Power and Polarisation in Swedish Forestry: From Lock-ins to Sustainable Transition

Debates over forest management in Sweden have become increasingly heated and polarised. Key actors stress the importance of intensive forest management for Sweden’s role as a major exporter of forest products. Others criticise that Swedish forestry is locked into practices that favour large-scale clear-cutting over alternatives like continuous cover forestry – at the expense of Sweden’s compliance with national, EU and global environmental goals.

The aim of this project, funded by the Swedish Research Council FORMAS (Nr. 2025-00198), is to analyse these lock-ins, their drivers and impacts – and to identify sustainable compromises to alleviate polarisation.

We first take stock of lock-ins into dominant forestry practices across the country. We then ask to what extent these lock-ins are driven by three different power constellations: among decision-makers at local, national and EU levels; among actors who seek to influence the Swedish forest policy agenda; and among deeper discourses these actors share or diverge on, including in emotionally polarised debates. Thereupon we analyse the psychological, socio-cultural, sustainability and public health-related impacts of current practices.

We apply and triangulate a diversity of methods across disciplines, from scenario analyses to interviews and focus groups, a survey, ethnographic approaches, and network analyses. Collaborating with key stakeholders, we provide a groundbreaking understanding of Swedish forestry and identify strategies to address polarisation towards a sustainable transition.

Forestry in Sweden today is a balancing act between important economic and ecological goals. The forestry debate in the country has become increasingly heated and polarised in recent years. On the one hand, there are those who advocate intensive forestry to maintain Sweden's role as a leading supplier of forest products. On the other hand, there are critics who argue that Swedish forestry uses unsustainable methods such as large-scale clear-cutting, which threatens species-rich forests and undermines national environmental goals, EU and UN legislation.

Our research project, funded by the Swedish Research Council FORMAS (Nr. 2025-00198), aims to analyse these lock-ins in Swedish forestry, their drivers and effects, and to identify possible sustainable forestry alternatives and reduce polarisation. We focus in particular on the debate on continuous cover forestry (CCF) as an alternative to traditional clear-cutting (‘Rotation Forest Management’).

What we like to investigate

1. To what extent is Swedish forestry today locked into certain policies and methods that priortise clear-cutting, as opposed to continuous cover forestry?
2. How are these lock-ins impacted by power constellations and polarisation in the debate?
3. What effects do these lock-ins have on individuals, society, sustainability and public health?
4. What opportunities are there to break these lock-ins in order to facilitate more sustainable forestry practices?

How we proceed

To answer these questions, we use a variety of methods:
•We analyse documents, reports and scientific literature to map policies and the prevalence of current forestry practices in Sweden.
•We interview experts, decision-makers and stakeholders to understand power relations and decision-making processes.
•We conduct political and environmental psychological analyses, a survey study, scenario and ethnographic analyses to investigate the long-term and in-depth effects of different forestry methods on individuals, society, ecological and economic sustainability, and public health.
•We use social and discursive network analyses to map collaborations, conflicts, information flows and different perspectives in the forestry debate.

Why this is important

Our project addresses one of the most important sustainability challenges for Sweden: balancing the economic use of forests with long-term ecological sustainability and social justice. Furthermore, Sweden's forests are not only a national asset but also play an important role among Europe's forest resources and in global efforts to combat biodiversity loss and climate change.

The results of our research can contribute to:

•Reduced polarisation and socio-cultural conflicts over Swedish forests
•More sustainable economic models for the forestry sector
•Improved biodiversity, carbon storage and recreation in Swedish forests
•Sweden achieving some of its national and international environmental goals
•Increased understanding of how different stakeholders, including Sami communities, local forest owners, the forest industry, civil society organisations and consumers, are affected by and can influence forest policy and forestry
•More inclusive and equitable strategies in forestry

Who can benefit from this research

Our results will be relevant to a range of different groups:
•Researchers in various disciplines working on forestry issues
•Decision-makers at local, national and EU levels
•Environmental, hunting, tourism and recreational organisations
•The forestry industry, both large companies and family-owned forestry operations
•Local communities affected by forestry
•Sami communities whose reindeer herding is affected by forestry
•Consumers of forest products


Future prospects

By identifying lock-ins in Swedish forestry and investigating ways to break them, we hope to contribute to a more sustainable and balanced forest policy in Sweden. Our goal is to provide decision-makers and stakeholders with tools to navigate the complex challenges facing Swedish forestry – and to find ways forward to reduce polarisation in the debate and identify alternatives that take into account psychological, social, cultural, ecological, economic and health-related aspects.

Insights from our project may also be valuable beyond Sweden's borders. By studying how a leading forestry country such as Sweden deals with these issues, we can contribute to the broader discussion on sustainable forestry and natural resource management in a global context, taking into account the EU's “Fit for 55” package and the Global Goals for Sustainable Development.