Europe\u2019s forests must be restored to strengthen them against new threats brought about by climate change, but communities, local knowledge and foresters need to be at the heart of this to make it a success.<\/p>\n
Climate change is causing an\u00a0increase in pests, fires, droughts and other shocks<\/a>\u00a0that have serious impacts on forests, but restoration and adaptation action is complicated as it varies between different geographics, ecosystems and human activity.<\/p>\n \u201cNo one knows the land better than a local forester or local farmer. So empowering them to use their skills is the most important thing we need,\u201d Irish climate and environment minister Eamon Ryan told EURACTIV.<\/p>\n Ryan\u2019s comments followed an agreement by EU ministers to\u00a0give the green light to the EU\u2019s Nature Restoration Law when they met in Luxembourg on Tuesday (20 June).<\/a><\/p>\n The EU is currently debating the law which would introduce binding restoration targets to reverse the decline of Europe\u2019s nature. As part of this, each country must draw up a national restoration plan.<\/p>\n Consideration for landowners and their management choices need to be at the core of discussions such as this, said H\u00e9l\u00e8ne Koch, a policy advisor from the Confederation of European Forest<\/a> Owners.<\/p>\n \u201cLocally suited approaches, adequate consultation, sufficient financing capacities, prior and informed consent of owners, and respect of ownership right will be the best way to support forest<\/a> owners\u2019 work toward even more resilient European forests,\u201d she told EURACTIV.<\/p>\n Funding restoration \u201cIt won\u2019t happen just voluntarily. It does need to give people a livelihood,\u201d said Ryan.<\/p>\n \u201cOne thing is certain, you do have to have that income stream or else the reversal of what\u2019s happened in the last 40-50 years<\/a> won\u2019t happen,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n Forest restoration<\/a> can lead to more profit for landowners and higher income for the local area due to increased ecotourism. It also reduces the risk of an entire forest being taken out by a pest or fire<\/a>, a concern for monoculture plantations.<\/p>\n \u201cI am harvesting big trees<\/a>, leaving all small, low-value trees to grow and become big before harvest. Also, I only have natural regeneration and no early thinning, which saves a lot of money,\u201d Anders Tivell, a forest owner in Sweden, told EURACTIV.<\/p>\n \u201cAltogether, I make a better cash flow than conventional clear-fellings,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n But financing restoration can be tricky. For instance, while switching between different forestry practices<\/a> can lead to less risky, higher-value forests, it can also take more time.<\/p>\n \u201cThe negative impact is when [landowners and foresters] consider the gain tomorrow,\u201d said Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat, a scientist with the Mediterranean Facility of the European Forest Institute.<\/p>\n \u201cBut if Europe today is preparing a law for nature restoration, it\u2019s because we have proof today that, when we don\u2019t take care of our nature, we will pay for it somehow and will have a huge economic problem,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n According to her, this needs to be tackled at a larger level rather than landowners shouldering the bill.<\/p>\n \u201cYou should have private financing, but the public and corporate financing should be here also because all these industries that were really using the environment extensively should somehow participate in this effort to rebuild nature,\u201d she argued.<\/p>\n Others are more sceptical about the role of private cash and would rather see restoration supported by redirecting existing public expenditure.<\/p>\n \u201cWe already have hundreds of millions of dollars that go to land, but we\u2019re just not using those funds<\/a> adequately,\u201d said forestry campaigner Kelsey Perlman.<\/p>\n \u201cWe definitely need to have a constructive conversation about what does forest finance look like in Europe because what we have now, through the Common Agricultural Policy, through the recovery and resilience fund<\/a>, we\u2019re seeing that those funds are just being used to replant and keep the existing model going,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n And, in the end, restored areas need to be able to stand on their own feet.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Restoration also has to make financial sense for communities and landowners if it is to be a success.<\/p>\n