Getting our cities right #3: From Green Infrastructure to urban forestscapes

The presentations from different research disciplines and sectors at the conference demonstrated that the status quo of urban development presents a significant challenge to changing the way we understand and utilise the forest and its resources. The inherently anthropocentric view of the forest as a resource used for industry, recreation and as sites to achieve climate ambitions dominated discourses of urban forests. Many of the presentations engaged with existing discourses on forest management, promoting reform and improvement of existing policies and practices concerning forest use. However, perspectives concerning the rights of nature, indigenous knowledge, and ethical considerations concerning resource extraction were notably under-represented in the debate.   

Closing the gap in resource flows from the forestry sector illustrates how contemporary interest in how circular approaches attempt to break with the traditional, linear, model of production and consumption is rising. Production processes can be more efficient with fewer resources; and with resources that are reclaimed, reused and recycled. Critical perspectives on this approach suggest it demonstrates the pervasiveness of economic growth because it depoliticises questions of environment and social questions in favour of the market and business. The circular bioeconomy approach presented by Diana Tuomasjukka, arguably partially meets this critique by placing biodiversity and functioning ecosystems at the heart of the economy. Moving towards a climate- and nature-positive economy not only means replacing fossil energy with renewable energy, it also means moving to fossil-free materials, substituting carbon-intense products like plastics, concrete, steel and synthetic textiles for lower carbon alternatives like wood. Whilst a nature-positive approach is desirable it also relies heavily on technological innovation and challenging the hegemony of the concrete industry and intensive use of fossil-based resources in our everyday lives.

Consequently, the necessary social, cultural and technological changes to make bio-based products more accessible, appealing and desirable present significant long-term hurdles to challenging the status quo of current economic growth and the way forests are used and managed. 

Change in the status quo is emerging through different processes of urban forest management, from planning and policy-making, to forest management and maintenance.  Torgny Lind pointed out that alternative approaches to industrial forest management, like continuous forest cover and increased proportion of old forests, can provide benefits for both the environment and economic development. The conference highlighted that accurate data and technological solutions can provide the tools to change forest management, however, it requires a willingness to cooperate with different stakeholders at all levels and finding compromise between the different values actors attach to the forest. The role of technology was particularly present in the debates on how to make industrial forestry more sustainable, however, this approach often fails to address the systemic and long-term change required to transition to sustainable use of forest landscapes. Critical approaches, like gender and indigenous rights perspectives, can help highlight the in-built inequalities and inequities in how resources are used and owned, and the types of knowledge that are excluded from decision-making for sustainable forest use. It underscores how forest resources are tied-up with land rights and consequently the power that is placed in the hands of a few large corporations that own vast areas of productive forests. These perspectives also bring a variety of knowledge and experiences to the forefront of forest management debates, demonstrating the different values attached to socio-ecological systems.  

In the case of Röbäcksdalen, a key tool for change is collaboration on-site, using experimentation to identify the different challenges and potential solutions to the co-existence of people, animals, nature and industry. Johanna Wallsten highlighted the importance of water resources and how Umeå’s blue-green infrastructure serves agriculture, recreation and citizens. Through the testing of water catchment areas on Röbäcksdalen, it is possible to monitor water resources and understand how the pressures of urbanisation affect water quality and find ways to manage these resources in sustainable ways.  

Umeå municipality highlighted that knowledge, education and skills development are tools that can facilitate processes of change, both in terms of how we relate to societal challenges of sustainable urban development and forest use, and also in ways that we develop innovative solutions to immediate problems and potential future scenarios. Both approaches require multi-scalar governance and collaboration between stakeholders, citizens and researchers to co-produce knowledge.  

A long-term transition in working with urban forestscapes requires dealing with conflict on many scales: conflict in values, conflict over resources, and conflict across scales (between rural and urban, local and regional). The conference highlighted that a multi-functional approach to urban forests is required to address trade-offs between economy and environment; and to incorporate the diversity of personal, sectoral and non-human interests tied up in forest ecosystems. In his presentation, Fredrik Widemo illustrated how more integrated urban planning and wildlife management through green infrastructure can bridge some of these conflicts, by for example creating habitats for wildlife at the same time as providing green space and multi-functional urban environments. The meeting of urban sustainability goals with forest ecosystems highlights that we need to walk a fine line to balance the delicate relationship between human and ecological systems.

The conference highlighted that a more-than-carbon approach to forestry is essential to account for the multitude of biological, ecological and cultural diversity tied to forest landscapes; and to ensure that approaches to sustainable development are equitable and just. Whilst forests are championed as carbon sinks and their wood-based resources extracted for low-carbon materials, the forest ecosystem and its multitude connections to social, economic and ecological systems requires a broader view of the forest landscape than simply its ability to mitigate the climate crisis. A more-than-carbon approach to forests raises questions about what the forest is used for and who has the right to use it. Does the forest belong to landowners and forestry companies? Should it be a public resource? Does it belong to nature? Or can it serve all of these interests? These are complex questions that demand a multidimensional and multi-scalar perspective of forest landscapes that connects people, place and the environment.