Annals of Forest Science

, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp 291–300 | Cite as

Is the private forest sector adapting to climate change? A study of forest managers in north Wales

  • Anna Lawrence
  • Mariella Marzano
Original Paper



Two-thirds of Britain’s forest area is privately owned. Thus, understanding private forest owners and managers, and their attitudes to uncertainty and change, is essential for the success of climate change adaptation policies.


The aims of this study are to (1) assess how beliefs in climate change in the private sector have influenced forest management practices; (2) identify constraints related to changes in species choice and silvicultural systems; (3) analyse the implications for implementing climate change policy in forestry.


Semi-structured interviews with key informants who provide advice to, or manage woodlands in, the private forest sector in north Wales.


Woodland managers and some advisers are not generally convinced of a need to adapt. They feel the future is uncertain, more usually in relation to tree disease than to climate change itself. Species choice is the principle focus of adaptation activities and reveals a deep divide in opinion. Commercial advisors look to new exotics but are inhibited by absence of markets, while small-scale owners rely more on native genetic diversity.


Findings that are likely to apply widely include: the influential role of forest agents in forest management decisions including species choice; lack of confidence in climate change predictions, and in markets; more immediate concerns about tree pests and diseases; demand for leadership from the public sector, and for engagement amongst the private sector. Further research is needed across a wider area to test the variability in relationship between attitudes and behaviours, and local conditions including climate change predictions.


Adaptation Attitudes Behaviour change Forestry extension Policy tools Risk Uncertainty 



We would like to thank all the respondents who participated in this study and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on the manuscript.


This research was funded through the 7th Framework Programme (FP7) of the European Union (Project MOTIVE, ENV-CT-2009-226544); further time for analysis and writing was funded by the Forestry Commission.


  1. Blennow K (2012) Adaptation of forest management to climate change among private individual forest owners in Sweden. For Pol Econ 24:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blennow K, Persson J, Tomé M, Hanewinkel M (2012) Climate change: believing and seeing implies adapting. PLoS ONE 7Google Scholar
  3. Bryman A (2001) Social research methods. Oxford University Press Centre, Exeter, 608 ppGoogle Scholar
  4. Buizer M, Lawrence A (2013) The politics of numbers in forest and climate change policies in Australia and the UK. Env Sc PolGoogle Scholar
  5. D’Amato AW, Bradford JB, Fraver S, Palik BJ (2011) Forest management for mitigation and adaptation to climate change: insights from long-term silviculture experiments. For Ecol Man 262:803–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daniels LD, Maertens TB, Stan AB, McCloskey SPJ, Cochrane JD, Gray RW (2011) Direct and indirect impacts of climate change on forests: three case studies from British Columbia. Can J Pl Path 33:108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Duncker PS, Raulund-Rasmussen K, Gundersen P, Katzensteiner K, De Jong J, Ravn HP, Smith M, Eckmüllner O, Spiecker H (2012) How forest management affects ecosystem services, including timber production and economic return: synergies and trade-offs. Ecol & Soc 17:17Google Scholar
  8. Forestry Commission Wales (2010) A guide for increasing tree species diversity in Wales. Grants and regulations. Forestry Commission Wales. 41 ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Forestry Commission (2011) The UK Forestry Standard. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, 108 ppGoogle Scholar
  10. Forestry Commission Wales (2012) Guidance for the use of silvicultural systems to increase woodland diversity. Forestry Commission Wales. 23 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Forestry Commission (2012a) Forestry Statistics 2012—Woodland Areas and PlantingGoogle Scholar
  12. Forestry Commission (2012b) Phytophthora ramorum in larch trees—Update. Forestry Commission. Accessed 18 August 2013
  13. Furness R, Nelson H (2012) Community forest organizations and adaptation to climate change in British Columbia. For Chron 88:519–524Google Scholar
  14. Fürstenau C, Badeck FW, Lasch P, Lexer MJ, Lindner M, Mohr P, Suckow F (2007) Multiple-use forest management in consideration of climate change and the interests of stakeholder groups. Eur J For Res 126:225–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ge ZM, Kellomäki S, Peltola H, Zhou X, Väisänen H (2013) Adaptive management to climate change for Norway spruce forests along a regional gradient in Finland. Clim Change 118:275–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilchrist VJ, Williams RL (1999) Key informant interviews. In: Crabtree BF, Miller WL (eds) Doing qualitative research, 2nd edn. Sage, London, pp 73–88Google Scholar
  17. Hokajärvi R, Hujala T, Leskinen LA, Tikkanen J (2009) Effectiveness of sermon policy instruments: forest management planning practices applying the activity theory approach. Silv Fenn 43:889–906Google Scholar
  18. Kolström M, Lindner M, Vilén T, Maroschek M, Seidl R, Lexer MJ, Netherer S, Kremer A, Delzon S, Barbati A, Marchetti M, Corona P (2011) Reviewing the science and implementation of climate change adaptation measures in European forestry. Forests 2:961–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lawrence A, Dandy N (2013) Private landowners' approaches to planting and managing forests in the UK: what's the evidence? Land Use Pol. In pressGoogle Scholar
  20. Lawrence A, Gillett S (2011) Human dimensions of adaptive forest management and climate change: a review of international experience. Forestry Commission research report. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, 52 ppGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall MN (1996) The key informant technique. Family practice 13:92–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mason B, Perks MP (2011) Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) forests in Atlantic Europe: changes in forest management and possible consequences for carbon sequestration. Sc J For Res 26:72–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mason WL, Petr M, Bathgate S (2012) Silvicultural strategies for adapting planted forests to climate change: from theory to practice. J For Sc 58:265–277Google Scholar
  24. Milad M, Schaich H, Konold W (2012) How is adaptation to climate change reflected in current practice of forest management and conservation? A case study from Germany. Biod & Cons 1–22Google Scholar
  25. Parkins JR, MacKendrick NA (2007) Assessing community vulnerability: a study of the mountain pine beetle outbreak in British Columbia, Canada. Glob Env Ch 17:460–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pautasso M (2013) Phytophthora ramorum—a pathogen linking network epidemiology, landscape pathology and conservation biogeography. CAB reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 8. 14 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Pommerening A (2006) Transformation to continuous cover forestry in a changing environment. For Ecol Man 224:227–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pommerening A, Murphy ST (2004) A review of the history, definitions and methods of continuous cover forestry with special attention to afforestation and restocking. For 77:27–44Google Scholar
  29. Ray D (2008a) Impacts of climate change on forestry in Wales, Forestry Commission Research Note 301. 8 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Ray D (2008b) Impacts of climate change on forestry in Scotland—a synopsis of spatial modelling research, Forestry Commission Research Note 101. 8 pp.Google Scholar
  31. Ray D, Morison J, Broadmeadow M (2010) Climate change: impacts and adaptation in England’s woodlands, Forestry Commission Research Note 201. 16 ppGoogle Scholar
  32. Read DJ, Freer-Smith PH, Morison JIL, Hanley N, West CC, Snowdon P (2009) Combating climate change: a role for UK forests. An assessment of the potential of the UK’s trees and woodlands to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The Stationary Office, Edinburgh, 242 ppGoogle Scholar
  33. Seidl R, Rammer W, Lexer MJ (2011) Adaptation options to reduce climate change vulnerability of sustainable forest management in the Austrian Alps. Can J For Res 41:694–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spies TA, Giesen TW, Swanson FJ, Franklin JF, Lach D, Johnson KN (2010) Climate change adaptation strategies for federal forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA: ecological, policy, and socio-economic perspectives. Lands Ecol 25:1185–1199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Temperli C, Bugmann H, Elkin C (2012) Adaptive management for competing forest goods and services under climate change. Ecol Appl 22:2065–2077PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wavehill Consulting (2009) A survey of farmers with woodland on their land. A report for the Forestry Commission Wales. Wavehill Consulting. 62 ppGoogle Scholar
  37. Welsh Assembly Government (2009) Woodland for Wales: the Welsh Assembly Government’s strategy for woodlands and trees. Forestry Commission Wales. 49 ppGoogle Scholar
  38. Willoughby I, Stokes V, Poole J, White JEJ, Hodge SJ (2007) The potential of 44 native and non-native tree species for woodland creation on a range of contrasting sites in lowland Britain. For 80:530–552Google Scholar
  39. Yousefpour R, Hanewinkel M, Le Moguédec G (2010) Evaluating the suitability of management strategies of pure Norway spruce forests in the Black Forest area of Southwest Germany for adaptation to or mitigation of climate change. Env Man 45:387–402Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of United Kingdom 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forest ResearchMidlothianUK

Personalised recommendations