V. 81 N. 2s (2026): Atti della Conferenza Foreste vetuste e antichi alberi: un tesoro di natura, vita e cultura. Firenze 1 ottobre 2025 / Vallombrosa 2-3 ottobre 2025
Reviews

Safeguarding old-growth and primary forests: protection and forest landscape restoration to deliver Europe’s 30×30 commitments

PDF (English)
  • Anique Hillbrand
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/ifm-1224

Pubblicato 2026-10-06

Parole chiave

  • old growth forest,
  • primary forest,
  • protection,
  • forest landscape restoration,
  • 30×30,
  • EU Biodiversity Strategy,
  • EU Nature Restoration Regulation
    • ...Più
    Meno

Come citare

Hillbrand, A. (2026). Safeguarding old-growth and primary forests: protection and forest landscape restoration to deliver Europe’s 30×30 commitments. L’Italia Forestale E Montana, 81(2s), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.36253/ifm-1224

Copyright (c) 2026 Anique Hillbrand

Creative Commons License

Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale 4.0 Internazionale.

Abstract

Safeguarding old-growth and primary forests is essential for biodiversity conservation, climate regulation, ecosystem resilience and cultural heritage, yet these forests remain rare, fragmented and increasingly threatened across the EU. Recent assessments estimate that primary and old-growth forests represent <3% of EU forest extent, with substantial gaps in spatially explicit mapping; this rarity underscores the urgency of protection and evidence-based restoration strategies (European Commission 2021b; Sabatini et al., 2018 ). In alignment with the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (Target 3, “30×30”) and the EU Nature Restoration Regulation, this paper argues for a dual pathway: (i) protection and improved legal enforcement for remaining intact, high-integrity old and primary forests and (ii) forest landscape restoration (FLR) to strengthen buffer zones, recover old-growth attributes and reconnect landscapes (CBD, Convention on Biological Diversity, 2022; European Union, 2024). We outline governance strategies to harmonize implementation across scales and emphasize the role of participatory management, engaging landowners and communities to strengthen social legitimacy and reduce pressures on remaining forests. Additionally, we suggest practical restoration frameworks, such as the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM), that support evidence-based interventions. We conclude with priority actions for conserving primary forests, restoring ecological connectivity, and communicating the ecological, cultural, and socio-economic values of old-growth landscapes. By coupling protection with landscape-scale restoration, supported by robust social safeguards and monitoring, Europe can accelerate progress toward 30×30 targets while enhancing climate resilience and societal benefits.

PDF (English)

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Agnoletti, M., & Santoro, A. (2015). Cultural values and sustainable forest management: The case of Europe. Journal of Forest Research, 20, 438–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-015-0500-7
  2. Anyanwu, L. E., Felix, O. O., Ejike, I. W., & Anyanwu, I. O. (2025). Environmental governance frameworks and stakeholder engagement mechanisms for effective natural resource management at local levels. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 28(2), 1998–2010. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.28.2.3808
  3. Barredo, J. I., Brailescu, C., Teller, A., Sabatini, F. M., Mauri, A., & Janouskova, K. (2021). Mapping and assessment of primary and old-growth forests in Europe (EUR 30661 EN). Publications Office of the European Union.
  4. Barredo, J. I., Rivero, I. M., & Janoušková, K. (2024). Assessing disturbances in surviving primary forests of Europe. Conservation Biology, 39(2), e14404. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14404
  5. Bluhm, H., Diserens, T. A., Engleder, T., Heising, K., Heurich, M., Janík, T., Jirků, M., Klich, D., König, H. J., Kowalczyk, R., Kuijper, D., Maślanko, W., Michler, F.-U., Neumann, W., Oeser, J., Olech, W., Perzanowski, K., Ratkiewicz, M., Romportl, D., … Kuemmerle, T. (2023). Widespread habitat for Europe’s largest herbivores, but poor connectivity limits recolonization. Diversity and Distributions, 29, 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13671
  6. Buchwald, E. (2005). A hierarchical terminology for more or less natural forests in relation to sustainable management and biodiversity conservation. In Proceedings: Third expert meeting on harmonizing forest-related definitions for use by various stakeholders (pp. 111–127). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  7. Carver, S., Convery, I., Hawkins, S., Hertel, S., Fallon, J., Lyons, K., Beyers, R., Locquet, A., Derham, T., & Kun, Z. (Eds.). (2025). Guidelines for rewilding. IUCN.
  8. Convention on Biological Diversity. (2021). A review of definitions, data, and methods for country-level assessment and reporting of primary forest: A discussion paper for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
  9. Convention on Biological Diversity. (2022). Kunming–Montreal global biodiversity framework. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
  10. Crouzeilles, R., Curran, M., Ferreira, M. S., Lindenmayer, D. B., Grelle, C. E., & Rey Benayas, J. M. (2016). A global meta-analysis on the ecological drivers of forest restoration success. Nature Communications, 7(1), 11666. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11666
  11. Cumming, G., Campbell, L., Norwood, C., Ranger, S., Richardson, P., & Sanghera, A. (2022). Putting stakeholder engagement in its place: How situating public participation in community improves natural resource management outcomes. GeoJournal, 87(Suppl 2), 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10367-1
  12. Dyderski, M. K., & Jagodziński, A. M. (2020). Impact of invasive tree species on natural regeneration species composition, diversity, and density. Forests, 11(4), 456. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11040456
  13. EuroNatur. (2020, 22 aprile). Destruction of Romania’s natural forests: Environmental groups pursue new legal action against Romanian authorities. Agent Green. https://www.euronatur.org/en/what-we-do/news/destruction-of-romanias-natural-forests-environmental-groups-pursue-new-legal-action-against-romanian-authorities
  14. European Commission. (2020). EU biodiversity strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (COM/2020/380 final). European Commission.
  15. European Commission. (2021a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Commission.
  16. European Commission. (2021b). Barredo, J., Brailescu, C., Teller, A., Sabatini, F.M., Mauri, A. & Janouskova, K., Mapping and assessment of primary and old-growth forests in Europe, EUR 30661 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.2760/797591
  17. European Commission. (2021c). Forest condition and primary/old-growth forest distribution in the EU (Joint Research Centre Report). Publications Office of the European Union.
  18. European Commission. (2023). EU Deforestation Observatory: Forest cover and drivers dataset. European Commission.
  19. European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration. Official Journal of the European Union, L, 1–55.
  20. FERN. (2022). EU enforcement is overdue: Destruction of Romania’s Natura 2000 primary and old-growth forests continues. https://www.fern.org/publications-insight/eu-enforcement-is-overdue-destruction-of-romanias-natura-2000-primary-and-old-growth-forests-continues-2465
  21. Fischer, H. W., Chhatre, A., Duddu, A., & Caviedes, J. (2023). Community forest governance and synergies among carbon, biodiversity and livelihoods. Nature Climate Change, 13, 1340–1347. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01863-6
  22. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2025). Global forest resources assessment 2025: Terms and definitions. FAO.
  23. Götmark, F., Söderlundh, H., & Thorell, M. (2000). Buffer zones for forest reserves: Opinions of land owners and conservation value of their forest around nature reserves in southern Sweden. Biodiversity & Conservation, 9(10), 1377–1390. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008978831068
  24. International Union for Conservation of Nature. (2004). Protected area categories. IUCN. https://iucn.org/sites/default/files/import/downloads/14_3lowres.pdf
  25. International Union for Conservation of Nature. (2022). IUCN policy statement on primary forests including intact forest landscapes. IUCN.
  26. International Union for Conservation of Nature & World Resources Institute. (2014). A guide to the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM). IUCN.
  27. Knorn, J., Kuemmerle, T., Radeloff, V. C., Keeton, W. S., Gancz, V., Biriș, I. A., Svoboda, M., Griffiths, P., Hagatis, A., & Hostert, P. (2013). Continued loss of temperate old-growth forests in the Romanian Carpathians despite an increasing protected area network. Environmental Conservation, 40(2), 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892912000355
  28. Kormos, C. F., Mackey, B., DellaSala, D. A., Kumpe, N., Jaeger, T., Mittermeier, R. A., & Filardi, C. (2018). Primary forests: Definition, status and future prospects for global conservation. In D. A. DellaSala & M. I. Goldstein (Eds.), The encyclopedia of the Anthropocene (Vol. 2, pp. 31–41). Elsevier.
  29. Mayhew, R. J., Tobias, J. A., Bunnefeld, L., & Dent, D. H. (2019). Connectivity with primary forest determines the value of secondary tropical forests for bird conservation. Biotropica, 51(2), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12629
  30. Moyer, J. M., Owen, R. J., & Duinker, P. N. (2008). Forest values: A framework for old-growth forest with implications for other forest conditions. The Open Forest Science Journal, 1(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874398600801010027
  31. Nolte, C., Agrawal, A., Silvius, K. M., & Soares-Filho, B. S. (2013). Governance regime and location influence avoided deforestation success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(13), 4956–4961. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1214786110
  32. O’Brien, D., Aavik, T., Fedorca, A., Fischer, M. C., Goffaux, R., Hoban, S., Hollingsworth, P., Hvilsom, C., Jehle, R., Kalamujić Stroil, B., Kershaw, F., Klinga, P., Kopatz, A., Leigh, D. M., Paz-Vinas, I., Robuchon, M., Segelbacher, G., Takacs, V., Vernesi, C., & Laikre, L. (2025). Restoring genetic diversity to facilitate the implementation of the EU Nature Restoration Law. Biological Conservation, 303, 110995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.110995
  33. Pugh, T. A., Lindeskog, M., Smith, B., Poulter, B., Arneth, A., Haverd, V., & Calle, L. (2019). Role of forest age in the global carbon sink. Nature, 571(7764), 230–234.
  34. RECONNECT. (2025). RECONNECT policy brief: Narratives [Policy brief].
  35. Rewilding Europe. (2025, May 8). Rewilding Europe’s Swedish Lapland rewilding landscape becomes Nordic Taiga. rewildingeurope.com
  36. Roberntz, P., & Suominen, M. (2025). Primary and old-growth forests at risk in Finland and Sweden: What will the EU’s impact be on protecting them? WWF Finland; WWF Sweden. https://wwf.fi/app/uploads/t/n/x/oehmxh4q8ikqt692yxj1x/primary-and-old-growth-forests-at-risk-in-finland-and-sweden--what-will-the-eus-impact-be-on-protecting-them-wwf-report-2025.pdf
  37. Rogers, B. M., Mackey, B., Shestakova, T. A., Keith, H., Young, V., Kormos, C. F., DellaSala, D. A., Brandt, P., Coad, L., Fitzsimons, J. A., Jaeger, T., & Hugh, S. (2022). Using ecosystem integrity to maximize climate mitigation and minimize risk in international forest policy. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 5, 929281. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2022.929281
  38. Sabatini, F. M., Bluhm, H., Kun, Z., Aksenov, D., Atauri, J. A., Buchwald, E., Burrascano, S., Cateau, E., Diku, A., Duarte, I. M., Fernández López, Á. B., Garbarino, M., Grigoriadis, N., Horváth, F., Keren, S., Kitenberga, M., Kiš, A., Kraut, A., Ibisch, P. L., . . . Kuemmerle, T. (2021). European primary forest database v2.0. Scientific Data, 8(1), 220. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00988-7
  39. Sabatini, F. M., Burrascano, S., Keeton, W. S., Levers, C., Bauhus, J., Korhonen, K. T., Jucker, T., Lõhmus, A., Ibisch, P. L., Stojanovic, D., Mikoláš, M., Bisi, F., Chirici, G., Diaci, J., Fekete, G., Grigoriadis, N., Knorn, J., Kozák, D., Matović, B., . . . Kuemmerle, T. (2018). Where are Europe’s last primary forests? Diversity and Distributions, 24(10), 1426–1439. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12778
  40. Sabatini, F. M., Keeton, W. S., Lindner, M., Svoboda, M., Verkerk, P. J., Bauhus, J., Bruelheide, H., Burrascano, S., Debaive, N., Duarte, I., Garbarino, M., Grigoriadis, N., Lombardi, F., Mikoláš, M., Meyer, P., Motta, R., Mozgeris, G., Nunes, L., . . . Kuemmerle, T. (2020). Where are Europe’s last primary forests? Diversity and Distributions, 26(12), 1646-1662. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13158
  41. Sterling, E. J., Betley, E., Sigouin, A., Gomez, A., Toomey, A., Cullman, G., Malone, C., Pekor, A., Arengo, F., Blair, M., Filardi, C., Landrigan, K., & Porzecanski, A. L. (2017). Assessing the evidence for stakeholder engagement in biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation, 209, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.02.008
  42. Stolton, S., Shadie, P., & Dudley, N. (Eds.). (2013). Guidelines for applying protected area management categories including IUCN WCPA best practice guidance on recognising protected areas and assigning management categories and governance types. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series, IUCN. https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/30018
  43. Thorell, M., & Götmark, F. (2005). Reinforcement capacity of potential buffer zones: Forest structure and conservation values around forest reserves in southern Sweden. Forest Ecology and Management, 212(1–3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.03.028
  44. Toto, R., Alix-García, J., Sims, K. R., Coutinho, B., Brenes, C. M., Pugliese, L., & Mendes, A. F. (2025). Evidence on scaling forest restoration from the Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact in Brazil. Nature Communications, 16(1), 345. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59194-3