Based on theoretical underpinnings and an empirical review of forest laws and regulations of selected countries throughout the Americas, we examine key components of natural forest management and how they are addressed in the legal frameworks of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Uruguay, and the U.S. We consider forest policy directives in terms of legislative, planning, operational, environmental/ecological, social, and economic aspects and classify them by the type of policy obligation: (1) non-discretionary laws or rules; or (2) discretionary, voluntary directives; and, further, by the type of policy approach: (1) a specific technology or practice required or recommended; (2) a process or system requirement or recommendation; or (3) a performance or outcome based requirement or recommendation. Protection of at-risk species and riparian buffers are required in all countries and include specific prescriptions in most; forest management planning and secure, legal land title or tenancy are commonly required; and mandatory processes to protect soil and water quality are customary. Less common requirements include forest monitoring and social and economic aspects, and, when in place, they are usually voluntary. Implications for improved policies to achieve sustainable forest management (SFM) are discussed.

Forests across the U.S. and U.S. affiliated islands of the Caribbean and Pacific constitute rich and dynamic social-ecological systems that, while heterogeneous in many ways, share certain characteristics and trends that underscore the utility of sustainability assessments that go beyond single jurisdictional efforts. This paper summarizes a recent effort to assess the sustainability of tropical island forests of and politically affiliated with the U.S. using the Montréal Process criteria and indicator framework (MP C&I), which address ecological, social, economic, and institutional dimensions of forests. Forests cover 45 percent of the total area and more than 50 percent of each island jurisdiction, except Hawaii (36 percent). Forest cover is generally stable over much of the area in terms of recent reference conditions. The history of human occupation and land alteration is a prominent determinant of current conditions throughout the islands, which exhibit relatively high rates of threatened species in comparison to mainland counterparts and particularly where endemism is high. The islands also harbor significant areas of new or novel assemblages of native and non-native forest species, predominately on abandoned agricultural lands cleared of native forests long ago, which have been shown to contribute to the restoration of these degraded lands and provide many other ecosystem services at levels as high as and in some cases higher than native forests. Although industrial-level commercial timber harvest is small to nonexistent on most islands, socioeconomic and cultural linkages to forests are extensive but difficult to quantify. Amassing a foundation of data sufficient to address the MP C&I was challenging, in part due to the heterogeneity of the islands, island geography, and limited reporting capacities. We document significant improvements in the availability of data important for sustainability assessments in the last decade or so, especially with the extension of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis program to the islands. Likewise, we find the MP C&I to be a useful tool for organizing and presenting information important for assessing forest sustainability. Nevertheless, considerable data gaps remain in the areas of biodiversity, forest functions and processes, and socioeconomic conditions of forests, which are critical elements to track across the islands, particularly in the context of climate change and ongoing anthropogenic pressures.

Tropical forest management increasingly is challenged by multiple, complex, intersecting, and in many cases unprecedented changes in the environment that are triggered by human activity. Many of these changes are associated with the Anthropocene—a new geologic epoch in which humans have become a dominating factor in shaping the biosphere. Ultimately, as human activity increasingly influences systems and processes at multiple scales, we are likely to see more extraordinary and surprising events, making it difficult to predict the future with the level of precision and accuracy needed for broad-scale management prescriptions. In this context of increasing surprise and uncertainty, learning, flexibility, and adaptiveness are essential to securing ecosystem resilience and sustainability, particularly in complex systems such as tropical forests. This article examines the experience to date with and potential for collaborative, adaptive land and resource management in the El Yunque National Forest (EYNF)—the only tropical forest in the U.S. National Forest System. The trajectory of EYNF policy and practice over time and its capacity for learning, flexibility, and adaptiveness to change and surprise are analyzed through an historical institutionalism approach. EYNF policies and practices have shifted from an early custodial approach that focused mostly on protection and prevention to a top-down, technical approach that eventually gave way to an ecosystem approach that has slowly incorporated more flexible, adaptive, and active learning elements. These shifts in EYNF management mostly have been reactive and incremental, with some rarer, rapid changes primarily in response to significant changes in national-level policies, but also to local level conditions and changes in them. Looking to the future, it seems the EYNF may be better positioned than ever before to address increasing uncertainty and surprise at multiple scales. However, it must be able to count on the resources necessary for implementing adaptive, collaborative forest management in a tropical setting and on the institutional and organizational space and flexibility to make swift adjustments or course corrections in response to system changes and surprises.

We evaluated how governmental forest regulation in Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Nicaragua has succeeded or failed in fostering changes in forest owner and user behavior that enhance the sustainability of tropical forest management. As expected, sufficient resources and capacity for forest policy implementation are crucial for attaining governmental forest policy objectives, but innovative arrangements for promoting, enforcing, and verifying policy compliance can compensate for limited regulatory resources and processes. The findings also indicate that: the level of governmental commitment to sustainable forest management (SFM) was as important as total funding levels; a mix of government rules and incentives enhanced adoption of SFM; the incorporation of professional forest regents offset limited agency capacity; and forest certification enhanced SFM on forest concessions. Local level inducements and constraints that enhance or impede governmental forest policy adoption and compliance also were identified.

Current trends in the nation’s forest-sector research capacity were analyzed in terms of funding and number of scientists, and compared with prior data in the National Research Council’s 2002 report, National Capacity in Forestry Research. The total number of professors at institutions accredited by the Society of American Foresters, research scientists at the USDA Forest Service, and forest researchers in forest industry decreased approximately 12 percent since 2002. In 2016, there were an estimated 1,224 professors and 540 Forest Service research scientists, for a total of 1,764 scientists. Total estimated research funding in 2015 for universities, private sector, and USDA Forest Service, including appropriations from federal grant programs from the USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture, National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Department of Energy was US$598 million—a nominal increase over 2002, but a decrease when accounting for inflation. The proportion of reported scientists’ disciplines shifted notably from production subjects to broader ecosystem services and forest health subjects, as well as from more applied to more fundamental or basic research. The data indicated that the nation’s forest research capacity continues to erode, leading to declines in research development and innovation, and putting at increasing risk the future health and productivity of America’s forests.