The European Commission published on Friday its new “closer to nature” guidelines as well as providing guidance on ecosystem payment schemes as part of its strategy for improved management of forests across the 27-nation bloc.
The “closer to nature” guidelines aim to “strengthen forest multifunctionality and resilience to climate change, while fostering long-term economic and other societal benefits”.
The forest strategy includes setting out a variety of ways in which land managers and foresters could obtain monetary benefits beyond logging.
In line with the EU biodiversity strategy and the new EU forest strategy for 2030, Brussels said these guidelines are “necessary given the social and community role of forest systems, and the deep involvement of stakeholders”.
“Closely related sectors that benefit directly from forest goods and services (e.g. agriculture, water, energy, tourism, mining, and health) rarely recognise the value of forest goods and services,” the document read.
“When they are well developed, these forests provide a wide range of goods and ecosystem services, but when they are degraded they become vulnerable to disturbance factors.”
According to the EU, payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes should increasingly apply to forests, and the restoration of degraded natural forests – namely broadleaved woodlands – should be supported in order to recover their functional condition and their capacity to resist wildfires.
The publication of the guidelines came at the end of what was the hottest month ever recorded.
Carlo Buontempo, director of the EU’s climate change service (Copernicus, or C3S), said “record-breaking temperatures are part of the trend of drastic increases in global temperatures”.
“July’s record is unlikely to remain isolated this year,” he added.
Wildfires in Greece and the Italian island of Sicily, as well as in Northern Africa, caused even more carbon emissions.
Instead of providing a carbon sink, as expected under the EU’s land use, land use change, and forestry sector (LULUCF) regulation, higher temperatures put landscapes at risk of being just another source of global warming – as has happened in Finland in recent years.
In general, as a result of human interventions, the EU document pointed out that “structural complexity and species diversity is unnaturally low in many parts of Europe: 75% of forests are even-aged and one third of forests consist of only one species with another 50% limited to two or three species”.
Lack of diversity has been linked to fires, impacting the capacity of forests for wood provision, carbon sequestration, or other services.
On the contrary, forests composed of several tree species, age classes, and life cycle stages are more resilient and adaptable to climate change and disturbances than even-aged monocultures and benefit forest functions, services, and long-term forest productivity.
Some measures, such as the proposed EU-wide certification framework for carbon removals, “will recognise both the quality and value of carbon sequestration activities, and possible sustainability co-benefits from the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems,” the guidance read.
The Commission also insisted that ‘closer to nature’ forest management is an economic opportunity, saying that “carbon sequestration and non-wood forest products, such as honey, mushrooms, or wild meat are marketable sources of income”.
Yet, the document recognised that “despite the actual value of, and increasing demand for, the large variety of forest ecosystem services, wood production remains the main – if not the only – source of income for forest owners and managers”.
The text of the Commission provided examples of good practice in the Alpine region, with greater distribution area of beech forests, native tree species and zones suitable as habitats for the chamois mountain goat, or the Atlantic region, and Ireland in particular, where interest in continuous cover forestry (CCF) has been increasing over time.
The EU developed the guidelines, collaborating with member states and relevant forest actors, as a suggestion.
They can be used on a voluntary basis by national and regional forest authorities as well as directly by forest managers who wish to introduce elements of ‘closer-to-nature’ forestry into management practices.
By Emanuela Barbiroglio – emanuela@carbon-pulse.com
*** Click here to sign up to our weekly biodiversity newsletter ***
