Social and technological innovations in forestry

In Europe, when referring to innovation in forestry, the dominant discourses mostly deal with technological innovation based on large-scale industrial investments. “Innovation is rather often used synonymously with technological innovation (Kubeczko et al. 2006:706)”. This is supported by a biased (limited) interpretation of the bioeconomy strategies, where attention is almost completely focused on the development of bio-refineries, i.e. on innovative plants that produce power, heat, a potentially large set of bio-chemicals and in some cases pulp, normally using huge amounts of low-value biomasses from agriculture, forestry or organic wastes (McCormick and Kautto 2013; Scarlat et al. 2015; Fund et al. 2015.). Also in the case of plants producing just bio-energy, the needs for industrial scale economies are creating a demand for woody biomass that is frequently not covered by the potential local supply, so industrial plants are located in proximity to port facilities with a process of internationalization not only of the investment capital, but also wood procurement (Pülzl et al. 2017). Moreover, although it has been pointed out “the need to focus on innovation as a socially embedded phenomenon that should stretch across all economic sectors, [this concept] has mostly been applied in policy practice in high-tech fields, often with a technological focus or bias (EU 2003; von Tunzelmann and Acha 2003)”, rather than in forestry (Rametsteiner and Weiss 2003: 692). Other emerging and innovative initiatives, like for example the creation of nature-based businesses connected with the establishment of payment schemes for ecosystem (or environmental) services (PES) that try to obtain value from the management of public goods such as water, biodiversity, human wellbeing and others (e.g., Wunder 2005), are often not considered as strategic choices to be invested in for the development of national economies , despite their potential in rural development (e.g., by means of income generation and employment creation) and innovation (Matilainen et al. 2011; Slee 2011; O’Driscoll et al. 2017; Tyrväinen et al. 2017). However, it was recently stressed that a new policy narrative is needed, that “should emphasise a sustainable and socially inclusive forest-based bioeconomy (Winkel 2017:153)”, i.e. a holistic bioeconomy […] “that recognises and mobilises the entire spectrum of ecosystem services that Europe’s forests can provide for the benefit of Europe’s societies (Winkel 2017)”. This chapter introduces and discusses the various implications of social and technological innovation on the forestry sector, especially in Europe. In the first section, links are made with the various components of globalization. In the second, both approaches are presented based on commonly used definitions. In the third, the two approaches are illustrated by means of concrete examples, while their pros and cons (in terms of positive and negative consequences) are pointed out and briefly compared. In the fourth section, insights into how to integrate the two approaches are proposed and discussed in relation to the current perspectives of globalization and future development. The special role that information technologies can play in the two cases is highlighted.