The development of societies, including spiritual development, is closely connected to forests. The larger interrelations among changing societies, transforming forest landscapes, and evolving spiritual values related to forests have yet to be extensively considered. Addressing this research gap is important to avoid the neglect of spiritual values in forest policy and management. Our exploratory study investigates spiritual values of forests from European and Asian perspectives, assessing 13 countries. Based on expert knowledge from 18 interdisciplinary experts, we first define forest spiritual values (forest spirituality). We then elaborate on the idea that forest spirituality evolves as societies and landscapes change, and propose a transition hypothesis for forest spirituality. We identify indicators and drivers and portray four stages of such a transition using country-specific examples. We find that during a first stage ("nature is powerful"), forest spirituality is omnipresent through the abundance of sacred natural sites and practices of people who often directly depend on forests for their livelihoods. An alternative form of spirituality is observed in the second stage ("taming of nature"). Connected to increasing transformation of forest landscapes and intensifying land-use practices, "modern" religions guide human-nature interrelations. In a third stage ("rational management of nature"), forest spirituality is overshadowed by planned rational forest management transforming forests into commodities for the economy, often focusing on provisioning ecosystem services. During a fourth stage ("reconnecting with nature"), a revival of forest spirituality (re-spiritualization) can be observed due to factors such as urbanization and individualizing spirituality. Our core contribution is in showing the connections among changing forest perceptions, changing land-use governance and practices, and changing forest spirituality. Increasing the understanding of this relationship holds promise for supporting forest policy-making and management in addressing trade-offs between spiritual values and other aspects of forests.

Urban Forestry: definitions, trends and consequences for forest stakeholders in Switzerland Since the mid-1990s the term “urban forestry” is used as an umbrella term for different activities in research and practice dealing with trees, forest and green space in cities and agglomerations. Though, urban forestry means more than just city forestry or forestry in urban areas. On the occasion of the 17th International Conference of the European Forum on Urban Forestry (EFUF) in Lausanne from June 3–7, 2014, challenges and trends of the debates around green cities and urban nature have been discussed. This article gives an overview over the debate and pursues three goals: 1) the term urban forestry is defined and conceptualized from different perspectives; 2) current trends and challenges as discussed at the EFUF conference are sketched out; 3) correspondingly, consequences for forest stakeholders in Switzerland are deduced. Forests in urban areas can not be managed with traditional forestry concepts only. An important precondition to successfully deal with the current challenges is intersectoral and interdisciplinary cooperation. Five fields of action are focused on: urban green strategies, management partnerships, crosssectoral monitoring, integrative research, training and education, and interdisciplinary networks to share experiences and transfer knowledge.

Background and Purpose: Partnerships are a key mechanism in the planning, delivery and management of urban forestry (UF) and green infrastructure (GI). They can facilitate locally rooted co-management and polycentric governance. They can also achieve synergies by combining the resources, commitment and expertise of diverse stakeholder groups in order to generate valuable outcomes and build social capital. Unfortunately, the term "partnerships" is not used consistently in literature and requires clarification. The characteristics which distinguish a partnership approach from other modes of cooperation are identified and described. The diversity of existing UF and GI oriented partnerships is outlined, with reference to their stakeholders, drivers, activities and goals, together with potential advantages of the partnership approach. Considerations to be made in their evaluation are derived from this background analysis and possible success factors are discussed. Materials and Methods: The diversity, aims and defining characteristics of a partnership approach are based on an extensive literature review. Results: Partnerships focus on diverse aspects and delivery phases of UF, ranging from the planning, design and creation of urban forests and GI to their management and use. Benefits delivered by such partnerships include environmental and economic services as well as social and cultural services such as environmental education, health, leisure and tourism. Generating valuable services whilst at the same time nurturing relationships between stakeholders helps to develop social capital and build capacity. In addition to environmental, economic and social benefits, the evaluation of partnerships may also address internal process variables such as social learning, the relationship between partners, and motivational outcomes that can influence future cooperation. conclusions: Cooperative partnerships offer a promising approach for delivery in UF. The development of relationships between partners maximises the potential for developing effective long term cooperation and for building social capital as an aid to the promotion of sustainable development.

No abstract

How forestry professionals assess the status of sustainable forest management in Switzerland The 170th Annual Assembly of the Swiss Forestry Society took place at Andermatt in August 2013 with the theme “300 years of sustainable management”. About one hundred forestry professionals took part in a seminar to debate the lessons of the last three centuries of sustainability for forest management. This article summarises the seminar results and draws conclusions for forest management in the future. The participants recognised that the greatest shortcomings were in the economic and social spheres. Measures were proposed in the area of knowledge of sustainable management, understanding of the forest ecosystem and in payment for forest services. The greatest challenge is considered to be responding to societal contradictions.