It is said that Finns have a special relationship with their forests. Indeed, forests have enabled the country’s significant prosperity, and with it, the building of the welfare state. For a large proportion of Finns, their relationship with forests intertwines with non-economic values such as cultural heritage, recreational use, and landscape value. Forests cover the vast majority of Finland’s land area, making them the country’s most significant natural resource. About 90 percent of Finland’s forests are in commercial use. However, the ongoing global environmental crisis threatens the entire planet’s biodiversity. In Finland, forests play a special role in slowing down climate change and biodiversity loss. For Finland, forests are a crucial carbon sink and home to numerous species, but despite this, the forest carbon sink is hopelessly small and intensive forest use threatens the existence of many forest species and habitats. Therefore, it is crucial that forestry acts are based on scientific research evidence and enable sustainable utilization of natural resources.
Unfortunately, current policy measures are not nearly enough to tackle the sustainability issues surrounding the forest industry. Finland will not meet its national goals, the obligations set by the European Union, or international agreements regarding the protection of carbon sinks and the prevention of biodiversity loss if the forest relationship is not thoroughly re-evaluated. We are living in a new era where forests are no longer merely an endless resource for the engines of the national economy but also the primary key to increasing Finland’s carbon sinks and strengthening biodiversity. Redefining a more sustainable forest relationship requires a critical review of forest-use priorities.
A forest always has an owner. In principle, forest owners are allowed to use their forests as they wish. Forest owners often end up choosing the most cost-effective forestry practice, namely clearcutting. This practice turns forests into a source of emissions for decades, permanently destroys the ecosystem services forests provide, pollutes water bodies, and, moreover, destroys the beautiful forest landscape. There are alternative forestry practices, such as continuous-cover silviculture, a method that consists of small-scale or group-selection felling without cutting the entire forest area. Forest owners should be guided toward sustainable practices, just as is done in many other industries.
There are very few restrictions on forest use at the legislative level. The forest industry is mainly self-regulated through forest certifications, which limit the harm caused by logging. Certification used in the majority of Finland’s forests have significant shortcomings from a sustainability perspective. Furthermore, certification does not take the cumulative impact caused by logging into account, nor do they completely prevent logging in valuable natural sites. Voluntary and state-supported conservation programmes for private forestry are excellent steps forward. Yet limited conservation measures by themselves are insufficient to achieve a fully sustainable society.
A sustainable forest relationship demands a new way of thinking. The perspective of the public interest must become a central part of forestry legislation. Public interest in forestry legislation means stronger integration of ecological perspectives in the use of Finland’s most important natural resource.
Forward-looking forest acts incorporate comprehensive, nationwide felling quotas designed to preserve carbon sinks, alongside regulations governing felling practices and expansive conservation zones for forest-dwelling species and water bodies to increase biodiversity. Furthermore, the sustainability transition in forestry must consider the position of the forest owner. Financial losses for forest owners can be reduced by modifying forest taxation or by the state redeeming unfelled areas.
Legislative means for sustainable forest use already exist. What is still needed is political will. Forest use has a profound impact on both current and future human generations, as well as on the living conditions of other species. Therefore, the commercial use of forests must be conducted within ecological limits based on scientific evidence. Finland’s accountability in global environmental crises begins with its forests.
