Search results

WOS: 000344355700037 ; Voluntary cooperation and the support of stakeholders carry a major importance in the development of Model Forests. The identification of the support level of local organizations as stakeholders in the Bucak Model Forest initiative, located in the Mediterranean region of Turkey, constitutes the theme of this study. Within this scope, the views of the stakeholders comprising local government units (LGUs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), village councils (VCs), professional organizations (POs) and forest products enterprises (FPEs) located in the district of Bucak were collected by utilizing a survey technique. The data were analysed by using non-parametric statistical analyses due to the absence of a normal distribution. The results show that the information provided about the Model Forest concept to the stakeholders located in the district on the Bucak Model Forest initiative was identified as a factor impacting the support level. Moreover, it was also observed that the stakeholders were more willing to provide advisory support rather than financial support. NGOs and VCs were identified as stakeholders who could not provide financial support due to their restricted budgets. We discuss the benefits for a Model Forest initiative of establishing international cooperation to strengthen the local and regional sustainable development process.

Building the adaptive capacity of interlinked social and ecological systems is assumed to improve implementation of sustainable forest management (SFM) policies. One mechanism is collaborative learning by continuous evaluation, communication, and transdisciplinary knowledge production. The Model Forest (MF) concept, developed in Canada, is intended to encourage all dimensions of sustainable development through collaboration among stakeholders of forest resources in a geographical area. Because the MF approach encompasses both social and ecological systems, it can be seen as a process aimed at improving adaptive capacity to deal with uncertainty and change. We analyzed multi-stakeholder approaches used in four MF initiatives representing social–ecological systems with different governance legacies and economic histories in the northwest of the Russian Federation (Komi MF and Pskov MF) and in Sweden (Vilhelmina MF and the Foundation Säfsen Forests in the Bergslagen region). To describe the motivations behind development of the initiative and the governance systems, we used qualitative openended interviews and analyzed reports and official documents. The initial driving forces for establishing new local governance arrangements were different in all four cases. All MFs were characterized by multilevel and multi-sector collaboration. However, the distribution of power among stakeholders ranged from clearly top down in the Russian Federation to largely bottom up in Sweden. All MF initiatives shared three main challenges: (a) to develop governance arrangements that include representative actors and stakeholders, (b) to combine top-down and bottom-up approaches to governance, and (c) to coordinate different sectors' modes of landscape governance. We conclude that, in principle, the MF concept is a promising approach to multi-stakeholder collaboration. However, to understand the local and regional dimensions of sustainability, and the level of adaptability of such multi-stakeholder collaboration initiatives, empirical studies of outcomes are needed. To assess the adaptive capacity, the states and trends of economic, ecological, social, and cultural dimensions in actual landscapes need to be linked to how the multistakeholder collaboration develops and performs over the long term.

AbstractAddressing the pressure that population growth puts on the environment has become a high‐level policy priority. Less discussed is the role of population decline in either enhancing or degrading the natural environment, and how the its reshaping can help new forms of de‐peripheralization and de‐marginalization. A long‐term trajectory of marginalization and peripheralization of depopulating places can be reversed in certain situations by adopting a more holistic and sustainable analytical and policy framing. To do this, here we integrate different types of diagnosis frameworks. The first, based on factors that the literature indicates as factors leading to negative effects of depopulation, for which the revitalization of such places is suggested, and the second, proposed in this paper, which adds the integrity of the ecosystems involved in places undergoing depopulation processes. Our findings suggest that as we add ecosystem integrity factor to observations, in some cases, revitalization is possible even in the localities displaying the potentially negative effects of depopulation decrease. This suggests that whereas in some places a policy‐managed abandonment may be appropriate to release human pressures over such degraded ecosystems, in other cases, revitalization may be a viable alternative for such settlements.

Wetlands are complex social-ecological systems, which provide both important habitat for species, and multiple tangible and intangible benefits for people. Sustaining long-term benefits through restoration, conservation, and sustainable use is often linked to integrative and adaptive approaches to wetlands management. Such approaches assume democratic ideals, and require multilevel, multisector, and multiactor participation in governance and management arrangements. How then can functional wetlands be restored and sustainably managed as social-ecological systems in strongly state-centric, top-down governance contexts, such as in former Soviet republics? Using three case studies of wetland restoration and management for ecosystem functionality, biodiversity conservation, and human livelihoods, we employ a complex systems approach to analyze key governance and management dynamics underpinning initiatives toward sustainable wetlands in Belarus. We identified five core processes, namely, planning, garnering stakeholder support, obtaining key inputs (financial, human, material, technological, fixed capital), implementing core activities, and integrating learning and knowledge cycles. Key constraints concerned institutional hierarchies, onerous regulations, "negativism," and financing difficulties. Strategies relating to perception management, risk mitigation, and learning are identified as key to enabling beneficial feedback loops relating to core processes. Although path-dependent societal dynamics of the Soviet era continue to influence wetland systems, combinations of social and ecological crises created windows of opportunity for active participation among nongovernmental actors. Major opportunities for enabling emergent management approaches included identification of confluences of interest amongst stakeholders, as well as the continued mutual integration of Belarus with the international community.

-Sustainable landscapes require evidence-based knowledge about multiple goods, services and values, as well as integrated place-based collaboration among actors and stakeholders at multiple levels. -EUROSCAPES is an international network of researchers, journalists and practitioners that supports sharing of knowledge about how to maintain and develop sustainable landscapes. --Euro. is about the diversity of places in the European continent's East and West - from the Ural Mountains and Caucasus to the Atlantic Ocean. --.scapes links to the word landscape, which has biophysical, anthropogenic and perceived dimensions. -EUROSCAPES gathers and communicates knowledge using three series of publications: --EUROSCAPES News with short texts and illustrations that can be used by journalists. --EUROSCAPES Communication with popular summaries of peer-reviewed publications and reports. --EUROSCAPES Report with longer peer-reviewed comprehensive text. -EUROSCAPES uses the web site www.euroscapes.org to disseminate these publication series using five themes: People, Places, Practices, Projects, and Publications.

The Biosphere Reserve (BR) concept aims at encouraging sustainable development (SD) towards sustainability on the ground by promoting three core functions: conservation, development, and logistic support. Sweden and Ukraine exemplify the diverse governance contexts that BRs need to cope with. We assessed how the BR concept and its core functions are captured in national legislations. The results show that the core functions are in different ways reflected in legal documents in both countries. While in Ukraine the BR concept is incorporated into legislation, in Sweden the concept is used as a soft law. In Ukraine managers desired stronger legal enforcement, while in Sweden managers avoided emphasis on legislation when collaborating with local stakeholders. Hence, BR implementation have adapted to different political cultures by development of diverse approaches. We conclude that a stronger legal support might not be needed for BRs, rather SD needs to be recognized as an integrated place-based process at multiple levels.

Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is one of the leading forest certification schemes. While many studies concern political aspects and social outcomes of FSC, little is known about the contribution of certification to biodiversity conservation. In Europe, the Russian Federation and Sweden have the largest areas of FSC certified forest. We assessed the potential of FSC certification for boreal biodiversity conservation in terms of standard content, and outcomes as habitat area set aside and habitat network functionality. First, we compared the biodiversity conservation indicators at different spatial scales in Swedish and Russian FSC standards. Second, focusing on one large state forest management unit in each country, we compared the areas of formally and voluntarily set aside forests for biodiversity conservation. Third, we evaluated the structural habitat connectivity by applying morphological spatial pattern analysis, and potential functional connectivity by using habitat suitability index modelling for virtual species. The Russian standard included indicators for all spatial scales of biodiversity conservation, from tree and stand to land-scape and ecoregions. The Swedish standard focused mainly on stand and tree scales. The area of voluntary set-asides for FSC was similar in Sweden and Russia, while formal protection in the Russian case study was three times higher than in the Swedish one. Swedish set-aside core areas were two orders of magnitude smaller, had much lower structural and potential functional connectivity and were located in a fragmented forestland holding. We conclude that to understand the potential of FSC certification for biodiversity conservation both the standard content, and its implementation on the ground, need to be assessed. We discuss the potential of FSC certification for biodiversity conservation with different levels of ambition. We stress the need for developing rapid assessment tools to evaluate outcomes of FSC for biodiversity conservation on the ground, which could be used by forest managers and FSC-auditors toward adaptive governance and management.

This paper interrogates how the increasing stringency of international rules on Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as reflected in the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)'s certification standards, is shaping the rights afforded indigenous and local communities in Russia. Viewing the FSC as a 'global governance generating network' (GGN) that gains rule-making authority through diverse 'forums of negotiation' at multiple scales, we examine how international rules are negotiated and re-configured regarding 1) the 'scope' of requirements – who is included or excluded from FPIC and 2) 'prescriptiveness' – the level and specificity of the rights afforded to FPIC holders. We find that Russian stakeholders perceive the increasing prescriptiveness of FSC's global FPIC policies as disrupting their existing norms of negotiated compromise, and originating from well-defined and politically influential indigenous populations elsewhere in the world. This has spurred intense debate on the scope of who should qualify for FPIC in Russia. While FSC-Russia's Social Chamber members have used formal standard-setting processes to negotiate for the increased stringency and scope of some FPIC requirements, industry-backed forums have inserted numerous exceptions, and drawn on external expertise and legal counsel to further restrict who counts as an FPIC rights-holder. These ongoing contestations highlight the risk that prescriptive international standards protecting local rights may narrow the scope of whose rights matter in their local implementation.

The situation for governors and managers of natural resources has increased in complexity. Previously it was enough to sustain the yields of wood, food and energy. Today, maintenance of ecosystem services, conservation of biodiversity, rural development and human wellbeing are new additional objectives. At the same time there are new risks and uncertainties linked to climate change, economic globalisation, energy security and water supply. Consequently, adaptive and holistic research, governance and management are needed. Landscape is a concept and framework that can be used as an approach to enhance implementation of policies about sustainable development as a societal process and sustainability as outcomes on the ground. For our analysis to define the landscape approach we used a hierarchical framework consisting of principles, concepts and initiatives; and included three principles defining SD and sustainability and five international concepts to analyze its implementation for our analysis to define landscape approach. We propose a practical operationalization that consists of five core attributes, (1) a sufficiently large area that matches management requirements and challenges to deliver desired goods, services and values, (2) multi-level and multi-sector stakeholder collaboration that promotes sustainable development as a social process, (3) commitment to and understanding of sustainability as an aim among stakeholders, (4) integrative knowledge production, and (5) sharing of experience, results and information, to develop local or tacit to general or explicit knowledge. Finally, we discuss the need for integrative research to study landscape approach concepts and what local initiatives using different concepts deliver on the ground.

The policy term green infrastructure highlights the need to maintain functional ecosystems as a foundation for sustainable societies. Because forests are the main natural ecosystems in Europe, it is crucial to understand the extent to which forest landscape management delivers functional green infrastructures. We used the steep west-east gradient in forest landscape history, land ownership, and political culture within northern Europe's Baltic Sea Region to assess regional profiles of benefits delivered by forest landscapes. The aim was to support policy-makers and planners with evidence-based knowledge about the current conditions for effective wood production and biodiversity conservation. We developed and modeled four regional-level indicators for sustained yield wood production and four for biodiversity conservation using public spatial data. The western case study regions in Sweden and Latvia had high forest management intensity with balanced forest losses and gains which was spatially correlated, thus indicating an even stand age class distribution at the local scale and therefore long-term sustained yields. In contrast, the eastern case study regions in Belarus and Russia showed spatial segregation of areas with forest losses and gains. Regarding biodiversity conservation indicators, the west-east gradient was reversed. In the Russian, Belarusian, and Latvian case study regions, tree species composition was more natural than in Sweden, and the size of contiguous areas without forest loss was larger. In all four case study regions, 54-85% of the total land base consisted of forest cover, which is above critical fragmentation thresholds for forest landscape fragmentation. The results show that green infrastructures for wood production and biodiversity conservation are inversely related among the four case study regions, and thus rival. While restoration for biodiversity conservation is needed in the west, intensified use of wood and biomass is possible in the east. However, a cautious approach should be applied because intensification of wood production threatens biodiversity. We discuss the barriers and bridges for spatial planning in countries with different types of land ownership and political cultures and stress the need for a landscape approach based on evidence-based collaborative learning processes that include both different academic disciplines and stakeholders that represent different sectors and levels of governance.