Challenges Facing the Improvement of Forest Management in the Hyrcanian Forests of Iran

Abstract

We address two main challenges facing the implementation of sustainable forest management (SFM) in the Hyrcanian forest of Iran: inconsistent forest policy and the use of outdated science and techniques. We propose the Sustainable Hyrcanian Forest Management Model (SHFMM) as the best currently available solution to achieve improved management of the northern forests of Iran. The management of the Hyrcanian forests suffers from a lack of scientific knowledge and state-of-the-art technologies. There is a pronounced difference in the mindsets of older and new-school forestry scholars regarding how to approach these deficiencies: the old-school mentality prefers conventional forestry despite its limitations, whereas more recently trained scholars believe that the adoption of 21st-century technological advances would lead to improved management. The lack of trust between policymakers and local communities is another significant challenge and has resulted in conflicts over management practices in the Hyrcanian forests. We suggest that the Hyrcanian Sustainable Forest management model (SHFMM) would provide a hierarchical framework for making decisions. Using this model, each sector—whether state or private—is empowered to make decisions. Further, it encourages all sectors to work together in its holistic implementation. The SHFMM is based on the outcomes of several independent studies of forest management in the Hyrcanian forest. Despite its site specificity, many lessons learned during its development could be applied elsewhere.

1. Introduction

The goal of any forest manager should be to manage their forests well. However, what constitutes good management has varied over time, and varies regionally. Over the last 30 years, the principles of good management have been agreed internationally, and codified under the concept of sustainable forest management (SFM). A number of criteria and indicators of SFM have been developed, and while these are very similar globally, there are regional variations that take into account regional variations in the nature of forests. All are underpinned by the need to balance social, economic, and environmental objectives. Obtaining a balance that satisfies all stakeholders is generally seen as a wicked problem [1] and therefore as an aspirational goal. Despite this, several certification bodies, such as the Forest Stewardship Council and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, have evolved that will certify a forest as being managed sustainably provided that it meets a number of clearly stated requirements.

The implementation of SFM has faced challenges in developing countries, including the availability of appropriate scientific and technical knowledge, effective policy, laws and regulations, and planning frameworks [2]. These challenges are sometimes referred to as wicked problems. As has been suggested [1], wicked problems have no definitive formulation, no stopping rule, and no test for a solution; it is unlikely that they will ever be resolved with certainty. Researchers have proposed various solutions to this problem, and attempts have been made to collate ideas about the management of natural resources [3]. These ideas have ranged from ‘consensus-based methods’ [4] aiming to gain the collective agreement of participants to adaptive management [5], which involves a constant cycle of learning and exploring. Adequate information is required to address the underlying causes of forest issues [2]. Information should be accessible through global, regional, and national networks and through traditional approaches. Innovative mechanisms are required to connect individual forestry research units so that a worldwide forest community tackling real-world forest management issues could be built. Furthermore, SFM involves implementing various practices and solutions, including testing different silvicultural methods, using multiple plans in community-based forestry, and applying various techniques for reforestation.

Sustainable forest management is a complex problem and an alternative approach, termed ‘metaforestry’, could be a gateway to a modern era of forest management [6]. However, issue-based information systems should provide a suitable basis for developing argumentation models [1,6]. Problem-solving methods, such as the waterfall model, were characterised by the usual steps of problem formulation, data collection, analysis, and presentation of the findings. A range of possibilities exist for programming methodologies [7], and a web-based system could facilitate discussion among various participants and public organisations and might provide a collaborative decision-making procedure to solve social problems [8]. Amongst all the available alternatives, negotiation and mutual understanding amongst stakeholders may be the most suitable to address wicked problems [6].

‘Metaforestry’ has been defined as a broader and higher concept than conventional forestry [6], and it has been argued that it involves a host of dimensions and relationships. These included (i) ends vs. means; (ii) substance vs. process (i.e., conceptual vs. procedural); (iii) spatial (i.e., local vs. distant or global); (iv) temporal (i.e., short- vs. long-term); (v) input vs. output, or outcome and results; and (vi) performance vs. progress measurement. In this approach, SFM is viewed as an all-embracing objective of “metaforestry” because it emphasises a holistic approach toward environmental, socioeconomic, political, and cultural considerations [6]. Such a comprehensive approach is intended to ensure the quality of human life and the sustainability of resources for current and future generations [6]. Most of these solutions are complex, whether in concept or practice. As a result, they require more resources than are generally available, and a better knowledge and understanding of forestry. These are rarely available in developed countries, and even more difficult for developing countries.

Since the 1980s, the acceleration of industrialization has transformed every aspect of society. Major changes can be characterised by “economic globalisation”, “the plurality of legitimate perspectives”, and “social atomization” [9]. These changes have blended the concept of sustainability with modernity which was already intertwined in the global mindset [6]. In this sense, SFM has been a modern concept for developing countries already wrestling with moving from tradition to modernity. During this transition, many developing countries have become separated from the main trends in global forest policy. These global trends include multi-objective forestry, the socialisation of forestry, and the internationalisation of forestry, all of which are recognized as a precondition for moving toward SFM [6]. When the world awoke to the alarming rate and extent of deforestation, some developing countries were experiencing socio-political turbulence, such as war or natural catastrophes, which were leading to the degradation of their forests. While such countries were focused on internal problems, the rest of the world was moving forward, creating, and subsequently widening the gap between countries. This historical separation narrowed the common vocabulary or style of thinking within the dominant culture of the leading countries [3].

Developing countries began to narrow the gap after 1992, when Agenda 21 was proposed in the 500-page United Nations program of action for sustainable development at the 1992 Earth Summit [10]. This agreement alone could not accelerate the progress of nations and solve wicked problems. As global forest policy fora could not bring all developed and developing countries to a common perception of SFM simultaneously, a legitimate question has always been how a developing country make sense of the state of SFM within the global forest policy context.

In this paper, we consider the state of SFM in one of the less-known developing countries, Iran. In the northern part of Iran, there is a narrow arc of dense montane mixed temperate deciduous forest, the Hyrcanian forest. Approximately one-tenth of Iran is forested, most extensively in the Caspian region where the Hyrcanian forest is located [11]. These forests face many political, economic, and cultural issues that have hindered the implementation of SFM.

2. Trends in Iranian Forestry

Over the past five decades, many nations have increasingly recognized the multi-purpose role of forests. The world’s forests are no longer considered simply as a convenient source of raw materials, especially timber. Instead, their value as ecosystems providing goods and services has been progressively recognized. However, the financial implications of this change are still disputed, as few countries have developed an appropriate means to value all the goods and services derived from forests, whether public or private. In Iran, this change in thinking internationally coincided with the establishment of the National Forest Law (NFL), which recognized forests as a source of wood supply rather than establishing their role in providing habitat for plants, animals, and micro-organisms as well as fulfilling many other ecosystem services. The Islamic revolution in the late 1970s, the Iran–Iraq War of the 1980s, and the efforts to achieve socio-economic restorations in post-war society that lasted until the late 1990s, all diverted the public’s attention from ongoing forest degradation in the country. People struggled to meet their basic requirements and could not afford environmental protection, which was seen as a luxury.

A second trend is a movement toward the socialisation of forestry. The idea that forests could be used for developing the ‘Third World’ [12] captured worldwide attention during the period of socio-economic development in the 1970s and 1980s. However, within Iran, this global trend was dismissed during the socio-political turbulence associated with the Iran–Iraq War, and any potential benefits to the Hyrcanian forests were lost. Although an increasing number of people, institutions, and social groups have recently turned their attention to these forests, the socialisation of forestry is still in its infancy in Iran. The general social responsibility to protect valuable forests has never been recognized, mainly because there is no mechanism or system to introduce people to their responsibilities. Moreover, introducing modern concepts of social responsibility remains difficult when forest-dependent communities continue to struggle with fundamental issues such as poverty and a lack of education.

A third trend is the internationalisation of the forest industry, which accelerated globally under the far-reaching impact of economic globalisation in the 1990s. During this period, some forestry companies moved from their traditional production bases in developed countries to emerging Asian and Latin American countries [13]. These moves generated multifaceted concerns from economic, strategic, and environmental perspectives at both the country and corporate levels. It has also influenced how wood products are viewed within global markets. Despite the importance of the internationalisation of forestry among developed- and emerging countries, Iran failed to benefit from this because of continuing international sanctions. Far from such global movements, the Hyrcanian forests have primarily been used to reconstruct and rehabilitate post-war society.

In 2000, the Tehran Process for Low Forest Cover Countries (LFCCs) was a significant step towards improving the management of the Hyrcanian forest. The Tehran Process prioritised the issue of developing SFM criteria and indicators for monitoring sustainability and developed the first set of criteria and indicators in 2011. The multiple management objectives needed for the Hyrcanian forest were recognized by both the state and the public, and forest laws and regulations were initiated to support this new approach to forest management. Although the sustainability of these forests was an appealing concept that was debated at very high levels in the forestry administration, the implementation of the necessary changes in management remained contentious. The dispute occurred over the ambiguities surrounding many of the suggested solutions from other countries, which were considered infeasible for the Hyrcanian forests. These solutions required the use of software such as Adaptive Software Development, ASD [14]; Crystal Methods [15]; Dynamic Systems Development Method, DSDM [16]; Feature-Driven Development, FDD [17]; Scrum [18]; and Extreme Programming, XP [19] to solve the wicked problems that have been identified [20]. However, the implementation of such methods would have required a major change in the Hyrcanian forest management paradigm. It would also have required supportive legislation, updated science, and modern technology, all of which were intertwined with the socio-economic condition of the country.

In many cases where multiple stakeholders are involved, disputes over the prioritisation of management objectives need to be addressed by an independent body. In many countries, this is the judiciary. If a judicial system is to address wicked problems successfully, it must be supported by a well-functioning democratic government and a mobilised civil society, and the system itself must be effective. There are many countries where these requirements are not met, limiting the ability of the legal system and requisite institutions to communicate current problems effectively and to find appropriate solutions [21].

Science and technology can work in more than one way. It is dangerous to assume that technology will solve wicked problems, especially when the science behind the use of the technology is insufficient to ensure that there are net benefits. Recently, the Centre for Alternative Technology has launched a pivotal program that is increasing action to help society develop the solutions to climate change as a ‘super wicked problem’, as defined by Lazarus [22,23]. The project found that a net zero-carbon Britain was possible without relying on future technology. Currently, in some developing countries, including Iran, access to the internet is problematic, making full use of science and technology exceptionally difficult.

Iran remains very much a developing country and that, together with its tumultuous political history, makes it difficult to achieve the prerequisites for SFM without paying enormous economic and social expenses. This is not always recognized in global fora, and the promotion of wicked solutions in countries without robust and advocative mechanisms, such as connections to global marketing and involvement in international political relations, is often too great a step forward.

Given these circumstances, the critical question remains: how can the management of the Hyrcanian forests be best achieved, and how can they achieve some semblance of SFM?

One possibility that has been widely adopted in other countries, to the extent of being considered standard practice, is the use of sustainable forest management plans. An SFM plan is a tool to accomplish sustainability through discussion, consensus, iterations, and acceptance that change is a normal part of the process [3]. Iran is only at the beginning of this road. The current Hyrcanian forest management plans (FMPs) are inconsistent with the concept of SFM, and many of the FMPs simply dismiss the value of ecosystem services [24]. Forest functions need to be better defined in the plans, and the ecological capability of the region needs to be considered when developing the plans. However, at the national level, a common-consensus statement on the development of SFM standards and on their application in FMPs is still lacking.

In the FMPs, the hierarchical process used to move from the overall goals to the operational objectives is very opaque. Achieving the operational objectives neither ensures that the overall goals are met nor selects the most suitable management scenarios at the forest management unit (FMU) level [25]. Most (but not all) forest stakeholders agree with the broad, overall goals, but there is less agreement on setting more detailed and specific operational objectives. There is also no general understanding of the use of systematic methods to classify objectives. Measuring the success of the control concept as applied to current FMPs has been limited to completing yes/no forms to check whether specific activities have been implemented. No indicators are in place to assess whether the management goals are being achieved or whether the activities specified in the plan are being implemented [25]. Consequently, the planning, implementation, and monitoring approaches of the FMPs require major revision [26].

The remainder of this paper covers the various definitions of forestry that have been adopted in the Hyrcanian forest and a timeline of forest policy and management practices there. It then addresses the two main challenges facing the implementation of SFM in the Hyrcanian forest: inconsistent forest policy and outdated science and techniques. Finally, it suggests the Sustainable Hyrcanian Forest Management Model (SHFMM) as the best current solution, the adoption of which could pave the way to sustainability.

3. The Concept of Forestry in the Hyrcanian Forests

Formal definitions of forestry in Iran date back to 1957, when the first book on forestry in Iran [27] was published. This became an essential reference for many years for forest management scholars and practitioners. It addressed the various definitions of forestry and the comprehensive concept behind this term. It described how early definitions in Iran were similar to those developed in Germany and France in the 18th and 19th centuries, and defined forestry as a series of rules and operations to set timber harvesting at a level that meets human demands and a permanent annual forest revenue [28]. It was believed that by practising these operations, forest protection would be ensured over time. However, other definitions were described in the book, such as the application of the term to the creation and maintenance of forest plantations. The initial definitions were accompanied by goals such as ‘becoming valuable or useful’ [27] (p. 19).

Later, the term ‘forestry’ in Iran became linked to the science of organisation—the term emphasised the organisation (i.e., management) of forests rather than placing an emphasis on the rules and operations. In its most recent applications, forestry has been designed based on silvicultural practices. As a result, forestry has increasingly been considered as a method to assist natural regeneration and promote forest structure and composition, very different to the original concepts focused on harvesting wood [27]. By the mid-20th century, forestry was seen as a series of operations to harvest a determined volume of trees per hectare in proportion to the growing stock, based on a forest harvesting plan, without disturbing the later growing stock over time [27]. Although many definitions of forestry have emphasised the management of forests to obtain a permanent supply of wood, the consequences of timber harvesting for more than a century have shown that such a definition neither ensures the sustainability of the wood production function nor other forest functions and services. This is because the definitions have excluded the general concept of ‘ecosystem services’, which recognizes that forests have multiple functions, including conservation, recreation, protection, education, and meeting socio-economic needs [29,30].

Conventional definitions of forestry in Iran need to be updated, based on 21st-century forestry experiences in SFM. Over the past half-century, attempts to introduce a new concept of forestry in Iran have met with strong resistance, and efforts to develop a new definition have been trivialised. A modern definition of forestry for the northern forests of Iran [31] exists that deserves wider recognition. Forestry is defined as an approach that determines and prioritises forest functions, strategic goals, and indicators for monitoring the sustainability of forest functions at the watershed level, and defines the operational objectives, activities, control indicators, and risk evaluation at the level of the FMU (i.e., district level). Although the legal administrations of the Hyrcanian forests still follow older forestry definitions, the updated definition of forestry provided the principles underlying the development of the SFM model for the Hyrcanian forests proposed by [31] (p. 510).

4. Iranian Forest Policy and the Hyrcanian Forest

The Hyrcanian forests are one of the last areas in the world where extensive tracts of temperate-zone hardwoods are found in ancient condition. For many centuries, only villagers claimed the forest lands, and rights to the forest were restricted to grazing. The villagers accepted forests as a part of the natural scene and used them to meet their basic requirements. The forests received their first official recognition by the central government when the Ministry of Commonwealth was founded in 1823 during the Qajar dynasty (1785–1925). The forests remained relatively untouched until the outbreak of World War II. During the war, economic activities increased, and the forests came under pressure. Landowners and villagers began to expand their livestock grazing in the forest and started to convert forest areas into farmlands or buildings. Demands for lumber and charcoal led to tree harvesting [32]. With the industrialization of harvesting, the forests attracted growing institutional attention.

The first Forest Office of Iran was established in 1920 (later dissolved in 1934), and a preliminary forest inventory and survey of the Hyrcanian forests was initiated in 1923. In 1924, the central forest organisation provided forest management plans, and forestry graduates received training from German and Austrian forest experts. In 1937, the first Iranian forestry engineer, Karim Saie, established a new Forestry Unit within the Ministry of Agriculture and he was responsible for estimating the area of the northern forest of Iran. The Forest Law of 1943 gave the Ministry of Agriculture the responsibility and legal authority to manage all forest lands in Iran. In the same year, the Forest Office changed its name, becoming the Forest Agency, and with responsibilities that included the establishment of forest nurseries, forest protection, prevention of charcoal production, and the preparation of new forest management plans, initially for coppice stands and later for high forests.

The Forest Law of 1943 had some significant shortcomings and problems. It was repressive and chiefly concerned with fines, permits, and detailed rules. There was no broad regulation to define the forest area or to identify the comprehensive role of forests for stakeholders and no attempt was made to set management standards to ensure forest protection and development. The position and function of the Forest Agency remained unclear in forest law, and there was an unclear distinction between state forests under the direct management of the Forest Agency and private forests regulated by it. The issue of forest grazing was largely ignored, and no payments for the right to make charcoal were required. The most serious defect was the lack of any enabling legislation that would allow the Forest Agency to formulate and enforce regulations without recourse to court action [32,33]. Despite these deficiencies, the Forest Law (1943) was followed by the Comprehensive Law on Forests and Rangelands, adopted in 1959 [34]. Formalising forest management in Iran through the establishment of forest laws and regulations helped organize the use of forests and was a step towards conserving the remaining forests. However, legislators needed to apply up-to-date executive changes in laws and regulations [35].

The Forestry Organization was founded in 1960, and in January 1963, it enacted a resolution to nationalise forests through the Forest National Law (FNL)—all types of forests and woodlands were transferred to the government, becoming public property, and all responsibilities for forest management, including preservation, rehabilitation, utilisation, and extension, were transferred to the State [36]. In 1968, the Ministry of Natural Resources emerged. However, in 1971, this Ministry was dissolved and merged with the Ministry of Agriculture, becoming the Forest and Rangelands Organization. Following the Islamic Revolution in 1979, forest lands and resources remained under the Forest National Law as national property held by the government. In 2002, State responsibilities for watershed management were separated from the Ministry of Jihad Agriculture and assigned to the Forests and Rangelands Organization, which was given the new title of Forests, Rangelands, and Watershed Management Organization (FRWO) [37].

The livelihoods of forest dwellers were specifically addressed in Article 8 of the Forest National Law. It covered the issuance of permits to local communities to harvest materials for their consumption without payment to the State. However, Article 8 led to an increase in illegal logging, as local communities exploited forest sites to supply their timber needs. The FRWO implemented welfare plans in an attempt to reduce forest exploitation, including providing fuel for forest livelihoods [36]. Kerosene was gradually substituted for wood and charcoal, and consumption of these forest products fell steeply after 1960 [34]. Nevertheless, there was a sharp decline in forest cover between 1970 and 1990, mainly because the construction of the required infrastructure for the provision of domestic gas occurred very slowly. During the eight-year war between Iran and Iraq (1980 to 1988), forest resource policies remained virtually unchanged [36].

Iran introduced the first Five-Year Development Plan (FYDP) in 1991 and this paid attention to conserving natural resources and the environment. The first FYDP (1991–1995) emphasised the protection of natural resources and allocated a significant budget to support the environment. The plan implemented substantial reductions in livestock grazing in forests and encouraged reforestation, partly offsetting the continuing forest removal.

The second FYDP (1995–1999) declared that all socio-economic actions must be performed within the constraints of the environment and biodiversity conservation and management.

The third FYDP (2000–2004) addressed the sustainable exploitation of natural resources, environmental liability and redress, support of Green Industries, and Environmental Impact Assessment. Article 104 of this plan introduced some aspects of sustainable natural resource management, including the implementation of management plans (e.g., livestock–rangeland balance) and relocating livestock outside forests. It provided local and tribal communities with their needs for fuel and hay and involved the public in forest planning and implementation processes. The State Cabinet laid down the basic policies for preserving the Hyrcanian forests in July 2001 and, in September 2003, it established the Comprehensive Plan for Preserving Northern Forests (CPPNF). A significant point made in the CPPNF was that the FRWO and the Supreme Council of Environmental Protection were committed to adopting national land/resource use policies that would prevent land-use conversion or a decline in the forest area. The FRWO, Department of Environment (DOE) and the private sector are responsible for preparing natural resource plans, protecting resources, organising forest dwellers, relocating livestock outside forest boundaries, surveying, and acquiring traditional/informal deeds for forest areas. Implementation of FMP became a joint responsibility of the State, cooperatives, and the private sector [36].

The fourth FYDP (2005–2009) emphasised issues such as the participation of forest dwellers and stakeholders in SFM. It committed the government to extend environmental training and to support private sector investments in forestry, mainly through plantations. It also outlined a policy to provide non-wood fuel to tribes and villagers, reducing their dependence on fuelwood.

The fifth FYDP (2010–2015) adopted a requirement for the environmental assessment of strategic policies and plans, as well as a countrywide ecosystem-based approach to managing wetlands and biodiversity. The plan was intended to delegate power to the people. This was an element of Vision 2025, a strategy for long-term sustainable growth.

Although the FYDPs paid particular attention to SFM, there was a mismatch between the legislation (e.g., the development plans) and the FMPs, which remained focused on maximising the income from resources, mainly through timber harvesting. This focus on income was inconsistent with ensuring the sustainability of the forest’s ecological and biodiversity functions.

The reduction in the area of the Hyrcanian forests and their increasing exploitation through processes such as the conversion of forest lands, construction of infrastructure, grazing, pests and diseases outbreaks, and climate change has obliged policymakers to find a solution. In 2016, the Parliament approved a 10-year ban on wood harvesting under the Forest’s Breathing Plan (FBP), which was scheduled to start in 2020 [31]. This plan was approved in the sixth FYDP (2016–2021) and implemented as a legal article. The article banned all timber harvesting except for the collection of broken branches and fallen or damaged trees, and the FRWO was the only legal office that could permit these exceptions. Logging was only permitted in reforested areas, and all operations in natural forests were banned. This plan, however, faced problems from the beginning of its implementation in 2017.

Divergent views existed about halting wood harvesting. Proponents of harvesting believed that sustainable harvesting ensured the sustainability of the wood function and sustained employment in forest industries at the national level. This approach towards forests remained focused on maximising income through timber harvesting. Opponents argued that FMPs had revolved around wood production for more than 60 years. Industrial wood harvesting had damaged natural regeneration and compacted soils and had affected the intactness of forests. Consequently, what forests really needed was nature-based restoration, accelerating the recovery of forest structure, ecological functioning, and biodiversity levels to those typical of a natural forest [38,39]. This conflict over the implementation of the Forest’s Breathing Plan led the FRWO to design a novel FMP named the Alternative Plan after completing the previous FMPs; the Alternative Plan was intended to start in 2021, but it is still under review. As a result, the Forest’s Breathing Plan was implemented in 2017 to fill the gap between past FMPs and the Alternative Plan.

While the development of the Alternative Plan is currently in progress, the FRWO has only permitted actions dealing with the protection of the forest, such as fencing, repairing roads, and managing damaged trees. No timber extraction has been allowed from the Hyrcanian forests.

Table 1. The timeline for Hyrcanian forest policies over the last 200 years.

Years	Description
1823	The forests received their first official recognition from the central government but remained relatively untouched until the outbreak of World War II.
1920	The first Forest Office was established.
1923	A preliminary forest inventory of the Hyrcanian forests was initiated.
1924	The central forest organization provided forest management plans
1937	Forestry Unit established within the Ministry of Agriculture
1943	The Forest Law was enacted
1959	The Comprehensive Law on Forests and Rangelands was established
1960	The Forestry Organization was founded
1963	The Forest National Law (FNL) was approved.
1968	The Ministry of Natural Resources emerged
1971	The Ministry of Natural Resources was dissolved and merged with the Ministry of Agriculture, becoming the Forest and Rangelands Organization.
1979	The Islamic Revolution occurred
2002	Watershed management moved from the Ministry of Jihad Agriculture to the Forests and Rangelands Organization under the new title of Forests, Rangelands, and Watershed Management Organization (FRWO)
1980–1988	Iran-Iraq war
1991–1995	The First five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
1995–1999	The Second five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
2000–2004	The Third five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
2003	The Comprehensive Plan for Preserving Northern Forests (CPPNF) was developed
2005–2009	The Forth five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
2010–2015	The Fifth five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
2016–2021	The Sixth five-year Development Plan (FYDP)
2016	The Parliament approved a 10-year ban on wood harvesting under the Forest’s Breathing Plan (FBP).
2017	The Forest’s Breathing Plan (FBP) was implemented. The Alternative Plan was designed.
2022	The implementation of the Alternative Plan is under review

shows the timeline of policies implemented in these forests over the past century.

5. History of Management Practices in the Hyrcanian Forests

The exploitation of the Hyrcanian forests over the past 200 years can be divided into three periods. The first included using wood to meet the basic needs of local people, such as construction and fuel, and continued from the beginning to the middle of the Qajar dynasty (1785–1925). The second period involved exploiting timber and other wood products, often exported to European countries. The most important tree species were Persian boxwood (Buxus sempervirens subsp. hyrcana (Pojark.) Takht.), Persian walnut (Juglans regia L.), and chestnut-leaved oak (Quercus castaneifolia C.A. Mey.), all of which were exported until the reign of Reza Shah (1925). During this second period, the dominant vision of these forests was economic, focusing on increasing the volume of wood harvested, with little attention given to forest regeneration. The clear-cutting of large areas of forest areas, especially in the lowland forests of Mazandaran and Gilan, was accompanied by the granting of significant concessions to foreign wood industry companies. This led to the extensive degradation of forests and the loss of valuable species, such as Persian boxwood, which is now rare.

The third period started with the introduction of systematic forest management around 1940. In 1959, a new law stipulated that harvesting must follow an approved Forest Management Plan developed by the Forests, Rangelands, and Watershed Management Organization’s technical office or private consultants under FRWO’s administration. Forestry initiatives aimed at wood harvesting started around 1960. The shelterwood system was the first silvicultural method adopted and was almost the only system applied for about 30 years. It aimed to produce even-aged high forests by establishing homogeneous plantations with fast-growing native tree species. However, these methods were unsuccessful for various reasons, including the presence of uneven-aged forest stands on steep slopes, which were not well-suited to even-aged uniform methods. In addition, the presence of livestock throughout the forests, and the failure to prevent livestock from entering regeneration areas, added to the pressure [37]. In 1990, an alternative silvicultural method was adopted in uneven-aged forest stands. It was a form of close-to-nature silviculture, where the selection system for cutting and regeneration was not confined to a particular area, but implemented throughout a forest stand. The selection system removes single or small groups of trees, leading to uneven-aged forest stands with a more varied species composition [31]. This method favours biodiversity, protects genetic resources, maintains natural complex forest ecosystems, ensures timber production, protects the soil, and provides clean air, clean water, and a healthy habitat for wildlife [37]. However, despite the use of this system for more than 20 years, some forest functions were compromised, mainly due to other activities, including livestock grazing, fuel extraction, conversion of forest lands, illegal logging, and illegal hunting. Many developed countries have countered these issues through regulation and appropriate forest protection. For instance, a grazing ban was enacted in the first half of the 19th century in Switzerland [40]. However, In Iran, the 25-legal battle to ban grazing so that natural generation can be protected remains ongoing. Figure 1 represents the history of silvicultural methods practiced over the last 60 years in the Hyrcanian forests.

6. Challenges for Forest Policy in the Hyrcanian Forests

The main challenges facing forest policymakers and communities are firstly the mistrust and conflicts over the perceptions of forest management and secondly the discrepancies between laws, policies, and forest management practices.

In the past, forest policymakers in Iran have shown little willingness to recognize—and thus utilise—the traditional knowledge of local communities. Legislation has tended to focus on the relocation of cattle and forest-based communities. One of the negative aspects of such an approach has resulted in an inappropriate approach to local participation. Policymakers and forest managers have tended to use local people as low-skilled forest workers rather than involving them in forest management planning and implementation. In contrast, an approach that involved participatory forest management would respect traditional tenure rights and promote public awareness of forest resource protection [36].

There needs to be more cooperation between local communities, major wood industries, and Natural Resources Offices (NROs) in profitable activities such as plantations, so that stakeholders can benefit from the long-term success of their investments. Unfortunately, the current approach has only led to increased poverty in local communities. Consequently, those communities are responsible for a significant proportion of the illegal logging that occurs in the forests [36]. Livelihood needs, increased demand for wood, and low-level penalties inconsistent with the nature of the crime have all encouraged illegal logging. In contrast, illegal hunting is mainly done for entertainment or retaliation rather than to meet the basic requirements of communities. This has severely reduced the population of many mammals, especially ungulates, such as red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.) [42] and large mammals, such as tiger (Panthera tigris L.), with the latter last being reported in the eastern Hyrcanian forest, in Golestan, in the 1950s. There is also other evidence of mutual mistrust [43]. Mental models held by FWRO experts and local herders in relation to the degradation of the Lire Sar forests have been compared [43]. Each group blamed the other for the degradation, and neither intended to adjust their actions to reduce degradation.

In 2013, the FWRO attempted to build mutual trust with local communities by approving the Caspian Hyrcanian Forest Project (CHFP). The CHFP has been successful: the government, in collaboration with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), has involved local communities in management activities, including conflict resolution, support for waste management schemes in villages, local festivals, and training sessions for forest rangers. However, the CHFP has also revealed residual distrust amongst FWRO staff and the local communities, evident through their experience in implementing the community forestry forest management plan (CF-FMP). Some community members have stated that if anyone else assumes responsibility for the CF-FMP, they will physically block implementation, suggesting a significant breakdown in the relationship. At the same time, some FRWO staff have stated that they do not support the allocation of CF-FMPs to communities because they feel that the communities will not implement the forest management plans successfully or that they will fail to protect the forests. Hence, achieving a high standard of management is considered unlikely so long as there is a lack of socio-political support [44].

There is a fundamental difference in the perceptions of forest managers and local communities about the purpose of local participation in forest management. Forest managers consider objectives such as forest protection and resource sustainability, while the residents of local communities tend to view these forests mainly as a potential source of income. In several cases, the management methods introduced by the legislation have threatened local livelihoods, increasing the numbers of residents leaving the communities [36]. The stated objective of the forest legislation is to increase local participation in forest management. However, this aim needs to be supported by changes in the laws and regulations. Revising legislation to be consistent with international development indices and using public consultants to align forest policy with legislation are both playing a significant role in building mutual understanding among stakeholders.

Coordination of laws, policies, and forest management practices is crucial if the best possible management of the forests is to be achieved. Forest-dependent communities are less likely to comply with forest laws if they think doing so will endanger their livelihoods [45]. There is an immediate need to analyse forest and wildlife law in the context of poverty alleviation. Various scales of land grabbing within the forest are partly related to poverty in these forests and stem from shortcomings in legal enforcement and regulatory assessment [46,47,48].

The legal framework of SFM needs to consider social aspects such as forest tenure rights, livelihoods, income-generating potential, migration, public participation, and local knowledge, and how these affect the restoration, development, and protection of the forests. Forest tenure is inadequately reflected and defined in much of the forest legislation (e.g., FNL and the Forest and Rangelands Protection and Utilisation Law (FRPUL)), and in some cases, other land acts have distorted the meaning of the legislation, mainly because of a weak understanding of the concept of sustainable forest management. There is also a need to criminalise offences against the legislation. In the FRPUL, there are no penalties for the destruction, pollution, sale, or transfer of soil in these forest and rangeland areas. A sound and coherent policy framework is necessary for the development of clear, transparent, and consistent legislation. Promoting clarity and understanding and establishing mechanisms for participatory law-making provide a meaningful opportunity for genuine participation in management and decision-making by different stakeholders [49]. The FRPUL is only a tool to implement an overall strategy, so an all-encompassing review of the forest policies is required before any drafting or redrafting forest laws or related resolutions occurs.

7. Scientific and Technical Challenges for Forest Management in the Hyrcanian Forest

The adoption of current science in forest management is closely linked to having access to new technologies. Technology can greatly facilitate the collection and analysis of forest-related data. It is also essential when simulating different management scenarios and predicting plausible futures. Efficient management depends on the use of information that is relevant, accurate, and concise. An analysis of the main issues related to data flow in the forestry sector in Iran has indicated several problems [50]. There is an under-developed process of collection, analysis, and dissemination of forestry data at the national level. There is no standard format for exchanging data between institutions, and information is scattered amongst various institutions. There is no robust mechanism to check the quality and credibility of information. Information is not discrete, and considerable overlap often occurs in subject areas for which information is being collected or disseminated. Finally, there is no comprehensive forest information system to assist the flow of data and information for decision making and no planning or evaluation of FMPs.

Forest managers in the Hyrcanian region have often relied on outdated forest inventories and problematic technical estimations rather than continuous, high-quality data and effective monitoring systems to assess the impacts of forest management on the forests. However, remote sensing is now enabling the early detection of many disturbances (e.g., fire, disease, and logging) in these forests. Forward-looking or adaptive management requires predictive systems (primarily modelling) to provide adequate information for efficient decision-making. Modelling the growth of the forests has been contentious. In contrast to many developed countries, the importance of measuring growth rates in the Hyrcanian forest has always been viewed sceptically, mainly because of the lack of relevant knowledge and the high price of using advanced technology. Several attempts have been made to measure forest growth, but they have not been entirely successful due to the high cost of the equipment needed for permanent sample plots (PSPs). The forest is in mountainous terrain, and few forestry roads reach high elevations (i.e., 2000 m a.s.l). The dense tree cover and steep terrain create difficulties for the use of GPS-enabled equipment.

Currently, FMPs are applied without the help of data from permanent sample plots or simulations of tree growth, establishment, and mortality using dynamic vegetation models (DVM). However, some university researchers are addressing these deficiencies in their research. A 2019 study modelled individual tree growth using 313 permanent sample plots (0.1 ha) between 2003 and 2013 [51]. The highest diameter growth occurred in chestnut-leaved oak (Quercus castaneifolia) and velvet maple (Acer velutinum Boiss.), and the most significant mortality occurred in European hornbeam (Carpinus betulus L.) and Caucasian alder (Alnus subcordata C.A. Mey.). The information was used to develop models for estimating tree diameter growth, regeneration, and survival rates, all of which is highly informative for uneven-aged forest management. However, the models have not yet been applied in management, mainly because of a long-term shortage of human and financial resources and an effective mechanism for monitoring.

There is a gap between the science developed at universities and the practices followed in government institutes and organisations. A formal approach such as adaptive management could be a solution to connect the power of science and the practice of managing these forests [52].

One of the areas in which universities and state organisations frequently collaborate is the use of technology to address challenges associated with the long-term health of the forest, including the role of natural disturbances, such as pests and diseases, floods, drought, and wildfires. Technology could help tackle these challenges by helping managers understand how to mitigate their impacts and by offering alternative solutions [53].

Remote sensing has been utilised effectively for various aspects of Hyrcanian forest management. The use of remote sensing to monitor natural disturbances in these forests could compensate for some of the constraints caused by the lack of human and financial resources and the high cost of data collection. Satellite images have provided data to construct a map of the distribution of Persian boxwood blight caused by Calonectria pseudonaviculata (Ascomycota), the leading mortality agent for Hyrcanian boxwood. The information enabled experts to identify blight hotspots and to develop control measures to address them. The first signs of damage caused by boxwood blight were reported in 2012, and two years later, the disease spread to forest areas in Eastern Golestan [54]. By 2014, approximately 40,000 hectares of boxwood trees had been infected in northern Iran [55], and the figure could now be closer to 52,000 hectares, from a total extent of nearly 70,000 hectares [54,55].

The increasing use of remote sensing has also led to more precise monitoring of carbon emissions. For instance, Zarandian et al. [56] detected changes in land use/land cover (LULC) in part of the Hyrcanian ecoregion (the Do-hezar and Se-hezar Forests) by analysing and comparing remotely sensed landscape data between 1984 and 2016. They predicted the impacts of future LULC changes on carbon storage and sequestration and evaluated them using the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) model under two plausible future scenarios of “business as usual” and “balanced development”. The study indicated that the quality and quantity of natural forest cover had been degraded over the past three decades due to the rapid development of human settlements and their adjacent orchards. The current trends in land cover will lead to a significant reduction in carbon sequestration and high social cost due to the loss of carbon stored in the landscape and its release into the atmosphere. However, balancing the development of settlements with the maintenance of forest cover could reverse the decline trend in carbon sequestration and avoid future socioeconomic costs.

Science and technology also play a significant role in the production of artificial wood. Although halting logging in the Hyrcanian forests created serious concerns for the wood industry, it led wood-processing facilities to seek alternative raw materials [57]. These included combinations of wood chips, paper, and waste plastics, used to manufacture various products used in houses, billboards, park tables, benches, and fence railings. Recently, these products have become increasingly popular, replacing natural wood, and partially replacing iron and steel.

Despite recent studies emphasising the importance of advanced technologies and reliable information in managing forests, the mindset behind Hyrcanian forest management has mostly remained conservative, especially amongst some forest policymakers. In contrast, some more forward-thinking forest managers believe that technological advances such as new measurement tools are game-changing for good management practices. However, while these advances may help make a difference, they will not in themselves ensure that the forests are well-managed.

Sayer [54] argued that “the game-changing technologies for sustainable forestry are those that foster better communication between stakeholders and allow informed decisions embracing scales from the gene to the ecosystem”. An example is the advantage conferred by information and communication technologies in the community-based monitoring of forests. There are several such tools, including Cyber Tracker [58], the Open Data Kit, and the Sapelli Platform [59], all of which were developed specifically for CBM and use smartphones or tablets as platforms for standardised data collection. These tools provide new opportunities and challenges for communities and professionals wishing to engage in CBM [60]; however, none of these technologies, even CBM, have been utilised in the FMPs developed by FWRO in the Hyrcanian forests. Figure 2 provides a summary of the challenges facing the implementation of SFM in the Hyrcanian forests.

8. A Conceptual Model for Sustainable Hyrcanian Forest Management (SHFMM)

Moving beyond the current situation in the Hyrcanian Forest requires the adoption of a new approach. One such approach is provided by the Sustainable Hyrcanian Forest Management Model (SHFMM). The proposed model consists of four modules: spatial forest planning, a hierarchical target system, planning activities, and control and assessment (Figure 3).

The conceptual model starts with the spatial planning of forest functions using the Iranian Ecological Capacity Evaluation model (IECEM), which defines a set of overall goals aligned with the ecological capacity of the area and develops a set of criteria and indicators for monitoring the long-term maintenance of forest functions. Then, the operational objectives are derived from the overall goals, which can then be applied to the FMU. The FMP activities that contribute to operational objectives are planned, and indicators are developed to control and measure the implementation and success of the FMP. This model also paves the way to the assessment of the environmental and social impact of the activities undertaken through the FMP.

8.1. Spatial Planning of Forest Functions

The Iranian Ecological Capacity Evaluation Model (IECEM), the so-called Makhdoum model, or Makhdoom’s Functional Systems Analysis Model, was developed in 2002 to evaluate the land’s potential capability and determine its natural land use [26,61].

The IECEM identifies physical and environmental resources on the land and integrates the data into homogenous units termed ‘environmental units’ (EU) or ‘arbitrary ecosystems’ [62]. The environmental units are selected and depicted on a map using stationary ecological factors (i.e., landforms, geology, soils, and plant communities). The variation in the dynamic ecological characteristics (i.e., climate, water, wildlife) and the socioeconomic resources of the land are needed to narrow down the selection of a suitable system. Therefore, each unit’s ecological and socioeconomic properties determine the land’s capability. Using this model, decision-makers apply a land-use planning process that has ecology as its core rather than economics [62]. The IECEM presents the ecological capacity of forest land (i.e., forest functions) in three classes: forest production, forest conservation and protection, and forest recreation. The forest production class includes seven sub-classes (F1–7) that cover suitable areas for wood production. The conservation and protection class comprises ten sub-classes (Ce1–10)—five sub-classes cover conserving biodiversity, wildlife habitat or sites with rare flora and valuable trees, and five sub-classes cover soil and water protection. The recreation forest class consists of two sub-classes, indoor and outdoor recreation, Eti1-2, and Ete1-2—indoor recreation covers campaigns in designated areas in forests, where visitors spend days in nature. Outdoor recreation covers forest excursions.

The syntheses are based on finding formulas or relationships between climatology, geomorphology, topography, vegetation cover, soil, hydrology, and the wildlife characteristics of the land [63]. The productivity of a region is computed based on a series of parameters, including slope (So), elevation (E), valuable tree species (Bvc), soil fertility (Pf), erosion susceptibility (Es), and so on. Each parameter is measured on the ground and represented as a spatial layer for a particular area. Each spatial layer has a specific threshold to make the forest eligible for a particular function.

Forest production classes use IF-AND-THEN rules to classify a forest area’s production function. A particular area’s dominant function is based on the landforms, geology, soils, and plant communities at the time. Similar units are classified as one group or zone, determining the dominant forest function. For instance, if the following are met in a given area of the Hyrcanian forests: slope (So) ≤ 25 (%) and elevation (E) ≤ 700 (m), and valuable tree species (Bvc) ≤ 3 (medium), and soil fertility (Pf) ≤ (good), and (erosion susceptibility) Es ≥ (weak), THEN the area is classified as (F1). This would mean that the forest area is classified as having a dominant function of protection.

The highest and lowest suitability is each model’s first and last sub-classes. For example, sub-class F1 has a higher ecological capability for forest production than sub-class F2. A similar logic is applied to the conservation-protection and recreation models.

After that, the ecological capability of the area is augmented with socio-economic spatial layers (e.g., location of villages, grazing paths, etc.) in which, for a given forest area, ecological capacity and social capacity are considered together to provide a unique prescription for managing the site. This prescribed management offers goals, objectives, activities, and indicators to monitor the sustainability of the dominant function in the given area. The ultimate goal is to achieve a specific management scenario reflecting the land’s ecological and social capacity. For instance, if the dominant function of the area is conservation, no industrial harvesting is prescribed, and the livestock population is also controlled to lessen the pressure of grazing.

Considerable research has been undertaken on the application of the IECEM model to the zoning of Hyrcanian forest functions [64,65,66]. However, there have been few attempts to use the model to determine the overall goals for a specific dominant function. Maleknia et al. [67] conducted research that was close to using spatial forest planning for the Hyrcanian forest functions as described in the SHFMM. They used the IECEM model for forest function zoning and developed a set of criteria and indicators for monitoring the sustainability of these forest functions; however, this research did not cover the setting of overall goals to achieve prescribed management. Only one study has covered all three stages of SHFMM, the Hyrcanian forests decision support system (Hyfo-DSS) [68]. The HyfoDSS is intended to help select appropriate management scenarios based on forest functions. Managers can then present FMPs that are compliant with the determined forest functions in each study area. However, this study did not cover the socioeconomic condition of the land.

8.2. Developing a Set of Criteria and Indicators for Monitoring Forest Functions

The suite of criteria and indicators used in the Hyrcanian forest is derived from internationally accepted standards for monitoring forest functions. Knowing what is available and appropriate for different scales is the first and foremost step in identifying which ones might be best for use at a particular location [69,70]. Most previous studies in the Hyrcanian forest attempted to achieve this by developing an appropriate set of criteria and indicators. Various multi-criteria analyses (MCA) (e.g., ranking, rating, and pairwise comparisons) have been used to generate criteria and indicators at the FMU level. Field-testing of indicators is still in progress [25,71,72,73] (See Section 9: The Hyrcanian Sustainable Forest Management (HSFMM): the best current solution given the available resources).

8.3. The Hierarchical Target System: Strategic Aims and Operational Objectives

The hierarchical target system defines the strategic and operational objectives for achieving the best management practices. The overall aims mimic the natural forest and its disturbance regime and are based on the Strategic Plan on Sustainable Forest Management in the Hyrcanian forest (SPAFM), research, knowledge, and the experience of experts and practitioners in these forests. Operational objectives put these theoretical objectives into concrete terms for forest management practices. An operational objective might be to maintain the distribution of natural stand types and representation of the entire range of natural development phases (e.g., old-growth phase) and structural classes. However, in practice, the design of FMPs still relies on a collection of small projects, mainly marking trees, wood harvesting, building roads and skidding trails, silvicultural operations, and the establishment of plantations. The SHFMM determines the dominant function and then uses the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) to set overall goals and objectives at the FMU level.

Only one study has proposed guidelines to design the Hyrcanian FMPs using LFA [25,74]. This approach defined objectives and activities based on a focal problem, besides improving implementation, monitoring, and assessment of the FMP. The study was conducted in the Kheyroud forest, where forest conservation and production were determined using the IECEM. The outcome presented three overall goals for areas suitable for the production function, and six goals suitable for areas designated for conservation [25]. The study used LFA for the first time in participatory decision-making amongst Hyrcanian forest experts. Despite the promising results, the results were not adopted due to resistance in the FRWO to any modification to the conventional framework of an FMP.

8.4. Planning Forestry Activities

Conventional Forest Management Plans in Iran deal with silvicultural operations (i.e., thinning, marking trees, etc.) or technical operations (i.e., fencing, repairing roads, etc.), but do not set any overall goals for the forest. These activities are occasionally misunderstood as goals. It has been suggested [25] that the Hyrcanian FMP guideline is the only framework that has been proposed to develop activities at a compartment level and which is built into a hieratical system of targets. The FMPs to date have not followed such a hierarchical target system to define the actions required to meet specified goals.

8.5. Control and Assessment

As activities are limited to silvicultural operations, mainly harvesting tree stands and some infrastructure maintenance (i.e., roads), the control that an activity has been completed successfully has been to complete a checklist indicating that the activity was implemented. However, the idea behind control is to ensure that good management is being practised. This should be done by choosing appropriate indicators, setting norms, monitoring the values of these indicators, and taking management actions whenever their recorded values are not suitably close to the target. Goushegir et al. [25] determined control indicators for conservation and production functions using LFA. The study proposed control indicators that could be used to monitor if activities were supporting the objectives. The guideline also eased the process of revising activities when some modification was required.

Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) in forestry provides decision-makers with information about the environmental impact of forestry activities [75]. Most research on environmental impact analysis in the Hyrcanian forests has focused on determining the positive or negative consequences of forest activities via effects analysis using a degradation model [76,77], or artificial neural networks [78]. A study conducted in a forest district of the Kheyrud forest used the degradation model, indicating that this area had a high degradation coefficient and needed 100% rehabilitation. It also revealed that forest activities, including roads and logging operations, needed to be modified and adjusted to the current forest condition [79].

9. The Hyrcanian Sustainable Forest Management (SHFMM): The Best Current Solution with the Available Resources

Sustainable Forest management is unachievable unless human use is commensurate with the ecological capacity of the forest ecosystem. For decades, FMPs in Iran focused on wood production by computing an Allowable Annual Cut based on forest inventory data and omitted other forest values, especially biodiversity. This paradigm resulted in a failure to consider the ecological capacity of these forests. The SHFMM is a novel forest management framework for the Hyrcanian forests that uses an innovative method for the spatial planning of forest functions based on IECEM, where the ecological and social capacity of the forest area is determined and creates a foundation to develop systematic goals to achieve specific management prescriptions at the FMU level.

The SHFMM represents a systematic process of forest management. The overall goals and operational objectives are defined within a hierarchical system of targets, activities are in harmony with the intended purpose, and criteria and indicators are applied within an effective monitoring mechanism. Each part of the model is supported by research that has been conducted in the Hyrcanian forest. Although the research studies were independent and no holistic research has been undertaken covering all stages of the SHFMM, they have provided promising outcomes that support the feasibility of the model. Socio-economic data is the only part that has not been covered by past research, mainly because of the difficulty in collecting and quantifying data. As some previous policies have adversely affected the livelihoods of local communities, this research gap needs to be filled.

The model should assist forest policymakers with two aspects of achieving best management practices: providing a conceptual decision-making framework for SFM and suggesting the practical tools that are needed to implement it at the watershed and FMU levels in the Hyrcanian forests.

As mentioned above, existing FMPs suffer from the lack of an effective mechanism for monitoring, mainly because there are insufficient experts to monitor management processes, technologies are outdated, and there is a lack of policies that encourage the involvement of sectors (i.e., private, and cooperative) other than the government. In developed countries, this role is often taken on by the private sector as part of the forest certification process.

In the past, FMPs focused on technical forestry issues—inventory, cutting rates, and utilisation methods—that happened at the compartment level (ca. 50 ha). The control consisted of a checklist of all activities undertaken by executives or contractors and was provided in the booklets associated with the FMP. There were no checks undertaken of potential long-term impacts of management on these forests. Monitoring for forest sustainability is a new concept that, for the first time, was brought up by the Low-Forest-Cover-Countries Process, otherwise known as the Tehran Process for LFCCs. This process has put the issue of developing criteria and indicators of SFM for monitoring sustainability at the top of its agenda. The Tehran Process developed the first set of criteria and indicators between 2000 and 2011 [80,81,82], with seven criteria and 69 indicators, of which six criteria and 24 indicators were relevant to the Hyrcanian forests. Six sub-projects were responsible for field testing the criteria and indicators, which led to the final set’s approval of six criteria and 18 indicators [81]. However, the Alternative Plan makes no reference to these Tehran Process indicators. The FWRO has instead accepted the seven criteria of The Near East Process, Cairo, 1996, as the initial set of criteria for the Hyrcanian Forest. The approved indicators differ from the Near East process, and their target values are incompatible with the Hyrcanian forests. Using different sets of criteria and indicators partly stems from the complexity associated with monitoring and is mainly due to the absence of a conceptual framework to understand and implement SFM in the country.

Viewed in this light, policymakers, before exploring various sets of criteria and indicators, require a decision-making framework (such as the SHFMM) to provide a conceptual basis. This would enable the role and application of criteria and indicators to be considered with a management context. What is known as sustainable forestry in the Hyrcanian forest has varied over time as stakeholders’ demands and perceptions have evolved. Such diversity has led the SHFMM to focus not on applying a definitive list of criteria and indicators but instead on using a general set of criteria and indicators as a toolbox that stakeholder groups can use to develop appropriate indicators once they have established their own management objectives and performance criteria. This is the approach adopted by the Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in three tropical and temperate forest zones [83]. The SHFMM has followed this approach, suggesting the set of criteria and indicators developed by Holvoet and Muys [84] and the CIFOR toolbox for temperate forests as sources for developing an appropriate set of criteria and indicators for monitoring SFM.

The FMPs also need more effective practical tools (i.e., methods and techniques) to implement the plan. The SHFMM applies forest zoning at the watershed level using the IECEM and uses the logical framework approach to determine a hierarchical system of targets (i.e., strategic aims and operational objectives). The hierarchical system of targets is defined using participatory methods—a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches in which the overall goals are derived by identifying focal problems, and the FMP administrator tries to solve them for the benefit of all stakeholders. The logical framework approach encapsulated in the SHFMM offers a basis to interact with various stakeholders by visualising the focal problems, causes, and impacts, as well as the goals, objectives, and activities. In this sense, multiple alternative management scenarios contribute to finding the best management solution. The links amongst different parts of the model can create interactions among stakeholders by encouraging them to gather around a table, listen to various opinions, and share their ideas.

This situation rarely happens between local communities and other parties in the Hyrcanian forests, mainly because of the lack of a transparent and practical method to encourage stakeholders to share their opinions. Transparent and efficient tools enable local communities to understand the challenges (e.g., climate change) from a broader perspective than their village. One study has suggested that in recent decades, over 90% of forest owners, management practitioners, and officials from forest-related departments in Iran have acknowledged that severe climatic changes have occurred in these forests in recent decades. None considered the FMPs as an efficient solution to the problem [85]. Although no research has examined the perceptions of climate change held by the local communities in these forests, similar studies suggest that climate change is a matter of concern for environment-dependent communities [86]. However, age, income, and literacy may all affect the perception of communities of the consequences of climate change [87]. This lack of awareness of global challenges can result in conflicts between policymakers and local communities when practising SFM. As an example, old growth is typically valued by many stakeholders. However, climate change will disrupt old-growth patterns by increasing disturbances, resulting in the loss of some species. How do forest-dependent communities react to this once they know it will happen?

As mentioned earlier, the disconnection between the field, provincial offices, and the FRWO has resulted in redundant and ambiguous data that, in turn, has affected data accuracy and resolution. The SHFMM smooths the flow of data and information by determining what data should be collected, recorded, or revised and where monitoring should take place. This information enables decision-makers to follow a transparent and easy-to-do framework without being concerned about the quality and credibility of data. The SHFMM provides the hieratical framework within which each sector—whether state or private—can make decisions, but all sectors must work together in its implementation. This is intended to encourage the parties to improve their communication skills and to motivate the FRWO to develop supportive legislation to catalyse the process. In turn, this should lead to a reduction in bureaucratic procedures and the outdated and cumbersome regulations. At the same time, appropriate rules enabling SFM would be developed. However, the productivity and efficacy of this model are dependent on the extent to which it is formalised through the legal institutions.

Iran has experienced a prolonged period of economic and political sanctions, which have limited access to resources available to other parts of the world (i.e., negotiation, participatory mechanisms, and free access to global marketing). The sanctions have adversely affected research by preventing scientists from accessing much scientific research and technology. This situation has prevented Iran from participating in “the worldwide forest community” [2] that recognizes forest issues, provides solutions, and benefits from the implementation of the global solutions. The SHFMM works within the available resources in the country and is based on the results of past research on individual aspects of the problem. In this sense, the implementation of SFM in the Hyrcanian forests is analogous to the parable of the Elephant in the Dark—legal organisations, research institutes, local communities, and the public each possess a perception of SFM, and research has offered solutions to particular problems. The proposed model (SHFMM) could reveal the interconnections among research outcomes and could be used as a road map towards SFM. Running each phase of the model will require the involvement of either state or private organisations, creating a basis for interaction, communication cooperation between parties that have become used to working independently. Stakeholders may also be motivated to improve their communication skills by listening to disagreements, conflicts, and fallacies and respecting diverse perspectives on the same subject. This in turn may stimulate administrators (i.e., FRWO) to develop supportive legislation to catalyse the process.

Understanding the flow of data and information, finding reliable sources, and accessing raw data via available databases in a country in transition that continues to experience significant levels of turbulence have all hindered the development of this review. Most information about forest management in Iran can only be obtained through permission from officials unless it has been published in academic research or under a joint project between officials and universities. Some information, such as forest law and regulations, is frequently revised, and locating the official versions of the revisions can be difficult as, in some cases, they are not published online. The rules and legislation continue to evolve and today there is speculation over a possible extension to the halting of industrial harvesting in the Forest’s Breathing Plan (FBP). Despite these limitations, the current manuscript covers the most recent information, data, and research results published in credible academic databases.

10. Conclusions

There are two main challenges facing the implementation of SFM in the Hyrcanian forest: inconsistent forest policy and outdated science and techniques. This study suggests the Sustainable Hyrcanian Forest Management Model (SHFMM) as the best current solution to achieve SFM in the northern forest of Iran. The SHFMM could assist forest policymakers to attain SFM by providing a conceptual decision-making framework and suggesting practical tools to implement SFM at the watershed and FMU levels in the Hyrcanian forests. The SHFMM provides a hieratical framework within which decisions can be taken and brings together all sectors for their implementation. Over time, stakeholder demands and perceptions have evolved and are reflected in what is described as sustainable management in the Hyrcanian forests. Hence, the SHFMM focuses not on applying a definitive list of criteria and indicators but on using a general set of criteria and indicator tools that stakeholder groups can use to develop appropriate indicators once they have established their management objectives and performance criteria.

The FMPs also need more effective practical tools (i.e., methods and techniques) if they are to be improved. The SHFMM suggests such tools at two scales: watershed and the FMU. The SHFMM applies forest zoning using IECEM at the watershed level and uses the logical framework approach to determine a hierarchical system of targets (i.e., strategic aims and operational objectives). This system of targets is defined through participatory methods—a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches where the overall goals are derived through the identification of focal problems, and the FMP administrator attempts to solve them for the benefit of all stakeholders. The logical framework approach encapsulated in the SHFMM offers a basis for interaction with various stakeholders by visualising the focal problems, causes, and impacts, as well as the goals, objectives, and activities. As a result, multiple alternative management scenarios contribute to finding the best management solution.

The SHFMM improves the flow of data and information—what data should be collected, recorded, or revised and where monitoring should place. This improved information enables decision-makers to follow a transparent and easy-to-do framework without having to be concerned about the quality and credibility of the data. In turn, this should lead to improved legislation that enables SFM.

The predominant scientific/technical mindset of developed countries towards SFM cannot be easily transferred to the Hyrcanian forests of Iran without the mechanisms needed for its implementation. As a result, the locally developed SHFMM is the best current solution available for forest policymakers and forest managers. It should be considered a dynamic solution that could evolve into the optimal solution for the future over time. The interconnected nature of this model should create interactions among stakeholders by encouraging them to gather around a table, listen to opposing opinions, and share their ideas. That in turn may encourage stakeholders to improve their communication skills by listening to disagreements, conflicts, and fallacies and respecting diverse perspectives on the same subject. Ultimately, such developments may motivate administrators (i.e., FRWO) to develop the necessary enabling legislation to catalyse the process.