Abstract
The management of land to provide both productive and public goods has contributed to the current nature and climate emergencies. How the 0.9 million ha of forestry that the UK governments directly control are managed will help to determine whether we will meet our carbon and biodiversity obligations. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether the involvement of local communities in forest stewardship could lead to the enhanced delivery of public goods when compared with public stewardship. If there was evidence of enhanced delivery of public goods when communities had a role in stewardship could they be attributed to: differences in espoused values; differences in how workers perceive their organisation’s priorities; differences in the environmental attitudes of staff and volunteers; or the differing resources available.Four case studies were selected, each reflecting different models of community stewardship, from ownership to an informal partnership agreement. Semi-structured interviews (n=29) were conducted across the public and community organisations to capture the views of those in governance, strategic management, operational management, and forest operational roles. The interviewees also completed a questionnaire to capture their attitudes to the environment.
The study showed that in each of the case studies community involvement in forest stewardship either had delivered, or had plans to deliver, the public goods of biodiversity and rural vitality beyond the level planned by the public forest stewards. This enhanced delivery did not appear to arise because of marked differences in the expressed objectives or espoused values of the community and public stewards. Nor did minor differences in the preferred outcomes, and the greater environmental sensitivity of the individuals within the community organisations appear to explain the observed differences in the delivery of public goods. Instead, I conclude that the principal driver of the enhanced delivery of public goods results from the increased resources, financial and human, brought by community involvement and the different operational constraints that apply to public and community stewards.
Despite public forest administrations acknowledging the benefits of community stewardship, anxiety about the loss of timber production and the internal resources required to engage with community organisations, plus a perceived lack of resilience of community organisations were raised as barriers to greater community stewardship. In Scotland, in part to support the policy of community asset transfer, the public forest agency has developed criteria around the delivery of sustainable development benefits (public goods), good governance, and appropriate resourcing to execute their role as gatekeeper to community stewardship. In Wales, even without freehold asset transfer, I conclude that there is significant opportunity for more widespread partnership working with appropriately constituted community groups to enhance the delivery public goods for the benefit of all.
| Date of Award | 7 Mar 2025 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Supervisor | Neal Hockley (Supervisor), Ashley Hardaker (Supervisor) & Rhys Ap Gwilym (Supervisor) |