12 pages., via online journal., Similar to other parts of the world, European society is becoming increasingly urban, both in a physical as in an economic and socio-cultural sense. As a result, the relationships between society and nature, including forests, are changing, and forestry as structural intervention in forest ecosystems has had to adapt itself to changing societal pressures and demands. The planning and managing of woodlands in and near urban areas has been the most directly affected by the urbanisation process. Many European countries have a long tradition of ‘town forestry’, serving as basis for current developments in urban forestry, i.e. the planning and management of all forest and tree resources in and near urban areas for the benefit of local society. Through the adaptation to the specific demands of local urban societies, a type of forestry has emerged which is structurally different from classic forestry. It focuses, for example, on the social and environmental values of urban woodlands rather than on wood production and emphasising the importance of communication — ranging from information to participation/power sharing — between stakeholders. This paper investigates ways to communicate urban forests and forestry to urban inhabitants and other stakeholders, based on results of a comparative study of main European cities. It explores the role which urban forestry has been playing in the development of forestry at large, especially with regards to better incorporating changing social values and interests.
10 pages., Via online journal., Forest ownership is changing in Europe. Reasons include recent institutional changes in Eastern Europe, changing lifestyles of non-agricultural owners and afforestation. At present, there is little comparative analysis across Europe, and the implications that these changes have for forest management and for the fulfilment and redefinition of policy objectives have not been addressed systematically. This paper has been developed in the framework of a European research network on forest ownership change, based on conceptual work, literature reviews and empirical evidence from 28 European countries. It aims to provide an overview of the state of knowledge, to discuss relevant issues and provide conceptual and practical foundations for future research, forest management approaches, and policy making. In particular, it discusses possible approaches for classifying forest ownership types and understandings of “new” forest ownership. One important insight is that the division into public and private forests is not as clear as often assumed and that an additional category of semi-public (or semi-private) forms of forest ownership would be desirable. Another recommendation is that the concepts of “new forest owners” vs. “new forest owner types” should be differentiated more consciously. We observe that, in research and policy practice, the mutual relations between forest ownership structure and policies are often neglected, for instance, how policies may directly and indirectly influence ownership development, and what different ownership categories mean for the fulfilment of policy goals. Finally, we propose that better support should be provided for the development of new, adapted forest management approaches for emerging forest owner types. Forest ownership deserves greater attention in studies dealing with forest policy or forest management.
