Forest Dialogue 2026: Biodiversity as a key to resilient forests 

How can biodiversity increase the adaptation capacity and resilience of forests that are also managed for wood production? At WaldDialog – Forest Dialogue – Dialogue Forestier 2026, this question brought together forest scientists, practitioners, policymakers, forest owners, communicators and administrators from Switzerland, Germany, France and beyond. On 10 September 2026, we all gathered at the University of Basel to explore what this means for forests facing increasingly uncertain conditions.

The event, organised by the TriNational ForestLab, SwissForestLab, the Conference of Cantonal Foresters (KOK) and the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU), created a space for something our forests – and we as well – increasingly need: dialogue across disciplines, institutions and borders.

I felt that the urgency of this question was made tangible from the very beginning. As Arthur Gessler (WSL/ETH) emphasized, 2026 marks a turning point. Extreme heat and drought are increasingly visible in forests, with trees such as beech already showing severe stress early in the growing season. Across the Basel region, monitoring indicates that rainfall has been reduced in almost every month, leaving forests under considerable pressure, Gessler emphasized.

A strong argument for diversity

A recurring theme throughout the presentations was that diverse forests are better equipped to cope with climate change and uncertainty. Research presented by Hervé Jactel (INRAE) showed that mixed forests tend to be more resilient to drought, fire and wind disturbance than monocultures. They can also be more productive: mixtures of coniferous and broadleaved species can benefit from complementary traits such as different rooting depths and patterns of water use. However, a specific mixture of broadleaved and conifer species is needed for both forest resilience and productivity, and that mixture needs to be identified. Still, the results are promising, highlighting the potential of diversity to strengthen forests in a changing climate.

Diversity, however, is about more than simply planting several tree species. Genetic diversity within species can provide the basis for adaptation to changing conditions, as Jörg Kleinschmit (FVA) highlighted. The choice of tree species — and potentially the use of assisted migration — therefore needs to be considered alongside the genetic resources available to forests.

At the same time, biodiversity conservation cannot be reduced to tree diversity. Frank Krumm and Martin Gossner (both WSL) highlighted the importance of habitat trees, microhabitats and deadwood. Microhabitats are small, specialised structures such as tree cavities, cracks, loose bark or dead branches that provide food, shelter or breeding sites for many species. Many of these valuable structures are found in or develop from deadwood, making it an important element of forest biodiversity. Around a quarter of forest species are closely dependent on it, while many more benefit from it. Natural forest reserves therefore remain an essential component of biodiversity conservation, particularly for species requiring specialised deadwood structures, Gossner emphasized.

Potential of biodiversity in managed forests

But managed forests also offer opportunities, and this event mainly aimed at exploring these. Instead of viewing biodiversity conservation and forest management as separate worlds, foresters can actively create microhabitats and make use of structures generated by natural disturbances. This is where the concept of “close-to-nature forestry” becomes particularly relevant: working with natural processes rather than against them, while maintaining the multifunctionality of forests.

The practical examples presented during the afternoon demonstrated that these ideas are already being put into practice. Case studies from Switzerland included a presentation by our Living Lab partner Amt für Wald beider Basel, Switzerland, represented by the coordinator of the Living Lab Ueli Meier. Examples from Baden-Württemberg (Germany) and Alsace (France) showed how natural regeneration, species diversification, habitat trees and the retention of surviving trees after disturbances can gradually transform forest composition. In Baden AG, for example, the proportion of broadleaved trees increased substantially over 25 years, supported by a strong focus on natural regeneration.

The discussions also made clear that there are no simple or one-fits-all solutions. Increasing deadwood can create safety challenges for forest workers. Changing tree species can involve economic and ecological uncertainties. Continuous-cover forestry offers structural and species diversity but also faces questions around economic risks and social acceptance. And local conditions matter enormously.

From local conditions to European approaches

This is precisely why this cross-border dimension of Forest Dialogue was so valuable. Drought, heat, pests, biodiversity loss and changing societal expectations do not stop at national borders. Forests may be managed locally, but the challenges they face are European.

The direction of European policy reflects this reality. The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and the Nature Restoration Law place increasing emphasis on restoring ecosystems, improving biodiversity and strengthening resilience. Yet this does not mean that Europe needs one standardised model of forest management. Instead, European objectives must be translated into approaches that work under different ecological, economic and social conditions.


FORWARDS presentation by Barbara Mihok
FORWARDS presentation by Barbara Mihok

For me, one of the strongest messages from Forest Dialogue was therefore the importance of knowledge transfer as a three-way process. Science needs to inform practice, but researchers also need to learn from the experience of those working in forests every day. The role of policy makers is to provide the interface between science and practice: translating evidence and practical experience into effective policy, while also ensuring that the realities and lessons from the field feed back into policy development. In this way, policy can become not simply an end point for knowledge, but a bridge that connects research, practice and decision-making. Projects such as TRANSFORMIT and FORWARDS as well as an established collaboration like the European Network Integrate (all presented there by my colleagues and me in sessions, via posters and talks) demonstrate different ways of connecting research, policy, and practice. TRANSFORMIT, for example, brings these communities together through Living Labs, stakeholder engagement and the development of practical, evidence-based guidance for Integrative Forest Management. FORWARDS connects scientific monitoring, modelling and data with the needs of forest managers and policy makers, with its ForestWard Observatory designed to support decisions on climate resilience and forest adaptation. The European Network Integrate provides a longer-term interface between the three, combining scientific evidence with demonstration sites, practical experience and policy exchange across countries.

The Forest Knowledge Gateway offers a practical platform to bring these different strands of knowledge together. It makes scientific findings, practical experience, tools and other resources easier to discover and access, helping users find relevant knowledge for the challenges they face in their own forests. In this way, the Gateway can help bridge the gap between knowledge being produced and knowledge being used.

What a nice resilient forest game developed by Ting Tang (ETH Zürich)

Ultimately, knowledge only becomes valuable when it helps someone to make a better decision in the forest – this is why I also very much enjoyed the presentations by forestry practitioners, who shared what answers they need from research and thus made the exchange more fruitful.

That is what made the Forest Dialogue 2026 particularly encouraging. Despite different perspectives and some smaller controversies, there was a shared recognition that biodiversity, climate adaptation and forest management must be considered together. Bringing different perspectives into the conversation is essential to understand the challenges from all sides, identify solutions that work in practice, and build the trust needed to put them into action. Dialogue and meaningful stakeholder engagement are therefore not just a way of exchanging knowledge – they are part of the process of finding a way forward for resilient forests.

El Periódico: “Europe turns Moianès into a laboratory for how tree removal can help curb large wildfires”

We are pleased to share a recently published article by El Periódico on our TRANSFORMIT Living Lab in Moianès, Catalonia: a landscape where forest management must respond simultaneously to drought, rising temperatures, biodiversity loss, and the risk of large wildfires.

Across 30,000 hectares, our local partners are testing different approaches to managing dead trees and forest biomass: removing some wood, retaining large logs as shelter and food for species, or applying intermediate solutions. The aim is not simply to “cut down trees”, but to learn – through evidence on the ground – which practices can create more diverse, resilient forests that are easier to manage in the face of extreme fires.

Teresa Baiges and Mercè Vilardos during TRANSFORMIT’s media field trip in the Moianès Living Lab

The article also reflects something that is central to our project: transformation does not just happen through forest processes, it happens through active collaboration and dialogue. Teresa Baiges, from the Centre de la Propietat Forestal of the Catalan Government, highlights the need to integrate biodiversity and climate-adaptative approaches into forest management. Mercè Vilardosa, a forestry technician for the region, works with landowners and links local needs to potential solutions. Other voices, including Pilar Clapers from the environmental group El Fanal, Josep Maria Espelta, a researcher at CREAF, Asier Larrañaga from the GRAF unit of the Catalan Fire and Rescue Service, and forest owner Antoni Masferrer demonstrate why collaboration among science, public authorities, landowners, civil society and emergency services is vital for creating climate-resilient forest futures.

The Moianès Living Lab and case study is relevant as it shows that integrative forest management requires place-based and adaptive decisions: retaining trees with high ecological value, reducing fuel continuity, and evaluating outcomes over the long term. Managed areas may not necessarily stop a fire, but they can reduce its intensity and give firefighting teams more opportunities to intervene safely.

What complex questions must we address to support Mediterranean forests in adapting to a changing climate?

Read the full article by El Periódico in Spanish here: “Europa convierte el Moianès en un laboratorio sobre cómo talar árboles para frenar grandes incendios”

Surveying the House Where Many Live: Recap of the Very First “IBP Train-the-Trainers” Workshop

Written by Silvester Boonen, European Forest Institute

In April 15th and 16th 2026, 30 forest practitioners, forest owners, researchers, trainers, and students from 12 European countries gathered in southwest Germany for two intensive days dedicated to one deceptively simple question: How can we better understand the biodiversity potential of forests – in a way that supports real management decisions?

The answer, or at least part of it, was the Index of Biodiversity Potential (IBP), a field-based diagnostic tool that has steadily gained recognition across Europe over the last 15 years. Hosted through the Integrate Network and supported by the HE TRANSFORMIT project, the workshop combined classroom presentations and discussions, insights into the scientific background of the IBP, and extensive field training exercises to prepare future trainers to bring the IBP into their own forestry contexts and institutions.

From the classroom to the forest floor

On the first day, we were welcomed at the town hall of Binzen by Andreas Schuck (EFI) and Frank Krumm (WSL), introducing IBP experts Laurent Larrieu (INRAE, CNPF) and Pauline Marty (CNPF) as our field trainers. Little did we know that the next two days were about to be filled with a tandem of new learnings about the IBP, its theoretical background and a lot of practical knowledge on how to apply the tool in the field.

So, what is the IBP? For starters, rather than directly measuring species richness, the IBP evaluates the so-called hosting capacity, habitats and structural features that support biodiversity at the stand level. Pauline explained that the IBP is used as a diagnostic tool, based on ten factors, seven relating to forest management and three to context. These range from deadwood and vertical forest structure to ancient forest continuity and tree-related microhabitats (TreMs). Each factor is scored from 0 to 5, allowing a maximum of 50. The workshop quickly revealed how much ecological research hides behind this easy-to-apply tool. Pauline explained that the IBP is designed to work fast, ideally within 20 to 30 minutes per stand. She then proceeded to go through each IBP factor and why it matters. Let’s take, for instance, the factor for flower-rich open areas: For this factor, the percentage of flower-rich open areas is recorded in comparison to the surveyed area’s size of the stand. As many species not only rely on deadwood, but also the occurrence of flowers, or both, this factor is highly relevant. Some hoverflies species that need deadwood for their larvae and use the nectar from the flowers in the adult stage.

The IBP, a brief overview of the scientific background

Following the introduction of the 10 factors by Pauline, Laurent took over and gave insights into the science behind the IBP. What appears in the field as a quick and practical scoring tool is, in fact, rooted in two decades of ecological research and development. Laurent reflected on the beginnings of the so-called “Paleo-IBP” around 2004, when he and his colleague Pierre Gonin first explored the idea of creating a rapid biodiversity assessment method for forest managers during their routine work. The first version focused on only five factors – large snags, large logs, very large trees and trees bearing “defects”, large nests, and aquatic habitats. This work eventually led to the landmark 2008 publication introducing the IBP as a “quick and easy method” that did not require taxonomic expertise. Laurent explained how the following years saw continuously refining and validating of the tool. Research explored whether the factors complemented each other, how sensitive the scores were to different forest types and management intensities, and how certain ecological components – especially tree-related microhabitats, deadwood, and forest continuity –could be better understood scientifically. Further, the IBP was adapted to different biogeographic regions (e.g. temperate Europe and the Mediterranean Basin). This process is still ongoing as new regions plan to apply the IBP. Despite all this scientific depth, Laurent stressed that the strength of the IBP remains its practicality: a fast, accessible field tool!

“TreMs are way nicer!”

After all this, it was time to head to the field!  We drove to a local communal forest, which Frank introduced to us. The stands consist mainly of high-quality oak with an understory of hornbeam. “They serve the needs of the community as a financial reserve, for example, to renovate a school”, Frank explained.

It was then time to investigate the diverse IBP factors hands-on! Spring was in full swing as the trees had their fresh green leaves, and the ground was covered with spring flora. To start off, Pauline introduced the five layers of the factor, also called ‘vertical structure’ (e.g. 1.5-7 m being the third layer). Here, a layer counts when you can observe a 20% occupancy of leaves in that layer. Important to note is that spring flowers on the forest floor would not be counted as an area for flower-rich open areas, as this factor looks at flowering plants linked to gap dynamics, open areas, and forest edges.  

Laurent advised to ‘eliminate’ individual factors as quickly as possible. This means that once the threshold of a factor is reached (e.g. 5 different tree genera), one can neglect that factor, as the maximum score of 5 points is reached. This speeds up the process of filling out the survey and allows forest practitioners to concentrate on the factors which are more difficult to record.

Laurent also noted that an “IBP is a score for today, but one should keep in mind that forests are dynamic and scores can change over time!”

We stopped at a large oak tree. Laurent turns to the group and says: “So, flowers are nice, deadwood is nice, but TreMs are way nicer! I wish TreMs could be higher than 5 in the score, but my colleague Pierre said no, all the factors need to capped at 5”. Everyone laughed! Laurent showed us why he likes this tree, pointing at the loose bark. “This is a bark shelter. It’s loose hanging bark that can serve as a shelter along the trunk with an opening at the bottom; an important feature, e.g. for bats or birds. We then took a look inside and, “voilà”, we could see a nest! Pauline then presented us with a special case, where we saw a combination of both a deadwood log and a snag. While the tree broke down, the lower stem (snag) was still attached to the upper stem that became a log. Such a tree can thus be counted as both lying and standing deadwood.

When we walked further, we came across an atypical kind of pond, a skidding trail, with an aquatic habitat that hosts different species. While this sounds great for biodiversity, skidding trails are caused by harvesting machinery, thus damaging the soil of the forest. This is one of the main reasons why, according to the IBP framework, it is not counted as an ‘aquatic habitat’ and therefore not recorded within the survey.  This was the final stop before wrapping up our walk, now having a much better understanding of each IBP factor and ready to soon put the knowledge into practice the next day.

As a final stop we partook in a guided tour through Frank’s farm in Binzen, learned about the local wine culture, and got a small taste of the wine and liquor he makes from his own grapes and cultivated fruit trees.

Walking a plotline

On the second day, we headed out to the Kandern Community Forest, which is part of the foothills of the Black Forest. We met at the natural monument “Beheleneiche”, an old oak tree that has an estimated age of more than 300 years. It only died and fell over around a year ago. Its tree trunk remains, as lying deadwood, offering food and habitat for many organisms –  a haven for biodiversity!

So, what was waiting for us that day? With the hope of putting our newly acquired knowledge into action and completing an IBP survey, we divided into small groups. Not sure where to start, Pauline and Laurent helped us by introducing diverse inventory approaches, including 3 possible methods: a route in a) concentric circles, b) a star shape or c) parallel lines. Each group got to pick one method, with our group choosing the concentric circle one.

We then started our survey in the Behleneiche marteloscope, named after the monumental oak tree. To save time, we learned to check the factors as much as possible from one location, as some required much more discussion or detailed observations. Native tree genera were an easy exercise: we spotted beech, maple, oak, wild cherry, and pine… check, 5 points! We then marked the broken tree as a snag, but … wait …  another participant noticed that the tree was still alive! Still important for the IBP survey, as it may bear microhabitats. We then were able to count some medium-sized logs as lying deadwood. We also used a TreMs field guide and identified a split fork in a wild cherry.

After the inventory of the inner circle we went on to survey the circular route. We paid particular attention to the factor of ‘vertical structure’, while identifying a few very large trees that were checked for additional TreMs.  We then wrapped up our survey : 5 points for native tree species, standing deadwood, living trees bearing microhabitats, very large trees, 2 points for large lying deadwood and vertical structure. The factors with no score were flower-rich open areas, forest continuity, aquatic and rocky habitats, as there were simply none present.

We then started to gather at the Behleneiche, to exchange on what we had surveyed. The local forester, Otto-Jesko von Schröder, joined and shared some insights on the Kandern Community Forest and its management. He highlighted the aim of ensuring a large number of different tree species in stands, emphasising those that can best cope with climate change impacts. One important detail we learned from Otto-Jesko was that formerly these sites were used for mining, which means that in the past, parts of these forests were cleared. For the IBP score this means 0 points for forest continuity over time.

Back in the classroom, the final afternoon sessions gave participants the opportunity to reflect on the IBP survey and place them into a broader operational context, learning about special cases (e.g., the uncapped version of the IBP). They also offered a glimpse into the future development of the IBP, including digital tools and applications designed to support field inventories and data collection more efficiently. By the end of the workshop, the IBP no longer felt like a simple scoring system, but rather like a practical framework that truly connects ecological understanding. Quite a few participants already announced that they will initiate training events in their home countries. Thus, it seems, the mission of training “future” trainers was already accomplished in Binzen! In any case, a memorable workshop for all – one that will hopefully continue to bear its fruits in many forests across Europe.

For more knowledge and guidance on how to apply the IBP, visit: https://www.cnpf.fr/ibp-index-biodiversity-potential

Webinar Recording Out Now! – From Indicators to Action: Bridging Science, Policy and Practice in Forest Restoration and Integrative Forest Management

“Indicators should be implementable, measurable, and aligned with other standards so they can ultimately support forest restoration and Integrative Forest Management across Europe,” said Gesche Schifferdecker as she wrapped up the webinar.

Co-organized with the Integrate Network, our webinar “From Indicators to Action – Bridging Science, Policy and Practice in Forest Restoration and Integrative Forest Management” brought together more than 90 participants from research, policy, and practice to explore how forest indicators can help ambitious restoration policies, particularly the EU Nature Restoration Regulation (NRR), to be effectively translated into action on the ground.


After Gergely Zagyvai, Integrate Network Chair 2026, opened the session with a welcome address, Stefanie Linser (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU)) delivered a keynote presentation on the development of Integrative Forest Management indicators within the TRANSFORMIT project.

This was followed by a rich panel discussion, moderated by Gesche Schifferdecker, featuring José I. Barredo (JRC – European Commission), Bernhard Wolfslehner (European Forest Institute), Teresa Baiges Zapater (Centre De La Propietat Forestal), and Stefanie Linser (BOKU). Together, they explored how diverse forest-related indicators can support decision-making across different governance levels, the practical challenges of monitoring and reporting, and ways to bridge the gap between policy ambitions and practical implementation.

The panel ultimately agreed on one objective: we have to support our forests to become more resilient – and this can only be done if scientists, policy makers, practitioners, and communication experts work collaboratively.

Many thanks to our outstanding moderator, speakers and panelists, and to everyone who joined, asked questions, and shared their experiences!

Slovenian and Chinese forest experts strengthen ties through science, innovation and field experience

Visit of the Delegation from the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF) within Bilateral Cooperation (SFI–CAF) and the TRANSFORMIT Project, 17–18 April 2026

Meeting room at the Slovenian Forestry Institute, CAF delegation

On Friday, 17 April 2026, the Slovenian Forestry Institute (SFI) welcomed a delegation from the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF) for a two-day programme dedicated to strengthening bilateral cooperation and advancing joint activities within the TRANSFORMIT project.

The visit began at the Slovenian Forestry Institute with welcome addresses by representatives of SFI, CAF and the Slovenia Forest Service, setting the stage for discussions on future scientific and professional collaboration between the institutions. Participants were introduced to the activities and research areas of SFI and exchanged views on opportunities for expanding cooperation in forestry research and practice.

Tour of the Centre’s laboratory facilities at the Slovenian Forestry Institute

The indoor programme continued with expert presentations covering sustainable forest management, forest restoration under changing environmental conditions, forest monitoring, and the bioeconomic dimensions of forestry. Particular attention was devoted to the TRANSFORMIT project and to the exchange of knowledge and experience between Slovenian and Chinese partners.

An important highlight of the meeting was the presentation by Prof. Zheng Yongqi on the upcoming International Workshop on Integrated Forest Management and Biodiversity Conservation (IFM), which will take place in Beijing from 15–17 July 2026. The presentation also introduced planned field visits scheduled for 18–20 July 2026 to either the Bawangling National Nature Reserve in Hainan Province or the Liangshui Experimental Forest Farm in Heilongjiang Province.

The delegation also visited the newly established Centre for Forest Seed Management, Nursery Production and Forest Protection at the Slovenian Forestry Institute. There, participants gained insight into the Institute’s research and professional activities related to forest reproductive material, nursery production and forest health.

The programme moved outdoors on Saturday, 18 April 2026, when SFI and the Slovenia Forest Service jointly organised a field day in the Gorenjska region.

At the IM forest monitoring plot at Brdo pri Kranju

The first stop was the intensive forest monitoring plot (IM, ICP Forests Level II) at the Brdo estate, where participants were introduced to the methodologies used for monitoring forest condition in Slovenia as part of the international ICP Forests programme.

From Brdo, the delegation continued to Pokljuka and the Mrzli Studenec site near the Slovenia Forest Service facilities. Here, participants were presented with the forest management plan for the area and took part in practical exercises using a marteloscope. The visit offered valuable insight into modern approaches to forest management planning and decision-making in practice.

Practical work with the marteloscope at the Mrzli Studenec site on Pokljuka

The field excursion then turned to one of the most pressing challenges facing European forests today: recovering from natural disturbances. Participants visited forest stands damaged by the severe windstorm that had struck the area earlier in March, discussing restoration measures and strategies for increasing forest resilience to natural disturbances and the impacts of climate change.

View of the peat bog

The programme concluded with a visit to the Goreljek peat bog in Triglav National Park. Participants explored the unique characteristics of this raised bog, considered one of the southernmost peat bogs of its kind in Europe. Presentations highlighted the processes of peat formation following the last glaciation, the ecological importance of peat mosses, and the exceptional conservation value of these sensitive wetland habitats.

The Goreljek peat bog area on Pokljuka

The two-day meeting once again demonstrated the importance of international cooperation in addressing shared challenges related to climate change, forest protection and the sustainable management of natural resources. By combining scientific expertise, practical experience and field-based learning, the visit further strengthened the partnership between Slovenian and Chinese forestry institutions and laid foundations for future collaboration.

Europe’s forest future on the ground: building resilient landscapes in Catalonia’s forests 

by Gesche Schifferdecker (EFI), with editorial input from Teresa Baiges Zapater (CPF) and Rahel Könen (EFI)

What does it take to manage a forest in a world of increasing drought, wildfire risk, and uncertainty? Who decides what forests should provide – timber, biodiversity, climate protection, or recreation? How can so many different expectations be reconciled on the same piece of land? And what is the role of private forest owners in this complex environment? 

These were some of the questions that framed our workshop on 7 May in the Moianès region of Catalonia, where we brought together journalists, researchers, forest owners, policy experts, conservationists, and practitioners. The event was organized by the European Forest Institute and the Forest Ownership Centre of Catalonia as part of the TRANSFORMIT project. 

Crucially, this was not a conventional workshop. The Catalan region of Moianès is one of TRANSFORMIT project’s Living Labs – a landscape where different actors come together to test, observe, and co-develop new approaches to forest management in real time. Instead of staying in a conference room, we spent the day moving through the sites of the Living Lab: walking through forests, visiting farms and vineyards, and stopping in small villages – and speaking directly with the people who are dealing with these questions in practice. 

Group discussion at first field stop at La Noguera Farm near Castellterçol

The setting could not have been more relevant. In Catalonia, forests are everywhere. They stretch from the Mediterranean coast to the Pyrenees, covering nearly two thirds of the region. Yet despite this abundance, there is a striking paradox: only 1/3 of these forests are managed, often economically unprofitable, increasingly vulnerable to drought and wildfire, and frequently at the center of debate over what forests are actually most important for. 

What emerged over the course of the day was not a single solution to Europe’s forest challenges, but something perhaps more important: a shared willingness in the Living Lab to experiment, collaborate, and rethink old divisions between conservation and production. 

Integrative Forest Management – a more holistic approach? 

The morning began in Caldes with discussions around a term that would accompany us throughout the day: Integrative Forest Management (IFM). Unlike approaches that focus only on timber production or only on strict protection, IFM attempts to work across scales and interests. It recognizes forests as ecosystems that must simultaneously provide biodiversity, climate resilience, livelihoods, recreation, clean water, and raw materials. Compared to other areas in Europe, in the Mediterranean, forest management is already fulfilling many of the IFM criteria, then, what can IFM bring? What needs to be transformed?

Gesche Schifferdecker (EFI) introducing journalists to the vision behind Integrative Forest Management

One participant described IFM as a “landscape perspective” rather than a single management technique, using a broad understanding of landscape that also includes the people who live within it. Some areas may be actively managed, while others are left untouched. The key idea is flexibility: adapting management to local ecological and social conditions while trying to balance environmental, economic, and social objectives with the objectives of forest owners. 

As the day unfolded, it became increasingly clear that small private forest owners – despite their diverse backgrounds and perspectives – are true stewards of forests. At the same time, the conversations showed that forestry is no longer discussed solely among foresters. Throughout the TRANSFORMIT project, partners have been working closely with forest owners, practitioners, policymakers, and conservation groups through workshops, trainings, webinars, and of course other Living Labs across Europe. The emphasis is on learning together rather than prescribing solutions from above.

That collaborative spirit felt particularly important in Catalonia, where forests are highly fragmented in terms of ownership, explained Teresa Baiges Zapater from the Forest Ownership Centre – Forestry administration of Catalonia (CPF). Around 78% of forests are privately owned, often by families with relatively small properties. Many owners inherited their land rather than actively choosing forestry as a profession, and forest management plans remain voluntary.  

Teresa Baiges Zapater (CPF) and Mercè Vildardosa (CPF)

As we learned from the Forest Ownership Centre, Catalonia’s forests are also surprisingly young. Large areas of agricultural land were abandoned over the past century, allowing forests to regenerate naturally. While this reforestation has increased tree cover, it has also created dense, relatively uniform forests that are increasingly vulnerable to drought and wildfire. 

Climate change and disturbances: changing realities for forest owners 

The challenge is intensified by climate change. The years between 2012 and 2023 were described as the driest period in 200 years. During our first field stop at La Noguera Farm near Castellterçol, researcher Josep Maria Espelta from the Centre for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications (CREAF) explained that drought has already affected around 100,000 hectares of forest – an area comparable to the amount burned by fire in Catalonia since the 1980s. 

Standing among Scots pine forests, the consequences became tangible. Many trees were weakened or dead, competing for increasingly scarce water. As Josep Maria Espelta emphasized, drought is now becoming as important a disturbance as wildfire in Mediterranean forests. 

This changing reality is forcing forest owners and managers to rethink old assumptions. One particularly interesting discussion focused on deadwood. Traditionally, removing dead trees has often been seen as necessary to reduce fire risk. Yet deadwood is also critical habitat for countless species and for forest resilience. 

The Living Lab in Moianès is experimenting with different approaches: some plots have all deadwood removed, others retain 20%, while in some areas all deadwood remains, explained Eva Gabriel de Franscisco (CPF). Researchers are monitoring how biodiversity responds under these different scenarios, both at the forest stand and at the landscape scale. Rather than promoting one universal answer, the Living Lab approach allows stakeholders to test trade-offs together and adapt based on evidence and the local context. 

How the Living Lab fosters collaboration 

What made these discussions especially compelling was hearing not only from scientists, but also from local conservationists and forest owners. 

Pilar Clapers, a passionate birdwatcher and member of the local NGO El Fanal, spoke about why she joined the Living Lab. For her, collaboration between ecologists, forest owners, and managers is essential in a time of biodiversity decline. One story she shared stayed with many of us: after identifying a rare oak species for the region in the area where salvage logging was taken place, forest owner Antoni Masferrer agreed that these trees would remain untouched, even if their wood is valuable as firewood. A small decision perhaps, but one that symbolized the trust slowly being built between groups that are often portrayed as opponents.  

Antoni Masferrer himself offered a perspective grounded in practicality and responsibility. His motivation for managing forests, he explained, is to leave them in a better condition for future generations while reducing fire risk and earning at least some modest income. At one point he compared forest management to going to the hairdresser: maintenance matters. 

But his comments also revealed the economic fragility behind many privately owned forests. Timber prices remain low, much of the wood is used for pallets or pellets, and qualified labor is difficult to find and afford. Many forest owners are aging, while younger generations often have little interest in taking over management responsibilities. 

“Forest owners don’t want to leave the forest as a burden,” he said. 

And who should pay for this? 

After lunch, discussions turned toward one of the central questions underlying the entire workshop: if society wants healthy, resilient, biodiverse forests, who should pay for them? 

Catalonia’s Climate Credit System offers one possible answer. Presented by Teresa Baiges (CPF), the scheme aims to finance integrative forest management through payments for ecosystem services. 

Unlike many carbon credit systems, the goal is not simply to maximize tree planting or carbon storage. Instead, the system focuses on maintaining healthy forests that are better adapted to climate change and less vulnerable to disturbances such as wildfire and drought. 

One innovative aspect is that particularly forest owner associations – rather than individual owners – can apply. This encourages collaboration at landscape scale, which is crucial for addressing wildfire risk, and services related to water and ecological connectivity. 

The credits are sold to both public and private actors, including companies interested in strengthening their environmental commitments or complying with emerging sustainability regulations. Because projects are local, buyers can visit the forests they support, creating a stronger connection between financing bodies and landscapes impacted by their sponsorship. 

Importantly, the money is provided upfront rather than after management actions are completed, helping overcome one of the major barriers many forest owners face. 

New landowners shaping transformation 

In the afternoon, the focus shifted toward another transformation taking place in Catalonia’s forests: the changing profile of forest owners themselves. 

One of the most inspiring conversations came from Dones de Bosc, the first association of female forest owners in Spain. Founded only in 2025, the network has already grown rapidly. 

left to right (top row): Eva Gabriel (CPF), Pau Santeugini Ochoa de Aspuru (CPF), Jordi Tarradas (Boscat), Gesche Schifferdecker (EFI), Josep Maria Espelta (CREAF), Agatha Allain (Journalist), Solveig Andresen (Dones de Bosc); left to right (bottom row): Teresa Baiges Zapater (CPF), Linda Osusky (Journalist), Rahel Könen (EFI), Natalie Donback (Journalist)

One of its members, Solveig Andresen, explained that although many women own forests, they remain underrepresented in traditional forestry structures. The association aims not only to increase visibility and leadership, but also to create a supportive community for shared learning and collaboration. 

During earlier training sessions organized by the Forest Ownership Centre, around 100 women attended workshops on developing forest management plans – a sign that interest and engagement are growing quickly. Several participants assumed that women may be more likely to approach forest ownership from perspectives centered around care, sustainability, and long-term stewardship rather than extractive models and principles. 

At the same stop, Jordi Tarradas from the Federation of Forest Owners’ Associations Boscat highlighted the importance of local collaboration more broadly. For many small forest owners, individual management is economically impossible. Associations allow them to share knowledge, coordinate fire prevention efforts, and strengthen their political voice. 

Third stop discussing various forest owners’ perspectives at Carlos Cortés’ land

New forest owner Carlos Cortés, who only recently bought a forest area of 120hectares, indicated that he is looking into different funding sources, and that he is grateful for the guidance of the Associations. His passion for his property became clear when he said: “I have heard a call from the land and that’s why I have bought it”. His primary goal is to increase the resilience of the forest and to maintain it for future generations, similar to the other forest owners who have joined our trip. 

Managing land for production and fire prevention 

Throughout the day, wildfire remained a recurring theme. In Mediterranean landscapes, fire prevention cannot rely only on what happens inside forests. It also depends on agriculture, grazing, and maintaining mosaic landscapes that slow the spread of fire. 

Our final stop at St. Miquel d’Oló Farm brought these ideas together beautifully. Surrounded by vineyards, pasture, and woodland, participants discussed how agricultural and forestry practices can reinforce each other. 

Final stop at St. Miquel d’Oló Farm, discussing the importance of mosaic landscapes for fire management

Asier Larrañaga, sub-inspector of the forest fire brigade and fire analyst, presented new approaches to landscape-level fire prevention, emphasizing the importance of collaboration between forestry and agriculture. Grazing, vineyards, and strategically managed forest areas can all contribute to more fire-resilient landscapes. 

Winegrower Oriol Garriga offered a deeply personal perspective. When he and his family bought the property in 2013, they restored the house and planted vineyards using ecological farming methods. Yet fire risk remains his biggest concern. 

For Oriol Garriga, maintaining people on the land is essential – not only for local economies, but also for socio-ecological resilience. Landscapes become vulnerable when they are abandoned. Producing and consuming local products, he argued, is part of sustaining both communities and ecosystems. 

Oriol Garriga sharing the story behind his farm and why socio-ecological resilience matters

As the day ended and participants gathered overlooking the landscape, one thing became increasingly clear: the future of Mediterranean forests will not be shaped by forestry alone. It will depend on cooperation between scientists, forest owners, conservationists, farmers, businesses, policymakers, and local communities. 

The Moianès Living Lab does not offer simple answers. Instead, it creates space for experimentation, dialogue, and shared learning in a time when climate change is rapidly reshaping what forests need – and what society expects from them. 

Why would journalists investigate Catalan forests?

Local and international journalists interviewing Catalan forest owner Antoni Masferrer

In Catalonia a combination of ecological pressures and weakened forest stewardship is increasing fire risks and raising a key question: how can these forests remain resilient and viable?

To respond to this, Catalonia’s Moianès region is emerging as a testing ground for inclusive and place-based innovations. Here, integrative forest management approaches are being developed that combine wildfire prevention, biodiversity conservation, biomass use, and rural development – alongside new forms of collective governance adapted to fragmented ownership.

Together with our local Living Lab partners, we invited a small group of journalists to an immersive, on-site workshop in Moianès to explore these developments first-hand. Through exchanges with forest owners, researchers, NGO representatives, and local authorities, journalists gained grounded insights into how such approaches can work in practice.


Beyond showcasing these initiatives to journalists, the workshop was designed as a two-way dialogue – creating space to reflect on which narratives resonate, and how science and practice can better connect with media storytelling.

Over the coming weeks, we’ll share more insights from the workshop and highlight some of the innovative approaches stewarded within Catalonia’s Moianès region. Stay tuned!

IBP “Train the Trainers” event is bearing first fruits: Ireland to host multiple outdoor workshops this Spring

During April and May various Marteloscope workshops are already taking place in Ireland, organised by Teagasc Forestry Development Department (National Forest Extension Agency) in collaboration with the Forestry Division of the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine (DAFM). Those are outdoor in-forest workshops, which aim to promote and facilitate discussions on integrative forest management options and approaches, together with forest owners, practitioners, and forestry students.

Credits: Jonathan Spazzi

The recent “Train the Trainers” event in Binzen, Germany, jointly organised by TRANSFORMIT project and the Integrate Network, and attended by Jonathan Spazzi (Teagasc) and Dermot Dunphy (DAFM), was instrumental to further bring the IBP survey methodology front and centre as part of the Irish Marteloscope workshops. As fully booked events, these workshop series showcase the current interest in Ireland to learn more about the integration of biodiversity conservation into management practices and, in particular, the Index on Biodiversity Potential. Here a blend of forest owners, practitioners and students are coming together to take part in frank and meaningful discussions.

So far, the feedback received is excellent, says Irish Integrate Network member representative Jonathan Spazzi. The organizers expect around 80 participants to be trained this spring with more planned to attend trainings in Autumn.

Through the Integrate Network and a range of research and development projects, including SimInForest and the TRANSFORMIT project, collaboration across Europe between educators and researchers is ongoing on how best to best promote and communicate new, integrative, and closer-to-nature management solutions and ensure that forest health and productivity can continue to provide essential services to society’s collective well-being.

How can a tool like the “Index of Biodiversity Potential” spread more widely?


From 15–16 April, 30 forest practitioners, researchers, and representatives from 12 European countries gathered in Binzen, Germany, for a very special two-day workshop – the first-ever “Train the Trainers” event on IBP, organised by the Integrate Network in collaboration with the EU Horizon TRANSFORMIT Project. We specifically invited a small group of participants to allow for a real hands-on and interactive experience.


On the morning of the 15th, Laurent Larrieu (INRAE) and Pauline Marty (CNPF – Centre national de la propriété forestière) gave us in-depth insights into the science and development of the tool and its ten key factors of biodiversity. In the afternoon, theory was brought to life. In the forest, participants reviewed what had been discussed with real stands and conditions.


Our second day started in a marteloscope in Kandern – participants were split into four groups to test their knowledge and conduct the IBP survey at the forest site. Laurent and Pauline provided hands-on support throughout the exercise, and the local forest manager joined to share the history and management of the forest we were standing in.



Rich Q&As, deep group discussions, and diverse reflections from various national contexts and forest types across Europe – all of these made the exchange valuable, not only with the two trainers but also between participants.


Over the past two days, various participants shared with us their perspectives on the IBP, why the tool is relevant to their local context, and how they are hoping to bring the knowledge from the training back to their colleagues and forests.

With their commitment to bring the knowledge and application of the “Index of Biodiversity Potential” home, we’re grateful for the success of this first iteration of an IBP “Train the Trainers” event!

You could watch the afterevent video on the right to learn more about this event.


Curious to know more about the IBP? Dive into the topic through EFI’s “What is” series and stay tuned for our upcoming articles regarding the IBP, its potential applications, and our IBP “Train the Trainers” participants’ reflections on our two days together.


Photo credits: Shanqing Gao & Rahel Könen, EFI

FORWARDS to boost the Forest Knowledge Gateway

FORWARDS is set to contributing to the future of the TRANSFORMIT-led Forest Knowledge Gateway, bringing in a wealth of scientific insights, practical tools, and policy‑relevant outputs generated across its work packages. With a growing body of content for integration – including scientific papers, and eventually good practice guides, tools and stories – FORWARDS is preparing to make the Gateway an even more powerful hub for forestry practitioners, policymakers, and scientists. This was discussed after a Gateway presentation as part of the FORWARDS project’s annual meeting in Florence.

A key opportunity lies in the project’s diverse digital outputs. These range from interactive applications developed within the ForestWards Observatory (WP5) to modelling tools for disturbances, carbon dynamics, and climate‑smart forestry. The intention to publish good‑practice guidance and multilingual materials directly onto the Gateway will further enhance accessibility and support its role as a European reference point.
FORWARDS’ commitment to sharing scientific publications and storytelling-based lessons learned adds to its value proposition, reinforcing the Gateway as a platform not just for data, but for knowledge exchange, engagement, and narrative‑driven impact.


Strengthening Synergies: TRANSFORMIT & FORWARDS

The collaboration potential between TRANSFORMIT and FORWARDS is emerging as a promising avenue for cross-project enrichment. Both projects emphasise practitioner-oriented engagement and communication, data-driven insights, and innovative digital outputs – making joint dissemination not only strategic, but mutually reinforcing. As FORWARDS moves into a crucial phase of shaping its policy messages, the collaboration with TRANSFORMIT offers a chance to amplify shared lessons, align outreach efforts, and strengthen Europe’s capacity to support climate‑smart and resilient forest management.

Featured image: performing trees before the Gateway presentation with the FORWARDS Consortium (photo: Katharina Freund)