Forest planning across Europe: the spatial scale, tools, andinter-sectoral integration in land-use planning

Abstract

New approaches to forest planning are needed to support the transition of European forests to sustainable management. The aim of this study is to review forest planning systems already in place throughout Europe by exploring a set of case-study countries reflecting the main silvicultural schools of Western Europe, including Belgium, Finland, France, Italy, Portugal, and Slovenia.

A literature review and case-study data were used to assess the scale factors (vertical logic) as well as the relationships between forest planning and other environmental/land-use planning sectors (horizontal logic). The influence of EU policy on the development of forest planning is also discussed. As assessed using the vertical logic, the multi-scale and multi-topic planning approaches adopted in the countries studied here are highly heterogeneous. The horizontal logic shows that despite the importance of an inter-sectoral and harmonic relational framework between forest planning and the planning efforts of other sectors such as landscape and urban planning, the various plans are barely consistent with each other across the European countries studied here. Although interest is growing in the multi-functionality of forests, their sustainable management calls for the development of better integrated planning approaches across Europe.

Keywords:

• forest management planning
• forest program
• multi-scale planning
• multi-topic planning
• inter-sectoral planning

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Eng. João Pinho from the Portuguese Autoridade Florestal Nacional for his help in filling in Figure 2.

Notes

1. It is the assumption that a forest – which is managed functionally to maximize wood production – is also capable of fulfilling its other inherent functions, such as hydro-geological protection, recreational use, environmental values, etc. (see various sources, including Patrone 1940; Peyron 2002).

2. Literally: Reforestation Plan.

3. Literally: Forest Advancement Fund.

4. Literally: Portuguese Forest Project.

5. Literally: Forest Action Plan.

6. The sub-regional level can be identified by the term territorial. However, it is important to note that in some countries (e.g. in Italy) a “territorial” planning level is not necessarily linked to a well-defined area – it is in between the administrative sub-national division (different denomination according to the country – Figure 1) (higher) and estate (lower) levels.

7. Literally, they both use the term “plan” instead of “program”.

8. That is, energy and protected areas/nature conservation programs bias forestry programs or vice versa.