A Martelscope site. Photo Credits: Gesche Schifferdecker
The study examines whether marteloscopes (forest training sites) used by foresters, can also serve as spaces for deliberative dialogue between forest managers and young climate activists. By observing group exercises and discussions, the authors find that these settings generally foster constructive communication and help different perspectives converge. However, they also note that a knowledge hierarchy often remains, which can limit truly open dialogue. Participants brought forward three alternative ways of framing forests: as complex living ecosystems, as inhabited by living beings, and through the lens of sufficiency and sustainability (especially regarding timber demand and global markets). The article argues that such dialogues: especially in informal, face-to-face contexts, can improve understanding and cooperation between experts and non-experts at a time when forest governance faces rising conflicts due to climate change and societal pressure.
In recent years, climate change and societal changes have increased the complexity of demands on multifunctional forest management, leading to new lines of conflict. Consequently, public forest management in particular seeks to improve communication and interaction with societal groups with which they previously have not been familiar. In our study, we apply the deliberative model of democracy to assess the suitability of silvicultural training sites (“marteloscopes”) for fostering deliberative communication on multifunctional forest management between foresters and young climate activists. Furthermore, we examine the interpretative frames emerging in this context. We adopt an exploratory study design, using participant observation and group discussions, which we analyze with sequential reconstructive methods. We find that marteloscope exercises generally support dialogue that meets the criteria of deliberate communication. We also observe a noticeable knowledge hierarchy, which presents a potential barrier to open deliberative processes. We identify three main interpretative frames brought by participants that in part challenge dominant forest frames: (1) forests as complex ecosystems (2) composed of living beings, and (3) sustainability as sufficiency, focused on timber consumption and the role of global market dynamics. Reflecting and acknowledging them could provide opportunities for improving communication between foresters and non-experts in times of climate change and other major transformations. Additionally, we encourage the use of settings conducive for informal, face-to-face deliberation to elicit and include perspectives that may not otherwise be represented in traditional governance structures.