Managing European forests for biodiversity conservation and global change adaptation: An assessment of current management concepts

Integrative forest management (IFM) aims at integrating biodiversity conservation and global change adaptation into forest management for the sustainable provision of multiple ecosystem services. In this paper, and in the context of the European project TRANSFORMIT, we have developed a novel definition of IFM and a framework of guiding principles and attributes directing decision-making and objectives. IFM is structured around eight guiding principles and corresponding attributes, encompassing key ecological and silvicultural elements including the promotion of habitat retention, site‑adapted native tree species, natural regeneration, structural diversity, and landscape connectivity, while reducing the ecological impact of forestry operations and enhancing resilience to ecological stress and disturbance. Based on the definition, we explored the alignment of existing forest management concepts in Europe with IFM. Through content analysis, the review evaluates a set of widely used forest management concepts in Europe, including Continuous Cover Forestry, Close‑to‑Nature Forest Management, ProSilva, the Stepping Stone Concept, Retention Forestry, TRIAD, Climate‑Smart Forestry, and Closer‑to‑Nature Forest Management. These concepts were compared to IFM through a literature‑based assessment of their theoretical foundations and implementation strategies. While most concepts overlapped to different extents at the level of principles, the application of the corresponding elements varied across concepts. We subsequently attributed divergences in terminology, emphasis, and implementation in Europe to differing contexts, including disturbance regimes and management traditions. By using IFM as a common framework, our study clarified where existing concepts converge or diverge, thereby helping to close gaps between high‑level management goals and their practical implementation. Using IFM as a benchmark allowed us to compare the respective strengths and weaknesses of established concepts and to suggest improvements through a transparent dialogue between science, practice, and policy. To illustrate the potential actions necessary to implement IFM, we present an exemplary theoretical transition pathway for the transformation of disturbance‑prone Norway spruce monocultures toward more diverse, adaptive and resilient forests. The trajectory underscores that successful implementation of IFM relies on context‑specific, multi‑level planning and should be tailored to local ecological realities and stakeholder networks. In conclusion, IFM provides a unifying but non‑prescriptive concept that is capable of integrating diverse forest management objectives. However, effective implementation requires context‑ and region-specific adaptation, coordination across governance levels and sectors (e.g. forestry, conservation, and rural development), and continuous exchange between science and practice. • IFM provides a unifying framework to compare European forest management concepts • European concepts share goals but differ strongly in how integration is operationalized • IFM supports a coherent implementation across scales and management traditions • Transition pathways link integrative principles to concrete management actions • Operationalizing integration remains the key challenge for biodiversity-oriented forestry