The forest in politics – new investigation
Which interests should weigh most heavily? How should forest policy be incorporated in the future?
The latest Swedish forest policy report (SOU 2025:93 – A robust forest policy for active forestry) aims to modernize forest policy based on today's demands for climate, biodiversity and economic development. It builds on the forest policy that was introduced in 1993, where the production goal and the environmental goal are given equal weight. However, the report notes that the conditions have changed significantly since then, including through increased climate requirements, new EU regulations and a greater focus on nature conservation and species protection.
A central proposal in the report is to increase forest production to contribute to the climate transition and strengthen Sweden's economy. The forest is seen as an important resource for replacing fossil materials and creating bio-based products. To achieve this, measures are proposed such as increased fertilization, better game management to reduce grazing damage and adaptation of forestry to climate change, for example by using more tree species. The report also proposes a clearer production target that will complement the environmental target.
Reduced granular control
At the same time, the inquiry wants to strengthen ownership rights and simplify the regulatory framework for forest owners. The idea is to reduce detailed control from the state and instead give forest owners greater freedom to decide for themselves how their land is to be used. This is considered to increase the willingness to invest and make forestry more efficient and competitive.
When it comes to the environment and nature conservation, several changes are proposed. Voluntary forest set-aside could be given greater importance, and in some cases protected areas could be reconsidered. The inquiry also wants to make environmental goals more concrete and measurable. At the same time, it is emphasized that forests should continue to contribute to preserving biodiversity, even if the methods for how this is done change.
Support and criticism
The forest is also highlighted as a central part of climate policy. Through increased growth in the forest, more carbon dioxide can be bound, while wood products can replace more climate-damaging materials. The report therefore proposes new ways to measure the climate benefit of the forest and how it contributes to a growing bioeconomy. However, the report has met with both support and criticism. Critics believe that the proposals risk deteriorating biodiversity and that the focus on production will be too great at the expense of the environment. Proponents, on the other hand, believe that the proposals strengthen the conditions of forest owners, increase growth and contribute positively to the climate.
In summary, the investigation implies a clear direction towards a more active and production-oriented forestry, while the environmental objectives remain but change. The central question going forward will be how the balance between economic development, climate benefits and the preservation of biodiversity should be managed.
