This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations.

While calls for critical, engaged and change-oriented scholarship in environmental communication (EC) abound, few articles discuss what this may practically entail. With this article, we aim to contribute to a discussion in EC about the methodological implications of such scholarship. Based on our combined experience in EC research and drawing from a variety of academic fields, we describe six methodological dilemmas that we encounter in our research practice and that we believe are inherent to such scholarship. These dilemmas are (1) grasping communication; (2) representing others; (3) involving people in research; (4) co-producing knowledge; (5) engaging critically; and (6) relating to conflict. This article does not offer solutions to these complex dilemmas. Rather, our dilemma descriptions are meant to help researchers think through methodological issues in critical, engaged and change-oriented EC research. The article also helps to translate the dilemmas to the reality of research projects through a set of questions, aimed to support a sensitivity to, and understanding of, the dilemmas in context.

This article provides useful information for universities offering forestry programs and facing the growing demand for bioeconomy education. An explorative survey on bioeconomy perception among 1400 students enrolled in 29 universities across nine European countries offering forestry programs was performed. The data have been elaborated via descriptive statistics and cluster analysis. Around 70% of respondents have heard about the bioeconomy, mainly through university courses. Students perceive forestry as the most important sector for bioeconomy; however, the extent of perceived importance of forestry varies between countries, most significantly across groups of countries along a North–South European axis. Although differences across bachelor and master programs are less pronounced, they shed light on how bioeconomy is addressed by university programs and the level of student satisfaction with this. These differences and particularities are relevant for potential development routes towards comprehensive bioeconomy curricula at European forestry universities with a forestry focus.

Adequate and accessible expert-based forest information has become increasingly in demand for effective decisions and informed policies in the forest and forest-related sectors in Europe. Such accessibility requires a collaborative environment and constant information exchange between various actors at different levels and across sectors. However, information exchange in complex policy environments is challenging, and is often constrained by various institutional, actor-oriented, and technical factors. In forest policy research, no study has yet attempted to simultaneously account for these multiple factors influencing expert-based forest information exchange. By employing a policy analysis from an actor-centred institutionalist perspective, this paper aims to provide an overview of the most salient institutional and actor-oriented factors that are perceived as constraining forest information exchange at the national level across European countries. We employ an exploratory research approach, and utilise both qualitative and quantitative methods to analyse our data. The data was collected through a semi-structured survey targeted at forest and forest-related composite actors in 21 European countries. The results revealed that expert-based forest information exchange is constrained by a number of compound and closely interlinked institutional and actor-oriented factors, reflecting the complex interplay of institutions and actors at the national level. The most salient institutional factors that stand out include restrictive or ambiguous data protection policies, inter-organisational information arrangements, different organisational cultures, and a lack of incentives. Forest information exchange becomes even more complex when actors are confronted with actor-oriented factors such as issues of distrust, diverging preferences and perceptions, intellectual property rights, and technical capabilities. We conclude that expert-based forest information exchange is a complex and challenging task. It is driven by actors’ preferences/interests, perceptions, and capabilities, and is shaped by formal rules and social norms.

Background: Increased cycling is generally recognized as a highly important project in decarbonizing urban transport. Despite well-researched and broadly accepted benefits of cycling, bicycle mobility plays only a marginal role in the modal share for most cities. Purpose: To make sense of this paradox, this review article investigates how cycling research engages with the governance of cycling. The review focuses on how cycling mobility is envisioned, approached and described within the change-oriented field of sustainability transitions research. Findings: Through a systematic reading of 25 peer reviewed scientific journal articles, we find that the articles mainly focus on technological objects of change (e-bikes and bikesharing systems); incumbent actors; and established planning and policy measures applied to new contexts. Most studies are evaluative, lacking the forward-looking and change oriented ambition transitions research set out to address. To contribute to increased cycling mobility in urban contexts, we conclude that future cycling research might benefit from adopting more diverse and clear notions of governance objects, actors and measures.

In response to intensifying wildfire seasons, scholars call for new wildfire policy and management approaches. Based on the assumption that science, policy, and management are integrated spheres of meaning-making, this article aims to contribute to reflective and creative research conversations about fire policy and management by directing analytical attention to the role of science. Using Causal Layered Analysis, we unpack scientific representations of three wildfire events/seasons in Sweden, the US, and Australia. The analysis illustrates that scientific representations of wildfires are contextual and promote particular policy recommendations and management interventions. Furthermore, the review identifies a discrepancy between dominant, more simplistic representations and the dynamic and complex representation emerging from an interdisciplinary reading of the literature. To address this discrepancy, we argue that there is a need to continuously renegotiate the boundaries of wildfires through rethinking the process underpinning the scientific representations to account for the complexity inherent in wildfire events.