Community Forestry

When we reflect on experiences in the North American setting, it seems that one of the more understated objectives of community forest advocates is the actual fostering of a culture of forest stewardship. Undoubtedly such visions exist in North America, but they are becoming difficult to sustain as the role of the forest industries declines and populations become increasingly urban-based. In Finland and Sweden a strong cultural attachment to forests and the resources they provide has remained in place despite similar patterns of urbanization. However, in spite of a long history of permitting community access to forested lands, neither country has always encouraged public participation in forestry policy and planning processes. But the policy setting has evolved in recent years, and in no small part as a response to rising public concern about the state of forest management. The Finnish and Swedish experience begs a different interpretation of what “community forestry” is; one that makes us think about tenure and stewardship in different ways. It also highlights the important social processes at the local level that help to shape land-use policy and facilitate successful implementation (Folke et al. 2005; Schultz et al. 2007). Ownership, while important, does not negate the potential for developing community–forest interactions or a social sense of possession and accountability. Here, we outline some of the features and recent changes in forest policy in each nation and connect these transformations to the broad notion of community expectations, an enveloping theme in the larger community forestry dialogue. By contrasting the Scandinavian case with those from North America (Chapters 3 to 7 in this book), we reflect on whether “community forestry” can be claimed in instances where a forest stewardship is engrained in national culture.