. To explore how the integration of research works in forest management guidance, we reviewed literature on the effects of forest management measures on disturbance impacts and conducted two rounds of semi-structured interviews. First, we interviewed forest professionals from nine European countries on what they perceive to be the best forest management measures to increase resilience to forest disturbances. Second, we interviewed forest professionals responsible for developing and adapting forest management guidelines in five European countries on the barriers they perceive in integrating research into practice. Both literature review results and interviews were analysed inductively with MAXQDA software coding. We found a discrepancy between forest management measures frequently addressed in scientific literature and those favored by forest professionals. Some measures that forest managers broadly perceive as important for increasing resilience to disturbances are scarcely studied, indicating that the science-practice interphase could benefit from more application relevant research. The lack of relevant information that could facilitate the practical application of measures and the lack of professional capacity were seen by forest professionals to be the main barriers in integrating research findings into forest management. The results showed that there is a need to support the integration of research findings into practice by increasing the capacities for providing forest management guidance.

Keywords

European countries, MAXQDA, analysis, application of measures, applications, barriers, capacity, changes, climate, climate change, code, comparison, countries, discrepancy, disturbance impacts, disturbances, effect, findings, forest, forest disturbance, forest management, forest management guidelines, forest management measures, forest professionals, forest resilience, guidance, guidelines, impact, increase forest resilience, increase resilience, information, integration, integration of research findings, interphase, interviews, knowledge, lack, lack of relevant information, literature, literature analysis, literature review results, management, management guidance, management guidelines, management measures, measurements, operating environment, perception, practice, priority, professional capacity, professionals, relevant information, relevant research, research, research findings, research work, resilience, results, review results, reviewed literature, scientific knowledge, scientific literature, semi-structured interviews, software code, work

Funders

  • National Science Center
  • Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture

Data Provider: Digital Science