1. European genetic resources conservation in a rapidly changing world : three existential challenges for the crop, forest and animal domains in the 21st centuryFrançois Lefévre, Danijela Bojkovski, Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat, Michele Bozzano, Eléonore Charvolin-Lemaire, Sipke Joost Hiemstra, Hojka Kraigher, Denis Laloë, Gwendal Restoux, Suzanne Sharrock, Enrico Sturaro, Theo J. L. van Hintum, Marjana Westergren, Nigel Maxted, 2024, original scientific article Abstract: Even though genetic resources represent a fundamental reservoir of options to achieve sustainable development goals in a changing world, they are overlooked in the policy agenda and severely threatened. The conservation of genetic resources relies on complementary in situ and ex situ approaches appropriately designed for each type of organism. Environmental and socioeconomic changes raise new challenges and opportunities for sustainable use and conservation of genetic resources. Aiming at a more integrated and adaptive approach, European scientists and genetic resources managers with long experience in the agricultural crop, animal and forestry domains joined their expertise to address three critical challenges: (1) how to adapt genetic resources conservation strategies to climate change, (2) how to promote in situ conservation strategies and (3) how can genetic resources conservation contribute to and benefit from agroecological systems. We present here 31 evidence-based statements and 88 key recommendations elaborated around these questions for policymakers, conservation actors and the scientific community. We anticipate that stakeholders in other genetic resources domains and biodiversity conservation actors across the globe will have interest in these crosscutting and multi-actor recommendations, which support several biodiversity conservation policies and practices. Keywords: agroecology, climate change, in situ conservation, multi-actor engagement, policy Published in DiRROS: 11.03.2024; Views: 341; Downloads: 156 Full text (666,43 KB) This document has many files! More... |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. Forest genetic resources and forest reproductive material at the crosssection of multiple policy domains in EuropeTodora Rogelja, Laura Secco, Aurelio Padovezi, Davide Pettenella, Mauro Masiero, Elena Pisani, Jacopo Giacomoni, Riccardo Da Re, Sofia Caiolo, Marko Lovrić, Anna-Maria Farsakoglou, Michele Bozzano, François Lefèvre, Bruno Fady, Aurore Desgroux, Santiago C. González-Martínez, Ulla Ovaska, Mari Rusanen, Egbert Beuker, Katriina Soini, Anže Japelj, Konrad Heino, Martin Braun, Erik Dahl Kjær, Jon Kehlet Hansen, Georgeta Mihai, Alin Alexandru, Ecaterina-Nicoleta Apostol, Alicia Fernandez Calvo, Laura Maria Luquero Ramos, Mariano Navarro De La Cruz, Giovanna Ottaviani Aalmo, Bent Leonhard, 2023, published scientific conference contribution Keywords: forest genetic diversity, forest biodiversity, sustainable forest management, policy gap analysis, forest genetic resources, forest reproductive material Published in DiRROS: 05.10.2023; Views: 576; Downloads: 174 Full text (113,21 KB) |
7. Impacts of Nature and landscape protection Act on forest management in SlovakiaKlára Báliková, Michaela Korená Hillayová, Daniel Halaj, Alex Bumbera, Peter Kicko, Jaroslav Šálka, 2023, published scientific conference contribution Keywords: forest policy, nature protection, cross-sectoral impacts, compensation payments Published in DiRROS: 05.10.2023; Views: 516; Downloads: 151 Full text (100,50 KB) |
8. |
9. Forest subsidy distribution in five European countriesElena Haeler, Andreas Bolte, Rafael Buchacher, Harri Hänninen, R. Jandl, Artti Juutinen, Katharina Kuhlmey, Mikko Kurttila, Gun Lidestav, Raisa Mäkipää, Lydia Rosenkranz, Matevž Triplat, Urša Vilhar, Kerstin Westin, Silvio Schueler, 2023, original scientific article Abstract: Forest subsidies are widely used to achieve policy objectives aimed at maintaining and supporting the provision of the various ecosystem services provided by forests. In the European Union, an important instrument is the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) within the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), but countries also have national subsidy systems. In both cases, individual countries determine which objectives they want to achieve with the subsidy schemes and which measures are supported. In this comparative study, we investigate which forest-related measures are subsidized across Europe and which forest owners, representing a very heterogeneous group, are involved in the activities of the subsidy systems. We collected data on subsidies paid out for forest-related measures from Austria, Finland, Germany, Slovenia and Sweden from the EAFRD funding period 2014–2020 for a comparison of the funded activities. Further, we analysed how subsidies were distributed among private forest owners with forest holdings of different sizes by performing G-tests to compare the observed with the expected subsidies received by forest owners in the different size categories. The results show that through the flexibility given by the CAP for countries to adjust their subsidy programmes to the specific national needs, EAFRD funds and equivalent national subsidies are indeed used for a wide range of activities instead of only a few following one common European goal. Reflecting the different needs and various forest functions, the subsidized activities range from the more ecology-oriented “investment to increase resistance and the ecological value of forests” to the more management-oriented “purchase of new machinery and new equipment for forestry operations”. In all five countries, small-scale forest owners with holdings smaller than 200 ha are the largest owner group and manage a large share of the forest area in private hands (from 47% in Austria to 97% in Slovenia). However, especially owners of the smallest holdings (< 20 ha) rarely use the funding scheme of the EAFRD framework and thus receive a disproportionately low share of subsidies. There might be several reasons for this. Small-scale forest owners are generally less involved regarding policy issues (including subsidy schemes) than owners of larger forest holdings and may not be aware of all funding opportunities. In addition, the considerable effort to apply, including project preparation, administration and documentation may be perceived as a barrier. It became clear that the current subsidy systems of the countries focus on different forest policy objectives. Our study further revealed that the documentation of subsidy distribution is partly unclear and inconsistent across countries hampering European comparisons. However, understanding current subsidy distribution is urgently needed for increasing the effectiveness of subsidy systems to achieve European policy goals of vital multifunctional forests. Keywords: European agricultural fund for rural development, EAFRD, policy, incentives, multifunctional forests, small-scale forest owners, bioeconomy Published in DiRROS: 05.01.2023; Views: 642; Downloads: 376 Full text (628,13 KB) This document has many files! More... |
10. Common preferences of European small-scale forest owners towards contract-based managementArtti Juutinen, Elena Haeler, R. Jandl, Katharina Kuhlmey, Mikko Kurttila, Raisa Mäkipää, Tähti Pohjanmies, Lydia Rosenkranz, Mitja Skudnik, Matevž Triplat, Anne Tolvanen, Urša Vilhar, Kerstin Westin, Silvio Schueler, 2022, original scientific article Abstract: The societal demands on forest management are becoming increasingly diverse, which will be reflected in decisions made by forest owners. We examined the willingness of private forest owners in Austria, Finland, Germany, Slovenia, and Sweden to participate in a contract-based payment scheme in which they were asked to apply a specific management strategy to promote either timber production or environmental goals. The preferences for the contract-based management and associated consequences in terms of profitability, biodiversity, carbon stock, and climate change-induced damages were addressed within a choice experiment. A majority of respondents across all countries agreed to participate in a payment scheme to promote environmental goals, while schemes purely targeted to increase wood production were found less attractive. Forest owners liked improvements in profitability and environmental attributes and disliked deterioration of these attributes. Differences among countries were found in the level of expected contract payments, and commonalities were found with respect to preferences towards environmental goals, including biodiversity and carbon stocks. Hence, new policies to target European forest subsidy to promote the provision of environmental goals would likely be acceptable. Keywords: choice experiment, ecosystem services, forest policy, incentives, private forest owners Published in DiRROS: 29.09.2022; Views: 617; Downloads: 352 Full text (1,24 MB) This document has many files! More... |