Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

6. REGIONAL UPDATE FOR WESTERN/NORTHERN/EASTERN EUROPE by P.H. Ståhl[7]


1. Policy and Institutional Issues

· Institutions: new roles, responsibilities, capabilities, organizations

The European Forest Genetic Resources Programme (EUFORGEN) is fundamental for the forest genetic resources (FGR) work in Europe and this region.

EUFORGEN is a collaborative programme among European countries aimed at ensuring the effective conservation and the sustainable use of forest genetic resources in Europe. It became operational in October 1994 and is financed by the participating countries and is coordinated by IPGRI, in collaboration with the Forestry Department of FAO. Its basic principle is that actual activities within the programme are carried out by institutions of the participating countries as contributions in kind to EUFORGEN. The pooled resources are kept minimal, covering only overall coordination and the cost of meetings and publications.

The Steering Committee of EUFORGEN is composed of national coordinators. At its 1998 meeting in Vienna a second phase was endorsed for the period 1 January 2000 - 31 December 2004. Some 30 countries participating in the programme activities. Of particular interest in the new phase is that the former Picea abies network has been widened to a general Conifer network.

EUFORGEN operates through networks of forest geneticists and other forestry specialists analysing needs, exchanging experiences and developing conservation methods for selected species. The networks also contribute to the development of conservation strategies.

EUFORGEN today has 5 conservation networks:

The networks have accomplished a lot during the years. I especially want to emphasize the long term conservation strategies developed in the Noble hardwoods cooperative for Alder (Alnus spp.), Ash (Fraxinus spp.), Chestnut (Castanea spp.), Elm (Ulmus spp.), Lime (Tilia spp.), Mountain ash (Sorbus spp.), Norway maple and Sycamore (Acer spp.), Walnut (Juglans spp.), and wild fruit trees. Several of these trees occur on the list of important species for conservation, improvement or seed procurement for northern, central and eastern Europe.

Network meetings are held regularly, on the average once per year. Excellent reports are produced from many of the meetings. EUFORGEN has a homepage (http://www.ipgri.cgiar.org/euforgen/euf_intro.htm) with information about ongoing activities, country reports, etc.

In addition to the European cooperation within EUFORGEN there is also regional cooperation. One is the Nordic Council for Forest Reproductive Material, a permanent unit under the Nordic Council of Ministers working for the coordination of management of forest genetic resources. Among its tasks are:

During the recent years the NSFP has e.g. actively been leading a discussion on the management of Nordic FGR. I will come back to this below.

For information on national institutions I refer to the EUFORGEN homepage.

· New legislation, policies, strategies on forest genetic resources

When as many countries as in this region are involved legislative changes occur continuously. The changed EU regulations on trade with seed and seedlings have for instance led to revised or changed legislations in many of the EU member countries. They also affected non-member states in that they set new rules for the trade with seed, seedlings, etc. I am not aware of any more dramatic changes in legislation affecting FGR.

Among the 5 Nordic countries discussions about the management of FGR, for instance the creation of a Nordic Forestry Gene Bank, coordination with EUFORGEN, etc. is going on in a process started by the Council of Ministers and the NSFP. There is a positive attitude towards increased cooperation and coordination of FGR work within the NSFP framework. Basic conditions for this are a better knowledge about the conditions etc. within the different countries and sufficient funding. The work and discussions continue.

Forest certification is becoming more and more widespread in Europe. Within the region which I am reporting about two systems dominate completely, the Forest Stewardship Council’s (FSC) and the Pan-European Forest Certification (PEFC). The two systems are relatively similar, but do not recognise each other. The exact rules set by the certification system vary from country to country, but in general definite rules are set by the certification systems for how the forest owner/manager should take care of his forests. Both systems certainly provide benefits from the point of view of FGR management.

· Developments in forest management/ownership

There is no clear tendency in the region for how forest management is developing. In Germany and some central European countries there is a strong move away from even-aged monoculture plantation forestry towards uneven-aged mixed species forestry. This will certainly have, in some cases already has had, considerable consequences for tree improvement programmes. Without a significant amount of plantation forestry there is little to motivate the costs for tree improvement.

The situation is different in northern Europe, particularly in Finland and Sweden, where even-aged plantation forestry, with larger and larger shares of genetically improved plantation materials, dominate. In Sweden, just to take an example, in 1999 artificial reforestation was used on 68% of the regeneration area, a share which actually seems to be slowly increasing. Tree improvement and forest genetic studies are relatively well financed in these countries.

If anything, there seems to be an increased interest in using indigenous materials and a reduced interest in exotics in most of the countries. But in for instance Ireland and Scotland the forestry to a large extent is based on plantations of exotic species.

Forest ownership trends are also highly variable in the region. In the Baltic republics, for instance, there is a privatisation of forestland going on, a return to the conditions that existed before the 2nd world war. In Sweden, on the other hand, most of the State forests were privatised in 1984. Today the government is buying back these lands.

Certain forest industry companies in the region are also, mainly to improve the return of the capital they are set to managed, talking about the possibility of divesting themselves from the forestlands. This could open up an interesting situation where the traditional almost exclusive use of wood for traditional uses, such as pulpwood and saw timber, can become much more open, with e.g. chemical industries looking to wood as an interesting raw material.

Another trend is that large national forest industry companies are merging with companies from other countries, i.e. becoming multinational. One result of this is an increased pressure for cooperative research, potentially also FGR research, between institutions in the different companies.

· Links with other international actions, frameworks or agreements (national forestry programmes, Convention on Biological Diversity; Agenda 21 of UNCED, notable work of the UN Forum on Forests; etc...)

Since the Panel’s last meeting a lot of work has been made, based on the Convention on Biological Diversity. Forests and FGR have become more and more discussed and actions been taken on both regional and national levels.

While the EU has no common forest policy a Forest Strategy for the European Union was agreed upon in 1998. It is based on the forest principles from UNCED 1992 and to the work carried out in the Pan-European Process on the Protection of Forests and other international agreements. Forest issues are also presented Biodiversity Action Plan for Agriculture Biodiversity and the Action plan for the Conservation of Natural Resources. Among points emphasized by the European Parliaments in its comments to the strategy was the importance of protecting remaining virgin and natural forests.

The EU LIFE-fund finances a number of biodiversity research projects in the member countries.

All the work with the CBD and EU initiatives have led to many new national activities, legislation, studies and other R&D activities.

2. Technical and Biological Issues

· New FGR assessments, exploration, conservation programmes

In many countries within the region various kinds of FGR studies have by now been carried out for 40 - 50 years. Very large numbers of genetic tests of varying types and ages exist in the region. The Forestry Research Institute of Sweden, just to take one example, has some 1500 active field tests and trials of genetic materials. Results are continuously coming from these studies and other ongoing research and form the base for better and better genetic materials and recommendations for their use.

The tests are mainly carried out for major indigenous species with a large industrial use, like Pinus sylvestris, Picea abies, Betula spp., etc. Much work is, however, also done on major exotics like Pinus contorta, Picea sitchensis, Pseudotsuga menziesii, etc. Throughout the region research on conifers dominate very clearly. Research on geographic variation through provenance trials is becoming less and less predominant and the centre of gravity for forest genetic research is now definitely on plus tree selection, breeding and progeny testing. Seed orchard materials now exist in northern Europe, which is 25% superior in growth to stand seed.

After saying that it must also be said that even in regions, where evaluation of FGR has been going on for at least 50 years, like the Nordic countries, there are still interesting new materials to be evaluated. One example is a study set up to see how Picea abies seed originating in east-Europe but grown one generation in southern Sweden compares to directly imported seed of provenances similar to those growing in Sweden, Byelorussian and Swedish orchard seed. The study should give information about a possible land race formation and hopefully also give indications of what could suitable reforestation materials to complement a short supply of Swedish orchard seed.

· Research on new forest products (entailing sustainable resources)

While there certainly is a lot of research on new forest products going on, it is hard to find examples that have a significant effect on our genetic resources. One possible example would be the fresh interest in Finland in using aspen (Populus tremula) for making paper. Aspen based paper is quite light and has some other interesting properties. The aspen resources in Finland a limited and for this reason there is suddenly an interest in growing hybrid aspen (P. tremula x tremuloides) again. This fast-growing hybrid was one of the earlier tested in northern Europe already in the early 1950’s but has been of very limited interest for almost 50 years. It was originally intended as a raw material for the match industry but when the demand for matches went down, so did the interest in the hybrid. A small Swedish research project had followed hybrid aspen trials, and when the interest now came up again it was able to provide research data and genetic materials of interest to the Finnish industry.

· Activities in germplasm supply, demand, procurement and exchange)

EUFORGEN has had a very positive effect in these fields, through its networking model of working. The frequent opportunities for researchers and other forestry specialists to work give numerous opportunities to discuss and arrange exchange of genetic material, especially for research.

As tree improvement activities have been going on for quite some time in many of the countries of the region, improved seed is now available, and in great demand. In Sweden, for example, it has been estimated that 80% percent of all Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) seedlings are produced from improved seed by now. Improved seed in commercial quantities can also be found on international markets. Orchard seed of Norway spruce (Picea abies) have for instance been imported to Sweden from Byelorussia.

Just a couple of examples of ongoing exchange activities should be enough to demonstrate what is going on in this field and the effects the could lead to:

· Developments in tree selection, and improvement, field evaluation

Various forms of tree improvement is actively being pursued in all countries of the region. In most the activities have by now been going on for many years, as many as 50 in many cases.

For example, in the Nordic countries and the Baltic republics plantation forestry dominates the forests, and here the interest in tree improvement is high. The effects of the tree improvement activities have been substantial. Again falling back on a Swedish example, orchards being established today, and still using first generation selection, will produce seeds, which are around 25% superior to the seed that can be collected from the native trees. - It should not come as a surprise to anyone that the demand for improved seed is increasing wherever it can be shown to be significantly better than other seed sources. Orchard seed is the basis for a large and growing share of all seedlings being planted in the region.

Again, the picture in Germany and some central European countries is different. Here, as mentioned before, forest managers have become more and more interested in uneven-aged forestry, often using mixed species stands and more and more natural regeneration. In these countries, the interest in tree improvement is of course limited and some tree improvement programs have been almost closed down.

· Threats to FGR, protection and conservation

A major long term threat to our FGR must be the global warming and general climate change. In our region seedlings planted today will be growing in the forests for as many as 50 - 100 years. During that period the climate according to most scenarios is expected to change significantly. Research during recent years have strengthened the risks that we are indeed going towards a significant warming, for instance.

Studies indicate that the climate change we feel that we have seen in the last few years is no immediate threat to the forests of the Nordic countries. The trees are plastic enough to be able to grow under varying conditions. If, on the other hand the climatic change becomes large and sustained the trees will have to adapt genetically. Because of the significant genetic variation existing in most tree species, most species should be able to do so over a longer time period, if the change in climate is not too rapid. Tree breeders can speed up the change in the different species. By testing the trees under various climatic conditions they will have knowledge about which trees to use as parents under coming climatic conditions.

The air pollution problem has probably become somewhat less. The sulphur deposition still seems to go, because of changed heating sources, better exhaust controls etc. No improvement has been seen in for instance the nitrous oxide emission or the gasses causing global warming like CO2 or HFCs.

The damage to forest trees, especially firs and spruces in northern and central Europe seems to have gone down a little during that last few years, probably as a response to less acid rain as a reduction in sulphur dioxide.

Elm disease continues to spread and intensify.

In Sweden large areas of middle-aged pine forest have been severely attacked by the fungus Gremmeniella abietina, a species which can attack both Scots pine and Norway spruce. At least 300 000 hectares are more or less severely damaged and large areas will have to be clear cut and replanted. One hypothesis about the cause of the disease is a combination of summers with a high rainfall/humidity and less cold winters. Could this be a preview of what we will have to live with in coming years with a changed climate?

· Advances in biotechnologies, incl. genetic modification

Biotechnology research has increased substantially during the last few years and at least locally at the cost of traditional genetic research. Within forest biotechnology research it appears as if micro propagation (particularly somatic embryogenesis) various forms of gene technology dominate. Research on gene technology has been well financed by both EU and national sources.

Much of the gene technology research has been around wood properties such as lignin modification, control of flowering and resistance. Promising results have been reached but so far very little integration with traditional breeding and tree improvement has occurred. Little if any field testing has taken place, and we will in all probability have to wait a very long time before we see genetically modified trees in our forests.

An interesting point is that at least several Finnish and Swedish forest industry companies have been very hesitant or negative to the new gene technology in the form of gene modification and not supported such research financially. The main reason is certainly the negative view shown by their customers and forest certification organizations.

2. Operational and Organizational Issues

Training, education and other forms of exchange of information are of utmost importance for the future of FRG research.

It is encouraging to see that good education in forest genetics and neighbouring scientific areas occur in most countries in the region. A substantial amount of exchange among the countries also takes places with graduate students getting advanced degrees at schools and universities in countries other than their own. Numerous researchers from the countries of the region are also, or have been, working as visiting researchers or "post docs" at various institutions both within and outside of the region.

The Internet is becoming a very important tool for FGR researchers providing information "on demand" from the working desk. The amount of information in our area is increasing very rapidly. E-mail has also become a dominant form of communication among researchers, facilitating and speeding of our research considerably.

Computer based interactive knowledge systems are also being introduced as management and education tools. One example can be the tool developed in Sweden to help foresters chose the best possible reforestation materials. The forester provides a number of descriptive data about a site he wishes to plant and the computer based system helps him chose the best possible plantation materials among improved sources and various sources of stand seed.

One should not forget the traditional forms of information and I would just like to mention one book, which I feel could have a substantial effect on FGR management in general during coming years, i.e. The Ecological Bulletins 50 from the EU.FAIR project CT-3575: "Biodiversity Evaluation Tools for European Forests". It is now in press.

· Notes related to financial scenarios, sources of funding

In several of the countries of the region traditional forest genetics and tree improvement research have met very strong competition for research funds from particularly biotechnology research.

EU financing is of great importance within the region. During the EU 5th framework program (1999 - 2002) forestry and genetics have been quite successful in competing for the considerable research funds provided by the Union. Two of the thematic programmes, "Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources" and "Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development" have taken responsibility for most of the projects.

In the coming 6th Framework programme we may meet larger problems when it comes to get EU funding. While negotiations are still go on, on a number of levels, it is very disturbing that "forestry" is not mentioned a single time in the basic documents describing the programme. Biodiversity issues are however well considered and this may leave a door open for research of importance to this group.

· Development of regional and international cooperation

Cooperation in the region and internationally is frequent, with the EU as a major source of financing. Much interaction is also taking place through for instance IUFRO, and regional organizations, e.g. Nordic Council for Forest Reproductive Material.

The Nordic Forest Research Cooperation Committee finances an organization called the Nordic Group for Management of Genetic Resources of Trees. This was originally an organization for forest geneticists from the 5 Nordic countries, but today also includes researchers from the three Baltic republics and Scotland; from January 2002 researchers from the Komi Republic in Russia will also be included. The group has an annual meeting/seminar about some topic of interest in one of the member countries. In addition to supporting this activity, the Nordic Research Cooperation Committee also finances some forest genetics research, where one of the requirements for support is that researchers from at least three of the member states should take part in the project.

[7] Original language: English

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page