Adaptation to EUTR Requirements: Insights from Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia

Eight years after the European Union Timber Regulation (EUTR) came into force, its effectiveness is still unsatisfactory due to deficient and uneven implementation among member states. In addition, some Western Balkan countries have poor legality monitoring systems, increasing the risk of trade in illegally harvested timber. Regardless of this, no recent work has analyzed the adaptation of national forest policies to the EUTR obligations. Our study aims to contribute to the understanding of EUTR implementation by analyzing the adaptation of policies of the Western Balkan countries (Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia) to the EUTR. Qualitative content analysis was conducted on 22 policy documents from Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia. Documents were coded using coding categories derived from EUTR. Our results point out that none of the analyzed countries have a policy to directly address illegal logging or prevention of illegal activities. As EU members, Slovenia and Croatia has implemented EUTR through laws. The Slovenian Forest Act addresses all EUTR obligations, while Croatian Law on EUTR Implementation does not directly address the obligation of legality. This obligation is addressed by the Law on Forests. As Serbia is not an EU member, it did not implement EUTR. Nevertheless, Serbian Law on Forests addresses all EUTR obligations, but has some discrepancies regarding Traceability obligation. With ongoing discourses on Green Deal policies and the increasing focus on “deforestation-free” commodities, stricter implementation might be expected of EUTR at EU level. Most countries would probably have to build capacities for EUTR implementation and become more transparent and responsible concerning information availability. To successfully implement EUTR, an increased number of checks as well as stricter fines will be needed

Institutional structures impeding forest-based social innovation in Serbia and Slovenia

The potential of forest-based social innovations (SI) can be understood by looking at existing institutional structures, relevant policy programmes and instruments, as well as the roles of the various relevant actors in SI frameworks. The case examples from Serbia and Slovenia aim to understand how existing institutional structures have become embedded in SI over the years as well as where gaps and untapped potential still exist within SI institutional frameworks. The research team conducted a content analysis of policy documents and of in-depth interviews with actors involved in SI with the results indicating a growing interest in SI in both countries despite the still vague understanding of the concept which is often equated with social enterprise (SE). Major factors that drive this interest are external processes, such as Serbia's accession to the EU and gaining access to EU funds for SI in Slovenia. This growing interest is most often articulated by public actors and civil society organisations but is also made manifest by the growing number of SE in each country. In Serbia, one high-profile example is a newly adopted regulation for SE in collaboration with civil society organisations that also establishes national support structures. However, this process lasted more than ten years, during which different challenges arose that revealed various notable informal and formal voids in governance structures for SI. Similarly, in Slovenia, new bodies were established and regulatory documents were adopted through regulations focused solely on SE, a group of activities that is classified as falling within the social-economy sector. Despite the supporting in-struments available, and partially due to the rigid understanding of SI and SE, the potential of forest-based SI is not reflected in Slovenia's forestry or social economy sector. Although improvements are being made in both countries, the current situation certainly demonstrates that forest-based SI will likely continue to manifest as hybrid organisations, partnerships and/or projects. They will need to chart a difficult path through existing institutional structures by utilising opportunities under the mantel of rural development or social economy until each State's forestry sector recognises the potential of forest-based SI and provides suitable instruments to support them. In terms of practice, some of the most urgent recommendations made here relate to the need for connecting actors into viable networks to facilitate dialogue and information exchange as well as reap the benefits that come with centralised coordination

Analyzing social innovation as a process in rural areas: Key dimensions and success factors for the revival of the traditional charcoal burning in Slovenia

In rural areas, the social innovation (SI) process emerges as a response to negative socioeconomic trends or gets triggered by open windows of opportunity, bringing solutions that revitalize the rural fabric through the voluntary involvement of the local community. As such, SI is increasingly recognized as a tool to support rural development and transformative change. Regardless of increased interest and research, there are still calls for empirical evidence on the SI process, its effects, and the success factors. Our study responds to this research gap by providing empirical evidence on the 20 years of the development of a remote rural area - Charcoal Land - that sparked the revival of traditional charcoal burning in Slovenia. To better understand how such processes roll out on the ground, we conducted the case study, using a combination of document reviews, key informant in-terviews, semi-structured interviews, and participatory observations. Using event sequence analysis, we mapped key events in the development of the Charcoal Land and distinguished five key dimensions (Context, Trigger, Agency, Phases, and Effects) based on a framework for analyzing SI as a process of SI. Then, we inductively recognized three key success factors that were crucial for the revival of traditional charcoal burning in Slovenia: the embeddedness of innovators in multiple networks, strategic use of narratives for obtaining resources, and legitimization by the local community and public actors. Our results indicate that the development of the Charcoal Land can be regarded as an SI process that sparked the reconfiguration of traditional charcoal burning and its revival in Slovenia. The voluntary engagement of various actors (e.g., charcoal burners, foresters, local authorities) led to the formation of evolving agencies with the capacity to repetitively rearrange around common projects and goals. Through diversification of activities, traditional charcoal burning started being performed small scale and for educational, touristic, culinary, cultural, and commercial purposes. Over the last 20 years, traditional charcoal burning scaled up and out of the local territory of the Charcoal Land to other geographical and policy levels. Due to three success factors, and through institutionalization, traditional charcoal burning became recognized as an intangible cultural practice, as well as monitored forestry and agricultural practices

Governance of social innovation in forestry

Over the last decade, the term social innovation has received increased attention as a potential solution to address complex global social problems and to add collective values to society. The forest sector has great potential for fostering employment, community development and reducing increased emigration from rural to urban areas. This potential is not always realised, especially in economically weak and remote rural areas. Hence, this paper tackles the question of how social innovations in forestry are able to succeed under adverse circumstances and contribute to respond to some of the before mentioned challenges? To answer this question, we first identified four very different cases across Europe that are compatible with the criteria of social innovation. Proceeding from this starting point, comparative research was undertaken with the aim to identify the cases' specific features and key criteria for success. In the cases considered, it is evident that the sheer determination and voluntary investment of time and effort by key individuals, who were convinced of the value of the idea for the community, provided indispensable impetus to all four social innovations. In drawing its conclusions, this paper highlights the principal areas that need consideration and that hence have implications when developing supportive policies. Furthermore, we provide some insight into future research topics that would allow us to better understand the positive impacts of social innovation in the forest-based sector

Correction: Governance of social innovation in forestry (Sustainability, (2020) 12, 3, 10.3390/su12031065)

(1) Replacing the email of the fifth author Wilding Maria [email protected] with [email protected] (2) Deleting two sentences in the second paragraph of Section 4. “Results” on page 6. The deleted part reads as follows: In the Spanish case, a group of forest owners started to organize themselves into groups to better fight forest fires as there was no effective public infrastructure available to address this need. This activity is particularly novel as it introduced a type of bargaining system, namely that individuals would engage in the often dangerous activity of fighting a fire on somebody else’s property based on the trust that if the same event occurs their own land, others would reciprocate. (3) Deleting two sentences in Section 4.3 “Austria’s “Nature Park Specialities” Association” on page 7. The deleted part reads as follows: • In the Spanish case, spontaneous self-organisation took place because of a pressing need and this led to further formalisation and institutionalisation. • In the Spanish case, it is the backbone of the entire endeavour as all firefighters are volunteers and funds are used purely for purchasing equipment such as protective clothing, specialized vehicles and the maintenance of these two things. (4) Deleting the Section 4.4 “Forest Fire Volunteer Groups in Spain” in page 8. The deleted part reads as follows: Fighting forest fires is carried out by local forest owners in parts of Catalonia in Spain [47] who organised during the 1990s and formed an association as forest fire defence groups. The need for this was that there was no effective public infrastructure to defend from forest fires. The arrangement is based on trust: Each forest owner helps in combating the wildfire for other forest owners whilst knowing that these will do the same for his/her land. Such cooperation functions best under the condition that the forest owners know each other in person have regular contact and good relationships in the area. Yet, the activity is highly dangerous, and this requires extra personal will and investments. With the time, the group they managed to reach recognition by local policymakers and new legislation was introduced for their legalisation and public support, the Catalan law regulating the “regulació d’Agrupacions de Defensa Forestal” [50]. This regulation provides the wild fire volunteers with equipment such as garments or cars for the activity. Their example led to positive changes in the Catalonian regional regulation in support of this type of organisation. (5) Deleting one sentence in Section 5 “Discussion: Governance of Social Innovation in Forestry” on the paragraph of (iii) Distinct policy features on page 10 i. The deleted part reads as follows: In the Spanish case, it was clearly the new regional regulation that provided an institutional framework whilst simultaneously leading to recognition and some funding possibilities for the Forest Fire Volunteer groups. (6) Replacing word “four” with the word “three” throughout paper related to three examples (case studies). In the abstract, word “four” was replaced by word “three” in the following two sentences: • To answer this question, we first identified three very different cases across Europe that are compatible with the criteria of social innovation. • In the cases considered, it is evident that the sheer determination and voluntary investment of time and effort by key individuals, who were convinced of the value of the idea for the community, provided indispensable impetus to all three social innovations. On page 2, word “four” was replaced by word “three” in the following two sentences: • The foregoing led us to the decision to study three cases of social innovation in three very different rural areas across Europe. • The subsequent results section will draw its findings from a comparison of the three cases by analysing their differences and commonalities before finally discussing their nature from the perspective of their deductively derived criteria for social innovation: community activities, triggers, internal organisation, financing and support. On page 4, word “four” was replaced by word “three” in the following three sentences: • From this pool of eleven cases, we identified the three best suited to our research question and that show the diversity of social innovation across forest activities and across European regions. • All three cases formed cooperative associations with strong involvement from civil society and produced collective benefits within the forest sector, thus featuring prominently governance aspects. • Furthermore, these three cases feature geographically distinct regions in Europe and also different products and activities, illustrating variety of institutional and natural conditions for developing social innovations. On page 6, word “four” was replaced by word “three” in the following sentence: • Moreover, all three cases characterise involvement of several actors and institutions that are supported by associations. Finally, one of them actively involves socially vulnerable groups in their training and skills development programme (UK). On page 10, word “four” was replaced by word “three” in the following three sentences: • In all three cases, being able to secure volunteers to work is one of the most important features. • Volunteer work was especially important during the founding phase in all three cases, and it still has an indispensable role in the UK case. • In particular, we have observed in the three considered cases from the forest sector (i) strong agency, (ii) creative and novel related impacts on their social innovation endeavours [8,9,19,23,25]. (7) To clearly indicate that the research included three instead of four cases, the authors wish to remove some sentences: Replacing the original version in page 4 in Section 3.1: Our cases include a “Charcoal Land Initiative” in Litija, Slovenia (SI), a community forestry enterprise in Wales (UK), the “Nature Park Specialities” association in the Austrian region of Styria (AT) and “volunteer wildfire groups” in Catalonia (ES). with Our cases include a “Charcoal Land Initiative” in Litija, Slovenia (SI), a community forestry enterprise in Wales (UK) and the “Nature Park Specialities” association in the Austrian region of Styria (AT). Replacing the original version in page 4 in Section 3.2: 1) between July and December 2014—in the frame of the STARTREE project, this refers to the Welsh and the Austrian case, and 2) between July and December 2018—in the frame of the SIMRA project for the Spanish and the Slovenian case. with 1) between July and December 2014—in the frame of the STARTREE project, this refers to the Welsh and the Austrian case, and 2) between July and December 2018—in the frame of the SIMRA project for the Slovenian case. Replacing the original version on page 5 in Section 3.2: In the Spanish case, apart from semi-structured interviews related to innovation process itself, great understanding of the case conditions was provided in the already published material from SIMRA project (including authors of this paper) [33,34,39–41]. with Apart from semi-structured interviews related to innovation process itself, great understanding of the case conditions was provided in the already published material from SIMRA project (including authors of this paper) [33,34,39–41]. Replacing the original version on page 6 in Section 4: In result, our selection conforms to the scholarly standards for innovativeness [10] because the cases either introduce a new idea for a historical, traditional product (Slovenia) or commercialise a good or service in a new way that is unique for the sector and the region (UK, Austria and Spain) [45] (p. 11) [46] (p. 5). with In result, our selection conforms to the scholarly standards for innovativeness [10] because the cases either introduce a new idea for a historical, traditional product (Slovenia) or commercialise a good or service in a new way that is unique for the sector and the region (UK, Austria) [45] (p. 11) [46] (p. 5). Replacing the original version on page 8 in Section 4.3 (after Table 1): It is important to note that all activities take place in localised areas where economic conditions are poor and local communities are suffering the aftermath of deteriorating or collapsed industrial production (AT, SI), are engaged in farming and forest management under increasingly difficult climatic conditions (ES), as well as often facing high rates of land abandonment, unemployment (ES, SI, UK), and/or an ageing local population (AT). with It is important to note that all activities take place in localised areas where economic conditions are poor and local communities are suffering the aftermath of deteriorating or collapsed industrial production (AT, SI), are engaged in farming and forest management under increasingly difficult climatic conditions (AT), as well as often facing high rates of land abandonment, unemployment (SI, UK), and/or an ageing local population (AT). Replacing the original version on page 8 in Section 4.3 (after Table 1): The cases we examined were sustainable or even flourished because of the continuous eorts of a range of various associations (UK), consulting firms (AT) and public administrations (SI, ES) (Table 1, above). with The cases we examined were sustainable or even flourished because of the continuous efforts of a range of various associations (UK), consulting firms (AT) and public administrations (SI) (Table 1, above). Replacing the original version on page 10 in Section 4.3: The initial ideas originated from specific individuals (innovators) who had the will to turn their ideas into reality. Some were subsequently supported either by a consulting agency (such as the ÖAR in Austria), by regular funding (TECT funding in the UK case), by a regulative policy instrument that provided a legal base for the activities and the opportunities to receive further developmental funding (the Spanish case). with The initial ideas originated from specific individuals (innovators) who had the will to turn their ideas into reality. Some were subsequently supported either by a consulting agency (such as the ÖAR in Austria) or by regular funding (TECT funding in the UK case). Replacing the original version on page 11 in Section 5 (i) Cooperation and collective action: The relationships that develop are, at least initially, largely based on trust and in the Spanish case, trust has proven to be enduring and decisive factor that provides ongoing impetus to the dangerous activity of fighting forest fires. with The relationships that develop are, at least initially, largely based on trust. (8) Replacing Figure 1: (Figure Presented) with (Figure Presented)   (9) Replacing Table 1: (Table Presented) with (TablePresented) The authors and the Editorial Offce would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused to the readers by these changes. The changes do not affect the scientific results of the original paper [1]. The manuscript will be updated, and the original will remain online on the article webpage

Training programmes in sustainable forest management in Austria, Croatia and Slovenia

Background and Purpose: During the Erasmus+ project "Cooperation for Innovative Approach in Sustainable Forest Management Training (CIA2SFM)" a study of the existing vocational education and training (VET) and lifelong learning (LLL) programmes in the field of sustainable forest management (SFM) was conducted in Austria, Croatia and Slovenia. The aim of this paper is to get an overview of and analyse SFM-related VET and LLL programmes in the study area, with an emphasis on the identification of good practice examples and providing recommendations for improvement. Materials and Methods: A combined approach of literature review, Internet search and consultations with training providers was applied in order to collect data on training programmes conducted in the period 2006-2015 in Austria, Croatia and Slovenia. The programmes were analysed based on topics, types of methods used, existence of specified learning outcomes, programme evaluation by participants and how the programme was advertised. The analysis employed basic descriptive statistics. Topics were grouped into broader themes. Only training programmes targeting private forest owners, forestry professionals, and forestry entrepreneurs were analysed. Three examples of good practice in each country were selected based on collaboratively developed criteria. Results: In Austria, Croatia and Slovenia numerous training courses related to SFM were conducted in the analysed period, predominantly addressing target groups in forestry sector and covering a variety of topics. The relative importance of themes varied among countries. In order to facilitate the knowledge uptake by participants various methods were applied. Although indoor ex-cathedra approaches prevailed, it could be recognized that there is a growth in interest for foster demonstrations in the field, organizing field trips, emphasize on practical work and combining methods and approaches in most countries. Conclusions: Even if national providers of training programmes may relate to individual needs within national forestry sectors, SFM-related training programmes should be regularly screened and updated according to international agendas and emerging issues. In order to cope with increasing uncertainty and expanding risks forest ecosystems are facing, it is an important task to open up the recent training offer to innovative forms of learning, combinations of topics and learning environments