Synergies and trade-offs in the European forest bioeconomy research: State of the art and the way forward

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
L. Hetemäki , D. D'Amato , A. Giurca , E. Hurmekoski
{"title":"Synergies and trade-offs in the European forest bioeconomy research: State of the art and the way forward","authors":"L. Hetemäki ,&nbsp;D. D'Amato ,&nbsp;A. Giurca ,&nbsp;E. Hurmekoski","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The management and governance of forests must consider the synergies and trade-offs between different societal goals, especially with the bioeconomy being a key factor in recent sectoral strategies worldwide. This literature review explores the multidimensional concept of synergies and trade-offs, focusing on scientific publications dealing with the European forest bioeconomy. The objectives are twofold: 1) to provide an overview of the reviewed literature, including publication outlets, disciplinary diversity, and geographic scope of the studies; and 2) to analyze the synergies and trade-offs assessed by the reviewed articles, including the temporal scope of the assessment, the value chain segment considered, the methods used, and the policy implications and research gaps identified. The results show that European forest bioeconomy research concentrates on Finland, Sweden, and Germany, the three largest roundwood producers in the EU. The research is highly multidisciplinary (with a strong presence of social sciences), employing a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods. Out of the 138 studies reviewed, 22% explicitly analyze synergies and/or trade-offs in the forest bioeconomy. The reported synergies were widely varied, while most commonly reported trade-offs related to wood production versus climate change mitigation, biodiversity, and more generally other ecosystem services. The use of the synergy and trade-off concepts is often inexact, and the policy implications articulated in the literature are frequently formulated in generic terms, emphasizing communication. The findings and recommendations of this review are thus of relevance for both the scientific and practitioner/policy community.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000571/pdfft?md5=f0ed58801ef1f4a9590e858ce1e0f510&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124000571-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000571","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The management and governance of forests must consider the synergies and trade-offs between different societal goals, especially with the bioeconomy being a key factor in recent sectoral strategies worldwide. This literature review explores the multidimensional concept of synergies and trade-offs, focusing on scientific publications dealing with the European forest bioeconomy. The objectives are twofold: 1) to provide an overview of the reviewed literature, including publication outlets, disciplinary diversity, and geographic scope of the studies; and 2) to analyze the synergies and trade-offs assessed by the reviewed articles, including the temporal scope of the assessment, the value chain segment considered, the methods used, and the policy implications and research gaps identified. The results show that European forest bioeconomy research concentrates on Finland, Sweden, and Germany, the three largest roundwood producers in the EU. The research is highly multidisciplinary (with a strong presence of social sciences), employing a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods. Out of the 138 studies reviewed, 22% explicitly analyze synergies and/or trade-offs in the forest bioeconomy. The reported synergies were widely varied, while most commonly reported trade-offs related to wood production versus climate change mitigation, biodiversity, and more generally other ecosystem services. The use of the synergy and trade-off concepts is often inexact, and the policy implications articulated in the literature are frequently formulated in generic terms, emphasizing communication. The findings and recommendations of this review are thus of relevance for both the scientific and practitioner/policy community.

欧洲森林生物经济研究的协同作用和权衡:技术现状和前进方向
森林的管理和治理必须考虑不同社会目标之间的协同作用和权衡取舍,尤其是生物经济已成为近期全球部门战略的一个关键因素。本文献综述探讨了协同作用和权衡的多维概念,重点是涉及欧洲森林生物经济的科学出版物。目的有二:1)概述所综述的文献,包括出版渠道、学科多样性和研究的地理范围;2)分析所综述的文章所评估的协同作用和权衡,包括评估的时间范围、所考虑的价值链部分、所使用的方法以及所确定的政策影响和研究差距。研究结果表明,欧洲森林生物经济研究主要集中在芬兰、瑞典和德国这三个欧盟最大的圆木生产国。这些研究具有很强的多学科性(社会科学占很大比重),采用了各种定性和定量方法。在所审查的 138 项研究中,22% 明确分析了森林生物经济的协同作用和/或权衡。所报告的协同作用多种多样,而最常见的权衡报告则涉及木材生产与气候变化减缓、生物多样性以及更普遍的其他生态系统服务。协同作用和权衡概念的使用往往并不精确,文献中阐述的政策影响往往采用通用术语,强调沟通。因此,本综述的结论和建议对科学界和实践者/政策界都具有现实意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信