Conflicts and policy priorities drive differences in the EU Forest strategy implementation: Insights from 15 European countries

Conflicts have arisen between Member States and the European Commission around the European Union Forest Strategy either because of differing opinions on whether forests should be considered as a commodity, as nature to be conserved, or because of disagreements about the EU's competencies vis-à-vis national sovereignty of forests. These conflicts highlight high and diverging stakes in the EU's governance of forest ecosystems. At the national level, impending changes related to EU regulations impact the forest-based sector and its governance, including monitoring and access to finance. Despite not being legally binding, the EU Forest Strategy is significantly influencing national policies within the broader EU political framework. To what extent this new strategy exacerbates existing conflicts or shapes new ones is not well understood. The main objective of this study is to understand whether and how conflicts and different policy prioritization may influence the implementation of this key EU Strategy at the national level. Theoretically, this study draws on Europeanization studies to understand how different forest-related conflicts are connected to attempts to integrate European forest policy at the EU level. Empirically, an analysis of policy documents and interviews with policy experts in 15 European countries was conducted. Our analysis provides a rich overview of the extent to which diverse national policy developments align with the EU Forest Strategy goals and how these developments connect to existing or newly emerging conflicts around the Strategy's implementation. Based on these insights, we suggest potential ways to overcome the challenges and advance forest policy in Europe. • The EUFS 2030 expands EU forest policy but faces resistance from some countries and stakeholders, risking deeper conflicts. • National policy path dependencies shape the uptake and implementation of EUFS goals. • EUFS can amplify existing policy tensions, especially between biodiversity and wood production. • Conflicts emerge over MS sovereignty and forest use as a commodity vs. conservation. • Regional governance, participatory processes, and stakeholder engagement remain critical issues across all studied countries.