Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T15:07:50.031Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Forest Landscape Stewardship for Functional Green Infrastructures in Europe's West and East

Diagnosing and Treating Social-Ecological Systems

from Part II - Landscape Stewardship on the Ground

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2017

By
Per Angelstam  and
Marine Elbakidze
Edited by
Claudia Bieling  and
Tobias Plieninger
Claudia Bieling
Affiliation:
Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart
Tobias Plieninger
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen
Get access

Summary

Forests and woodlands form the natural potential vegetation in most of Europe. After a long and gradual domestication into resilient traditional cultural landscapes surrounded by intact forests, the contemporary focus on economic development has led to undesired effects. This involves human migration from rural to urban areas, loss of natural forest and cultural woodlands, modified natural and anthropogenic processes as well as loss of species. In response to this, policies about rural development, biodiversity and ecosystem services have emerged. The green infrastructure concept is a tool for co-ordinated actions among different sectors. However, changing undesired trajectories is difficult. This calls for landscape stewardship approaches that consider the states and trends of landscapes as social-ecological systems, and which can foster collaborative regionally adapted spatial planning. We summarise results from systematic place-based analyses of a suite of landscapes in Europe’s West and East. First, we review results from diagnoses of the current states of both ecological and social systems, and identify challenges regarding the maintenance of functional green infrastructures. Second, we review traditional and emerging treatments in terms of landscape stewardship concepts. We discuss how traditional and regionally adapted landscape stewardship approaches can be advanced by fostering collaborative learning, education and public awareness.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Science and Practice of Landscape Stewardship , pp. 124 - 144
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnoletti, M. (ed.). (2006). The Conservation of Cultural Landscapes. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Andersson, K., Angelstam, P., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M. & Törnblom, J. (2013a). Connecting municipal and regional level planning: Analysis and visualization of sustainability indicators in Bergslagen, Sweden. European Planning Studies, 21, 1210–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, K., Angelstam, P., Elbakidze, M., Axelsson, R. & Degerman, E. (2013b). Green infrastructures and intensive forestry: Need and opportunity for spatial planning in a Swedish rural-urban gradient. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 28, 143–165.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P. & Kuuluvainen, T. (2004). Boreal forest disturbance regimes, successional dynamics and landscape structures – A European perspective. Ecological Bulletins, 51, 117–136.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Jonsson, B.-G. & Roberge, J.-M. (2011a). Protecting forest areas for biodiversity in Sweden 1991–2010: Policy implementation process and outcomes on the ground. Silva Fennica, 45, 1111–1133.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Laestadius, L., Lazdinis, M., Nordberg, M., Pătru-Stupariu, I. & Smith, M. (2011b). Knowledge production and learning for sustainable forest management: European regions as a time machine. Forestry, 84, 581–596.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Elbakidze, M., Axelsson, R., Dixelius, M. & Törnblom, J. (2013a). Knowledge production and learning for sustainable landscapes: Seven steps using social-ecological systems as laboratories. Ambio, 42, 116–128.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Grodzynskyi, M., Andersson, K., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Khoroshev, A., Kruhlov, I. & Naumov, V. (2013b). Measurement, collaborative learning and research for sustainable use of ecosystem services: Landscape concepts and Europe as laboratory. Ambio, 42, 129–145.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Annerstedt, M., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Garrido, P., Grahn, P., Jönsson, K. I., Pedersen, S., Schlyter, P., Skärbäck, E., Smith, M. & Stjernquist, I. (2013c). Solving problems in social-ecological systems: Definition, practice and barriers of transdisciplinary research. Ambio, 42, 254–265.Google Scholar
Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Isacson, M., Gavrilov, D. V., Axelsson, R., Bäckström, M., Degerman, E., Elbakidze, M., Kazakova-Apkarimova, E. Y., Sartz, L., Sädbom, S. & Törnblom, J. (2013d). Learning about the history of landscape use for the future: Consequences for ecological and social systems in Swedish Bergslagen. Ambio, 42, 150–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angelstam, P., Khaulyak, O., Yamelynets, T., Mozgeris, G., Naumov, V., Prots, B., Elbakidze, M., Manton, M., Valasiuk, S. & Chmielewski, T. J. (2017). Green infrastructure at the EU’s eastern border: Effects of road infrastructure development and forest habitat loss. Journal of Environmental Management, 193, 300–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216–224.Google Scholar
Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P. & Svensson, J. (2007). Natural forest and cultural woodland with continuous tree cover in Sweden: How much remains and how is it managed? Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 22, 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Elbakidze, M., Stryamets, N. & Johansson, K.-E. (2011). Sustainable development and sustainability: Landscape approach as a practical interpretation of principles and implementation concepts. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 4, 5–30.Google Scholar
Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Myhrman, L., Sädbom, S., Ivarsson, M., Elbakidze, M., Andersson, K., Cupa, P., Diry, C., Doyon, F., Drotz, M. K., Hjorth, A., Hermansson, J. O., Kullberg, T., Lickers, F. H., McTaggart, J., Olsson, A., Pautov, Y., Svensson, L. & Törnblom, J. (2013). Evaluation of multi-level social learning for sustainable landscapes: Perspective of a development initiative in Bergslagen, Sweden. Ambio, 42, 241–253.Google Scholar
Blicharska, M., Angelstam, P., Antonson, H., Elbakidze, M. & Axelsson, R. (2011). Road, forestry and regional planners’ work for biodiversity conservation and public participation: A case study in Poland's hotspots regions. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 54, 1373–1395.Google Scholar
Bollmann, K. & Braunisch, V. (2013). To integrate or to segregate: Balancing commodity production and biodiversity conservation in European forests. In Integrative Approaches as an Opportunity for the Conservation of Forest Biodiversity, Kraus, D. & Krumm, F. (eds.). Freiburg: European Forest Institute, pp. 18–31.Google Scholar
Cheng, A. S. & Fiero, J. D. (2005). Collaborative learning and the public's stewardship of its forests. In The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century, Gastil, J. & Levine, P. (eds.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley, pp. 164–173.Google Scholar
Chertow, M., Singh, S. J., Haberl, H., Mirtl, M. & Schmid, M. (eds.) (2013). Conclusions. In Long Term Socio-Ecological Research. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 555–561.Google Scholar
Claesson, S., Duvemo, K., Lundström, A. & Wikberg, P. -E. (2015). Skogliga konsekvensanalyser 2015. Skogsstyrelsen Rapport 2015:10. Jönköping: Swedish Forest Agency.Google Scholar
Daniels, S. E. & Walker, G. B. (2001). Working Through Environmental Conflict – The Collaborative Learning Approach. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Dawson, L., Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P. & Gordon, J. (2017). Governance and management dynamics of landscape restoration at multiple scales: Learning from successful environmental managers in Sweden. Journal of Environmental Management, 197: 24–40.Google Scholar
Dubois, A. & Roto, J. (2013). Making the Best of Europe's Sparsely Populated Areas. Stockholm: Nordregio.Google Scholar
Edman, T., Angelstam, P., Mikusinski, G., Roberge, J.-M. & Sikora, A. (2011). Spatial planning for biodiversity conservation: Assessment of forest landscapes’ conservation value using umbrella species requirements in Poland. Landscape and Urban Planning, 102, 16–23.Google Scholar
Elands, B. H. M. & Wiersum, K. F. (2001). Forestry and rural development in Europe: An exploration of socio-political discourses. Forest Policy and Economics, 3, 5–16.Google Scholar
Elbakidze, M. & Angelstam, P. (2007). Implementing sustainable forest management in Ukraine's Carpathian Mountains: The role of traditional village systems. Forest Ecology and Management, 249, 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbakidze, M. & Angelstam, P. (2013). Sustainable forest management from policy to landscape, and back again: A case study in the Ukrainian Carpathian Mountains. In The Carpathians. Integrating Nature and Society Towards Sustainability, Kozak, J., Ostapowicz, K., Bytnerowicz, A. & Wyżga, B. (eds.). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 309–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P., Sandström, C. & Axelsson, R. (2010). Multi-stakeholder collaboration in Russian and Swedish Model Forest initiatives: Adaptive governance towards sustainable forest management? Ecology and Society, 15, 14. (http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art14/).Google Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Nordberg, M. & Pautov, Y. (2011). How does forest certification contribute to boreal biodiversity conservation? Standards and outcomes in Sweden and NW Russia. Forest Ecology and Management, 262, 1983–1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Andersson, K., Angelstam, P., Armstrong, G. W., Axelsson, R., Doyon, F., Hermansson, M., Jacobsson, J. & Pautov, Y. (2013a). Sustained yield forestry in Sweden and Russia: How does it correspond to sustainable forest management policy? Ambio, 42, 160–173.Google Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Angelstam, P., Sandström, C., Stryamets, N., Crow, S., Axelsson, R., Stryamets, G. & Yamelynets, T. (2013b). The biosphere reserves for conservation and development in Ukraine? Legal recognition and establishment of the Roztochya initiative. Environmental Conservation, 40, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Hahn, T., Mauerhofer, V., Angelstam, P. & Axelsson, R. (2013c). Legal framework for biosphere reserves as learning sites for sustainable development: A comparative analysis of Ukraine and Sweden. Ambio, 42, 174–187.Google Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Dawson, L., Andersson, K., Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Stjernquist, I., Teitelbaum, S., Schlyter, P. & Thellbro, C. (2015). Is spatial planning a collaborative learning process? A case study from a rural–urban gradient in Sweden. Land Use Policy, 48, 270–285.Google Scholar
Elbakidze, M., Ražauskaite, R., Manton, M. Angelstam, P., Mozgeris, G., Brumelis, G., Brazaitis, G. & Vogt, P. (2016). The role of forest certification for biodiversity conservation: Lithuania as a case study. European Journal of Forest Research, 135, 361–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erixon, S. (1960). Svenska byar utan systematisk reglering: En jämförande historisk undersökning. Stockholm: Nordiska museet.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013). Green Infrastructure (GI) – Enhancing Europe's Natural Capital. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 34, 487–515.Google Scholar
Fung, A. & Wright, E. O. (2001). Deepening democracy: Innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics and Society, 29, 5–42.Google Scholar
Giergiczny, M., Czajkowski, M., Żylicz, T. & Angelstam, P. (2015). Choice experiment assessment of public preferences for forest structural attributes. Ecological Economics, 119, 8–23.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, L., Baker, S. C., Bauhus, J., Beese, W. J., Brodie, A., Kouki, J., Lindenmayer, D. B., Löhmus, A., Pastur, G. M., Messier, C., Neyland, M., Palik, B., Sverdrup-Thygeson, A., Volney, W. J. A., Wayne, A. & Franklin, J. F. (2012). Retention forestry to maintain multifunctional forests: A world perspective. BioScience, 62, 633–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hann, C. (2003). Property relations, historical justice and contemporary survival in the postsocialist countryside. In Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Report 2002–2003, Schlee, G. & Mann, B. (eds.). Halle-Queis: Druck-Medienverlag, pp. 207–223.Google Scholar
Haberl, H., Winiwarter, V., Andersson, K., Ayres, R. U., Boone, C., Castillo, A., Cunfer, G., Fischer-Kowalski, M., Freudenburg, W. R., Furman, E., Kaufmann, R., Krausmann, F., Langthaler, E., Lotze-Gampen, H., Mirtl, M., Redman, C. L., Reenberg, A., Wardell, A., Warr, B. & Zechmeister, H. (2006). From LTER to LTSER: Conceptualizing the socioeconomic dimension of long-term socioecological research. Ecology and Society, 11, 13. (http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art13/).Google Scholar
Halme, P., Allen, K. A., Auniņš, A., Bradshaw, R. H., Brūmelis, G., Čada, V, Clear, J. L., Eriksson, A.-M., Hannon, G., Hyvärinen, E., Ikauniece, S., Iršėnaitė, R., Jonsson, B. G., Junninen, K., Kareksela, S., Komonen, A., Kotiaho, J. S., Kouki, J., Kuuluvainen, T., Mazziotta, A., Mönkkönen, M., Nyholm, K., Oldėn, A., Shorohova, E., Strange, N., Toivanen, T., Vanha-Majamaa, I., Wallenius, T., Ylisirniö, A.-L. & Zin, E. (2013). Challenges of ecological restoration: Lessons from forests in northern Europe. Biological Conservation, 167, 248–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartel, T. & Plieninger, T. (eds.) (2014). European Wood-Pastures in Transition. A Social-Ecological Approach. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hartel, T., Dorresteijn, I., Klein, C., Máthé, O., Moga, C. I., Öllerer, K., Roellig, M., von Wehrden, H. & Fischer, J. (2013). Wood-pastures in a traditional rural region of Eastern Europe: Characteristics, management and status. Biological Conservation, 166, 267–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, S. P. (1997). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Gurgaon: Penguin Books India.Google Scholar
IMFN (International Model Forest Network) (2008). Model Forest Development Guide. Ottawa: International Model Forest Network Secretariat.Google Scholar
Kates, R. W. (2011). What kind of science is sustainability science? PNAS, 10, 19449–19450.Google Scholar
Kirby, K. J. & Watkins, D. (eds.). (2015). Europe's Changing Woods and Forests: From Wildwood to Cultural Landscapes. Wallingford: CABI.Google Scholar
LaPierre, L. (2003). Canada's model forest program. The Forestry Chronicle, 79, 794–798.Google Scholar
Liu, J., Dietz, T., Carpenter, S. R., Alberti, M., Folke, C., Moran, E., Pell, A. N., Deadman, P., Kratz, T., Lubchenco, J., Ostrom, E., Ouyang, Z., Provencher, W., Redman, C. L., Schneider, S. H. & Taylor, W. W. (2007). Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science, 317, 1513–1516.Google Scholar
Manton, M., Angelstam, P., Milberg, P. & Elbakidze, M. (2016). Wet grasslands as a green infrastructure for ecological sustainability: Wader bird conservation in southern Sweden as a case study. Sustainability, 8, 340.Google Scholar
Marples, D. R. (1984). The kulak in post-war USSR: The West Ukrainian example. Soviet Studies, 36, 560–570.Google Scholar
Mayer, A. L., Kauppi, P. E., Angelstam, P. K, Zhang, Y. & Tikka, P. M. (2005). Importing timber, exporting ecological impact. Science, 308, 59–60.Google Scholar
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005). Current State and Trends. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Mirtl, M., Orenstein, D. E., Wildenberg, M., Peterseil, J. & Frenzel, M. (2013). Development of LTSER platforms in LTER-Europe: Challenges and experiences in implementing place-based long-term socio-ecological research in selected regions. In Long Term Socio-Ecological Research, Singh, S. J., Haberl, H., Chertow, M., Mirtl, M. & Schmid, M. (eds.). Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 409–442.Google Scholar
Myrdal, J. & Morell, M. (2011). The Agrarian History of Sweden: From 4000 BC to AD 2000. Lund: Nordic Academic Press.Google Scholar
Naumov, V., Angelstam, P. & Elbakidze, M. (2016). Barriers and bridges for intensified wood production in Russia: Insights from the environmental history of a regional logging frontier. Forest Policy and Economics, 66, 1–10.Google Scholar
Naumov, V. (2017). Barriers and bridges for intensified wood production and biodiversity conservation in NW Russia's boreal forest. PhD thesis. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae, 2017, 9. (http://pub.epsilon.slu.se/13977/1/naumov_v_170112.pdf).Google Scholar
Newman, D. (1999). Geopolitics renaissant: Territory, sovereignty and the world political map. In Boundaries, Territory and Postmodernity, Newman, D. (ed.). London: Frank Cass, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Nordberg, M., Angelstam, P., Elbakidze, M. & Axelsson, R. (2013). From logging frontier towards sustainable forest management: Experiences from boreal regions of North-West Russia and North Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 28, 797–810.Google Scholar
Pallot, J. (1990). Rural depopulation and the restoration of the Russian village under Gorbachev. Soviet Studies, 42, 655–674.Google Scholar
Popescu, V. D., Rozylowicz, L., Niculae, I. M., Cucu, A. L. & Hartel, T. (2014). Species, habitats, society: An evaluation of research supporting EU's Natura 2000 network. PLoS ONE, 9, e113648.Google Scholar
Potapov, P. V., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., Krylov, A. M., McCarty, J. L., Radeloff, V. C. & Hansen, M. C. (2015). Eastern Europe's forest cover dynamics from 1985 to 2012 quantified from the full Landsat archive. Remote Sensing of Environment, 159, 28–43.Google Scholar
Prescott-Allen, R. (2001). The Wellbeing of Nations. A Country-by-Country Index of Quality of Life and the Environment. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. D. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. American Prospect, 13, 35–42.Google Scholar
Redman, C., Grove, M. J. & Kuby, L. (2004). Integrating social science into the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) network: Social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems, 7, 161–117.Google Scholar
Roberge, J.-M., Angelstam, P. & Villard, M.-A. (2008). Specialised woodpeckers and naturalness in hemiboreal forests-deriving quantitative targets for conservation planning. Biological Conservation, 141, 997–1012.Google Scholar
Rothstein, B., Charron, N. & Lapuente, V. (2013). Quality of Government and Corruption from a European Perspective: A Comparative Study on the Quality of Government in EU Regions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Sabogal, C., Besacier, C. & McGuire, D. (2015). Forest and landscape restoration: concepts, approaches and challenges for implementation. Unasylva, 66, 3–10.Google Scholar
San Martín-Rodríguez, L., Beaulieu, M. D., D'Amour, D. & Ferrada-Videla, M. (2005). The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 132–147.Google Scholar
Stryamets, N., Elbakidze, M. & Angelstam, P. (2012). Role of non-wood forest products for local livelihoods in countries with transition or market economy: Case studies in Ukraine and Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forestry, 27, 74–87.Google Scholar
Stryamets, N., Elbakidze, M., Ceuterick, M., Angelstam, P. & Axelsson, P. (2015). From economic survival to recreation: Contemporary uses of wild food and medicine in rural Sweden, Ukraine and NW Russia. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 11, 1.Google Scholar
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). World Network of Biosphere Reserves. (http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/world-network-wnbr/).Google Scholar
Wilson, G. (2012). Community Resilience and Environmental Transitions. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×