Scope for the 1st joint call of
Sustainable forests for society of the future
This Sumforest ERA-NET Call focuses on basic and applied research regarding multifunctional forestry and as such may also cover consortia addressing research issues spanning over the whole value chain from forest management to product and service development. Proposals are expected to be transnational and the consortia needs to have members from at least three different partner countries that are funding the call.
The call covers the research topics listed below which have been
prepared by funding agencies/organizations involved in the ERA-NET
Sumforest, in collaboration with representatives from two other
ERA-NETs, Foresterra and WoodWisdom-Net. At least one of the topics
shall be addressed but proposals covering more than one topic are also
welcome. Topic descriptions include focus areas which should be
primarily addressed by submitted proposals. However, the proposals may
include additional issues within a given topic.
Innovative forms
of cooperation are encouraged, i.e. interdisciplinary research and
implementation that stretches across disciplinary boundaries of the
forest-related sciences and results to meaningful cooperation between
biophysical/natural and social scientists. Additionally, involvement of
a variety of stakeholders representing also different geographic areas
will enable proper exchange of multiple academic backgrounds. Consortia
may also elaborate on how they connect to research communities outside
Europe.
The call should also contribute to the overall objectives
of the ERA-NET. It is supposed to stimulate the mobility of researchers
and practitioners between the countries and intensify researcher
training, thereby increasing the quality of European research and its
implementation.
Topic 1.
Comparative assessment of the sustainability performance between renewable and non-renewable raw material-based value chains
Problem
statement: Objective and holistic comparative analyses of the various
sustainability characteristics related to renewable vs. non-renewable
raw material based value chains are missing.
Bioeconomy
refers to an economy that relies on renewable natural resources to
produce food, energy, products and services. Unfortunately, this
overall preference towards renewable options is not at all obvious when
it comes to various public policies or communication in the marketplace.
In fact, e.g. the forest biomass-based products are facing even unfair
competition from fossil and mineral-based alternatives as the origin
and sustainability of the latter is not equally scrutinized.
Forest-,
agriculture- or aquaculture-based biomasses may be able to offer
sustainable solutions to a huge number of products and services through
substitution of fossil and mineral-based alternatives. For example, in
packaging or building applications, in textiles or in media
applications, even in transportation the different biomass-based
products can replace the non-renewable options.
The increasing
awareness of the importance of sustainable solutions to mitigate climate
change has contributed to a plethora of sustainability- related schemes
and claims in the market place. Practically every industry and service
sector offers their own approach to assess sustainability of their
respective value chains. There is a growing confusion in the market
place regarding the credibility of these statements.
The aim of
the research is to provide objective and neutral analysis between the
sustainability performances of biomass-based vs. fossil/mineral-based
value chains. This would allow both consumers as well as policy makers
to make fact-based choices. The role of carbon in these assessments
needs to be fully understood, including the respective sequestration and
substitution effects as well as the contribution to circular economy.
- The work should review various multidisciplinary methodologies for sustainability assessments.
- If appropriate, new assessment methodologies and sustainability criteria should be offered.
- Results from case-studies regarding comparisons should be presented.
- The analysis should bring novel information to the existing knowledge and be justified by gap analysis.
- Possibility to utilize existing data sources is an asset.
- The
proposal should also include an approach to - and practical
implementation of - the enhancement of the science-policy-practice
interface related to this topic.
Topic 2.
Risk
resilient forest management - defining forest management regimes which
effectively incorporate risk assessments related to climate change
Problem
statement: The probability of natural, social and economic hazards
caused by climate change - or related factors - is increasing. How
should the management regimes be developed to guarantee the forest
resiliency at regional, local and stand levels?
Changing
climate will alter the basis for the existing forest management regimes.
Relationships between the different elements of the ecosystem - soil,
water, flora and fauna - will all be impacted by changing temperatures,
precipitation patterns and hazardous biotic and abiotic events. Climate
change will increase the risks for disturbances in provisioning of both
ecological and socio-economic products and services from the forests.
- The
research should come up with new ways to define climate resilient
management regimes applicable for different types of forest functions
and environments.
- Special attention should be paid to risk
analysis methods and strategies to avoid negative consequences of
certain risks caused by changes in climate or in the socio-economic
environment.
- The research can apply foresight analysis to
predict the potential impacts of climate change on the ecological and
socio-economic services of the forest sector.
- The proposal
should also include an approach to - and practical implementation of -
the enhancement of the science-policy-practice interface related to this
topic.
Topic 3.
Appraisals and trade-offs related to forest ecosystem services
Problem
statement: Comprehensive value assessments related to forest ecosystem
services are missing. As a consequence, the trade-offs between often
conflicting demands on the various ecosystem services are not properly
analyzed and understood in policy and other decision making processes.
Forests
are offering a multitude of benefits for the society. Some of these
benefits - or ecosystem services - may be conflicting, while some others
can be synergetic. For example, the intensification of biomass
production can have negative impacts on some recreational values, e.g.
scenic qualities. However, the opposite may also happen, e.g.
intensive biomass production through development of forest road network
may allow better hunting possibilities which contribute to improved
recreational values.
In order to make sound decisions, the values
of the different ecosystem services need to be assessed. This value
assessment needs to be done in a manner that assures the comparability
of the results. Trade-offs between economic, ecological and social
ecosystem services and products need to be presented in a form that
allows the decision-makers at all levels to conceptualize the
implications of the various choices. Better understanding of synergies
and trade-offs between different ecosystem services will help to develop
coherent and well-founded policies.
- The research should include appraisals of existing methods to assess trade-offs between various forest ecosystem functions.
- Development on decision support methods applicable for assessing various aspects of multifunctional forestry.
- Results of case studies using the method developed in this project.
- The
proposal should also include an approach to - and practical
implementation of - the enhancement of the science-policy-practice
interface related to this topic.