Improving labour efficiency and restoration success with specialised machinery
Site preparation using specialised machinery.
Forestry restoration efforts in Croatia and Serbia were enhanced through the use of specialised machinery. These machines improved labour efficiency by reducing the need for manual work during site preparation. This approach made restoration activities faster and safer, contributing to the overall success of forest recovery in the demonstration areas.
Context:
In Croatia and Serbia, specialized machinery was introduced in forest restoration to address forest degradation and labour shortages. Forests had suffered from unsustainable land use, erosion, and climate-related damage, which weakened their ecological functions and services. Site preparation machinery, such as mowing and mulching, enabled faster restoration of these ecosystems, supporting improvements in soil aeration and stability, enhanced moisture retention, increased organic matter, and better nutrient cycling. Socioeconomically, rural depopulation and a lack of skilled manual forestry workers made traditional restoration methods difficult and costly. The use of machinery improved efficiency, reduced expenses, and led to a shift in the workforce—from physically demanding roles to more technical and operational positions—making restoration efforts more economically sustainable. Culturally, forests are deeply valued in both countries, and there is growing acceptance of technology in restoration, especially when it leads to visible improvements in forest health and supports long-term sustainable management.
Problem Description:
Limited labour availability and high physical demands during restoration activities have posed significant challenges in Croatia and Serbia. Manual work in rugged terrain and large-scale restoration sites often slowed progress and increased costs. The introduction of specialized machinery helped improve labour efficiency by reducing the need for intensive manual work and enabling faster, more consistent restoration operations. This shift also supported a reorganization of the workforce—moving from physically demanding roles to more technical and equipment-based positions—making restoration efforts more economically viable and socially sustainable. The practice proved especially valuable in areas affected by severe disturbances.
Implementation Steps:
• Site assessment and planning – including mapping of terrain features.
• Identification of invasive species or competing vegetation that may require targeted removal.
• Selection of appropriate machinery; prioritize low ground-pressure equipment to minimize soil compaction.
• Workforce preparation and training.
• Site clearing: using machinery such as tractors with winches, skid-steers, and brush cutters to remove felled trees and debris; including sorting of cleared material.
• Soil preparation: machinery such as rotary mulchers and mechanical mowers is used to mulch bare areas and subsequently mow the site to create planting rows.
• Avoiding deep soil disturbance to protect existing root systems.
• Appropriate row spacing – row are about 30 to 50 cm wide and about 80 cm deep.
• Construction of fences surrounding the restored area to prevent grazing and browsing.
• Continuous monitoring and maintenance.
Stakeholder Engagement:
Forests in Croatia and Serbia are primarily managed by public enterprises—Croatian Forests, Serbia Forests, and Vojvodina Forests—whose practitioners are actively implementing restoration using specialized machinery. These stakeholders are well-informed and directly involved in planning and executing mechanized restoration activities. This approach also engaged local communities, forestry workers, and nature protection organizations, who benefited from improved labour efficiency, reduced physical demands, and opportunities for upscaling restoration projects. This practice fostered collaboration, knowledge exchange, and broader support for sustainable forest restoration.
Knowledge Types:
The practice included scientific, practical, local, and institutional knowledge. It combined scientific knowledge on machinery use, soil characteristics, and cultivation. Practical knowledge from forestry workers guided equipment adaptation and efficient field operations. Local knowledge contributed insights into terrain, land use history, and community forest values. Institutional expertise ensured coordination, compliance, and stakeholder engagement throughout the restoration process.
Replicability:
YES, the practice has been tested and replicated in multiple contexts and scales and therefore, can be easily transferred and/or adapted to other initiatives with similar goals.This practice has long been part of Croatian and Serbian forestry and continues to evolve, with specialized machinery used by public enterprises such as Croatian Forests Ltd., Serbia Forests, and Vojvodina Forests in earlier restoration efforts. Within the SUPERB project, it was demonstrated across 60 hectares of riparian and floodplain forests, coordinated with the Croatian Forest Research Institute and the Institute of Lowland Forestry and Environment. Its successful results led to replication beyond the project scope. The approach is well-suited for broader application in forest stands across Croatia, Serbia, and similar contexts elsewhere.
Key Success Factors:
• Stakeholder engagement and cross-sector collaboration: involvement of public forestry enterprises, research institutes, local communities, organizations, and NGOs.
• Economic viability and operational efficiency: mechanized restoration reduces labour costs and time.
• Sustained institutional and political support: backed by state and regional organizations, and national restoration project objectives.
Common Constraints:
• Technical and environmental limitations in complex terrain: machinery use can be limited in uneven or waterlogged areas, such as parts of riparian forests, therefore, manual labour was selectively used in inaccessible parts of the site. Unskilled and excessive use can lead to surface soil damage and increased carbon emissions.
• Higher initial investment costs and more expensive maintenance
• Social and awareness barriers: limited local awareness and acceptance of unfamiliar, noisy, and robust mechanized equipment
Lessons Learnt:
• Site-specific planning within the restoration strategy is essential for effective use of mechanization.
• Training operators and building capacity improves performance and success, and reduces risks.
• Timely stakeholder involvement smooths implementation and supports long-term maintenance.
Positive Impacts:
- Improved societal support
- Improved tree species regeneration
- Increased monetary value of the land/ forest stock
- Increased share of forests dominated by native species
- Reduced invasive alien species
The positive impacts of the practice were evaluated by scientists and forest engineers through expert field surveys and operational monitoring, focusing on indicators such as planting success, labour input, and soil condition. Feedback from forestry workers, local communities, and institutional stakeholders was gathered through workshops and field demonstrations, validating the benefits and addressing concerns. Lessons learned were integrated into updated guidelines to enhance future implementation and ensure broader applicability.
Negative Impacts:
- Reduced deadwood
Use of machinery can reduce standing and lying deadwood by clearing access paths, removing unstable trees for safety, and unintentionally damaging wood on the ground. This impact is typically temporary and was mitigated by designating deadwood retention zones and planning in advance machinery routes.
- Economic & Financial
- Implementation
- Environmental
- 81,5