Forestry administration and management in the European Union (abbr. EU) vary significantly across its Member States due to differences in land use, forest ownership, and institutional arrangements. Although there are common frameworks set by the EU, the responsibility for forest policy primarily rests with national governments. This analysis will compare key aspects of forest management in the EU, including land use, ownership structures, and institutional frameworks responsible for forestry-related procedures and legislation. The institutions responsible for forestry administration across the EU are structured at national, regional, and local levels. While the EU provides guidance on SFM, decision-making authority chiefly rests with Member States.

According to FAO’s 2020 report,4 forests cover around 38% of the EU’s total land area (approximately 182 million hectares),5 but the distribution of forested land is uneven across Member States. Finland and Sweden are the two countries that have the largest forest areas in the EU, with forests covering approximately 73% and 69% of their land, respectively. These countries rely heavily on forest resources for their economies, particularly timber production and biomass energy. Southern Europe countries such as Spain (36%) and Portugal (35%) have significant forest areas, but forest ecosystems in this region are more prone to fires, desertification, and land degradation due to climate conditions. In Central and Eastern Europe Countries like Slovenia (62%), Austria (47%), and Romania (29%) also have high forest cover, with Romania standing out for its biodiversity and old-growth forests. As regards Western Europe, countries like France (31%) and Germany (33%) have substantial forest areas, with France being one of the EU’s largest producers of forest products.

The ownership structure of forests in the EU varies significantly between countries. In general, ownership is divided between state-owned forests and privately-owned forests, with private forests often being dominant. Nordic countries (Sweden, Finland) have a high proportion of privately-owned forests. In Sweden, 75% of forests are privately owned, with family-owned forestry being a common practice. The Swedish Forest Agency is the main body responsible for implementing forest policy in Sweden.6 Its work focuses on enforcing forestry laws and promoting sustainable management. Finland has a similar structure, with 60% of forests owned by private individuals, mostly family owners. State ownership accounts for around 26% of the forest area. In Finland, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry oversees forest policy, supported by Metsähallitus, which manages state-owned forests. The Finnish Forest Centre works with private forest owners to promote sustainable forest management. In Germany, around 50% of forests are privately owned, and a significant portion belongs to smallholders. Municipalities also own a considerable share of forests. The federal government and states own 30% of the forested area. Forestry in Germany is managed at the state level, with each federal state having its own forestry department. The Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture provides guidelines and coordinates national forest policy, but most decisions are decentralised. Forestry is regulated under the Federal Forest Act, which mandates SFM and includes regulations for biodiversity protection and wood production. Regional forest laws provide additional guidelines.7

In Romania, the National Forest Administration Romsilva is the main authority responsible for the management of state-owned forests, while the Ministry of Environment oversees forest policy and legislation. Forest legislation in Romania has been evolving to address challenges related to deforestation, corruption, and illegal logging. The Forest Code regulates forest management and aims to improve transparency and law enforcement. After transitioning from a communist regime, Romania reallocated its forests to private owners, and currently, 66% of forests are state-owned, while 34% are private. However, forest restitution has been subject to controversies and legal issues. In Poland, around 80% of forests are state-owned and managed by the State Forests National Forest Holding, which follows sustainable forest management guidelines. The Czech Republic has a more balanced structure, with 51% state-owned and 49% privately-owned forests.8 In France, the National Forest Office (abbr. ONF) manages public forests, while the National Centre for Forest Ownership (abbr. CNPF) assists private forest owners. French forest law mandates that public and private forests be managed sustainably under a 10-year forest management plan. France’s forests are largely private, with 75% privately owned and only 25% managed by the state or local governments.9 Forest management practices are regulated by national laws and regional forest plans. In Poland, the State Forests National Forest Holding manages public forests, which constitute the majority of Poland’s forested land. Local governments also play a significant role in managing forests.10

In the light of the above, it can be stated that forestry administration and legislation in the EU are highly decentralised, with individual Member States maintaining control over their forest management policies.11 While the EU provides guidance on sustainable forest management (SFM) through its Forest Strategy and environmental directives (e.g., the Habitats Directive), implementation and enforcement rest with national governments. For instance, Germany uses a decentralised approach, where forest policies are administered by state governments under the overarching Federal Forest Act.12 Conversely, Finland operates a more centralised model through the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, with organisations like Metsähallitus managing public forests and promoting sustainable practices.13 This ensures regional needs are considered but can lead to inconsistencies in enforcement across states.