Forests are vital for sustaining biodiversity, mitigating climate change, and ensuring food security. To name a few examples, they provide wood, food and fuel, increase income and employment, prevent soil erosion, and regulate microclimates and water availability and quality They therefore contribute to the objectives of the EU Bioeconomy and Forest Strategy, as well as the Sustainable Development Goals.

The world’s population is expected to increase to 9.7 billion in 2050, and the demand for food is expected to increase by 56%. By protecting and managing forests responsibly, we not only protect ecosystems and mitigate climate change, but also help the provision of food for our growing population.

Without forests, land degradation and erosion increase, crop yields decline, water becomes scarcer and of poorer quality, and producing enough food for everyone becomes more difficult. Thriving, healthy forests must be at the heart of a sustainable global food system; through sustainable farming practices and forest management, agriculture can work in harmony with nature.

Forests around farms: rooted benefits

The Guidelines on biodiversity-friendly afforestation, reforestation and tree planting underlines the role of agroforestry in agricultural landscapes to preserve biodiversity, control pests, support pollinators, support nutrient and water cycles as well as to sequester carbon, etc.

Crops-poplar-blocust.jpg

Alley cropping system of Poplar (Populus spp.) and Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) in Forst, Northeastern Germany.

In addition, integrating trees into agriculture aligns with the European Green Deal's Farm to Fork Strategy, which aims to increase the proportion of farmland under organic farming to 25%, thereby benefiting agroforestry systems that have the potential to enhance the sustainability of organic farming. But how can trees and forests help?

Approximately 80% of EU crops depend on animal pollination. A study observed that the absence of insect pollination would result in a 25–32% reduction in the total production of pollination-dependent crops. Many of these pollinators inhabit forested areas, highlighting the vital role of forest fragments in preserving the pollinator community and, consequently, food production.

Forests and trees near agricultural areas can support natural predators of crop pests, such as the parasitoids of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) in Brussels sprout crops. So, having more complex landscapes surrounding the agricultural area, including forest fragments, could lower the dependency on pesticides.

Moreover, nitrogen-fixing trees improve soil fertility in agroforestry systems. They enrich the soil with nitrogen, an important nutrient for plant growth, and increase crop productivity.

Trees can also improve the microclimate conditions of crop fields. For instance, an alley-cropping agroforestry system involves planting rows of trees and shrubs on agricultural land. These trees have been shown to modify the microclimate by providing shade, acting as windbreaks, and helping to prevent soil erosion. When well-planned and managed, these changes can enhance crop growth and overall farm productivity.

Forests and agriculture can coexist, and agroforestry can be one solution for food security and production. Due to its combined economic and environmental benefits and potential for diversifying food production, agroforestry has regained interest in Europe. However, the transition to a more sustainable food system that is more resilient to climate change will also depend on how practitioners and policymakers consider the role of trees.

Agroforestry: integrating trees into agriculture

Agroforestry has been a part of Europe’s agricultural history for centuries – and still is, with farmers traditionally integrating trees into their farming landscapes. However, modernisation and the rise of mechanised farming led to a shift from these multi-purpose land-use systems to modern monocultures. Today, we recognise that trees within agricultural landscapes provide essential ecosystem services. These traditional practices, now enhanced with contemporary knowledge and technology, could hold the key to achieving environmental sustainability in food production.

But what exactly is agroforestry?

Shillingford organics, top fruit and vegetables, Devon, the United Kingdom. May 2014.

Shillingford organics, top fruit and vegetables, Devon, the United Kingdom. May 2014.

Agroforestry is the purposeful integration of agriculture and trees. It providesmany ecosystem services and can offer a sustainable way to mitigate and adapt to climate change . Agroforestry involves arranging trees and crops, including livestock, on the same area of land or time arrangement. In Europe, according to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), agroforestry systems are land use systems in which trees are grown in combination with agriculture on the same land. Agroforestry provides many ecosystem services and can offer a sustainable way to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

In Europe, trees are identified as some of the “high-diversity landscape features” of interest to preserve biodiversity and maintain the productivity and resilience of the food system. Therefore, the Nature Restoration Regulation includes a target of reaching satisfactory levels of the share of high-diversity landscape features in agricultural ecosystems.

More than 15 million hectares of land are under agroforestry, which accounts for 3.6% of the territorial area or 8.8% of the agricultural area of Europe . In addition, the most common forms of agroforestry are wood pastures, hedgerows, windbreaks, intercropped and grazed orchards, grazed forests, forest farming, silvopastoral systems, shelterbelts and riparian buffer strips. Some of these were mentioned by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 as pollinator-friendly habitats for pollinators.

Agroforestry systems can help farmers ensure food security, increase income, and contribute to soil health and biodiversity conservation . By diversifying farmers' crop production and income streams, they improve productivity and the livelihood of local rural communities. For example, in France, fodder trees were planted to be grazed by cattle and to provide wood chips, and their shade benefited the animals and strengthened the farm's resilience. In another study, Mediterranean agroforestry systems showed greater financial revenue than conventional agricultural systems.

There is evidence about the benefits of agroforestry systems in the EU, but what else needs to be done to promote agroforestry practices?

Agroforestry in Europe has recently gained some political attention. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the EU Forestry Strategy recognise agroforestry, but they still lack clarity about its implementation and positive externalities. Policies and other incentives should be better aligned to support European agroforestry development, for example, by creating an EU Agroforestry Strategy.

In addition, agroforestry can be labour-intensive compared to conventional agriculture. Subsidies and grants for farmers who adopt agroforestry practices could help overcome these financial constraints.

Research, knowledge exchange, and innovation are vital for promoting agroforestry and empowering European farmers. EU-funded projects such as ReForest, FOREST4EU, DigitAF, AF4EU, AFINET, AGFORWARD, and AGROMIX have been gaining momentum across the continent. These initiatives aim to support agroforestry through various means, including tools to help farmers select the right tree species, cost-benefit analyses to assess the economic viability of agroforestry practices, and the creation of networks and living labs to foster further innovation.

Non-wood forest products: beyond just timber

Forests and trees can offer even more than the examples mentioned previously. They also provide nuts, berries, mushrooms, honey, medicinal herbs, oils, and more, showcasing their diverse potential beyond what is commonly recognised.

Non-wood forest products

Non-wood forest products. Photos from top to bottom and left to right: (1) Cork tree / leongoedhart from Getty Images Signature, (2) blueberry cultivation / Toni Jardon from Getty Images, (3) resin on the tree orchard / Ana-O from Getty Images, (4) chanterelle mushrooms / genlock1 from Getty Images, (5) bottle of essential oil / Madeleine_Steinbach from Getty Images, (6) lavender soap bars / AleksStudio from Canva.

Non-wood (or non-timber) forest products (NWFPs) help foster sustainable livelihoods, healthy diets and lifestyles. For instance, collecting NWFPs encourages people to engage in outdoor activities and promote physical health and connection with nature. NWFPs can play a major role in emerging bio-based economies, providing biological resources that can contribute to the transition to a more sustainable bioeconomy for food and agriculture. Their potential has been recognised by EU-founded projects, such as INCREDIBLE , StarTree and FOREST4EU.

Globally, 3.5–5.76 billion people are expected to use NWFPs. The total economic value of collected NWFPs is 23.3 billion euros yearly more than 80% of which is self-consumed. In Europe, NWFPs total value was just 2.2 billion euros in 2015 and showed only modest growth, reaching 2.8 billion euros in 2020, with the highest share in Central-West Europe. This highlights the importance of NWFPs for livelihood and the untapped potential of NWFPs to contribute more significantly to local economies and global markets.

A successful example can be found in Italy, where a local association promotes chestnut production. This initiative enabled locals to sell high-quality chestnuts and processed products, fostering innovation – such as creating a creamy chestnut liqueur – and boosting regional tourism. Additionally, it contributed to the restoration and preservation of the local landscape.

Promoting sustainable management of NWFPs represents a win-win for landowners, consumers, and the environment. Integrating NWFPs into broader forestry strategies can foster economic, social, and ecological resilience in global challenges like climate change and food insecurity.

Mushrooms, honey, herbs, and wild berries allow landowners to diversify their income streams. These high-quality products are valued for their nutritional and medicinal properties, offering consumers a range of healthy and sustainable alternatives. Finally, the production and trade of NWFPs can alleviate pressure on overexploited resources, contributing to a more balanced and sustainable ecosystem.

Forests and trees help diversify the food system. However, high commercial demand for specific forest products can lead to overharvesting, depletion of wild resources, and negative impacts on biodiversity. Promoting sustainable forest management and regulating harvest rights for NWFPs can help ensure sustainable harvest levels while safeguarding recreational opportunities for hobbyists and professional pickers.

Socio-economic benefits

In the frame of a bioeconomy, developing food-based activities in forests is a way to foster socio-economic well-being and promote wealth redistribution between urban and rural areas in Europe. For example, in sectors like forestry and agriculture, organising small producers into cooperatives can empower them to retain a larger share of the value of their goods. By pooling resources, they can enhance product quality, marketing strategy, and access to broader markets. Furthermore, cooperatives in the bioeconomy contribute to environmental sustainability by encouraging local production, minimising waste, and reducing reliance on imports.

Forest food products have a dual value: besides the goods component, they also have a social value that is captured by the willingness of people to go and pick these products themselves, even if at a higher opportunity cost than buying. A study in the Czech Republic observed that collecting forest berries and mushrooms, beyond the benefit of recreation, even if not marketed, was worth more than 48 euros per hectare of forests for the country's population.

In the rural area of central-northwestern Spain, regional and national governments and the European Union collaborated to promote the management and valorisation of fresh mushrooms. Mycotourism boosted the economy and encouraged the public to engage in mushroom picking and related activities. According to the study, mycotourism attracts approximately 251,000 tourists annually and generates around 32 million euros in income. In addition, it contributes to conserving biological and ecological systems and preserving cultural habitats.

In addition, survey participants from Italy, the Czech Republic, and Sweden expressed a positive attitude towards payments for sustainable forest management practices that support NWFPs. In countries such as the Czech Republic, Sweden, and Poland, collecting NWFPs has emerged as a significant recreational activity. This type of recreation highlights the cultural importance of forests as valuable assets for human physical and mental health.

The recreative component of forest food products translates into the consumption of local services such as food, accommodation services and transport. Consequently, the local economic impact is usually higher than the products' value.

Therefore, there are many ways to improve the current food system, which relies on a small pool of staple crops — trees and forests are one of the solutions. Even though they can be overlooked, trees and forests are essential for sustainable food production. Not only do forests provide crucial ecosystem services to sustain our lives (e.g., berries, mushrooms, clean water), but they also sequester carbon, protect biodiversity, reverse soil depletion, prevent land degradation, and help mitigate and adapt to climate change. Additionally, they offer nutrient-rich foods to nourish us, provide extra income to local families and communities, and are a source of remedies and cultural well-being.

References

  1. Montagnini, F. & Metzel, R. The Contribution of Agroforestry to Sustainable Development Goal 2: End Hunger, Achieve Food Security and Improved Nutrition, and Promote Sustainable Agriculture. In: Montagnini, F. (eds) Integrating Landscapes: Agroforestry for Biodiversity Conservation and Food Sovereignty. Advances in Agroforestry. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69371-2_2
  2. van Dijk, M., Morley, T., Rau, M. L. & Saghai, Y. A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger for the period 2010–2050. Nature Food 2(7), 494–501. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00322-9
  3. Muys, B., Nyssen, J., du Toit, B., Vidale, E., Prokofieva, I., Mavsar, R., & Palahi, M. (2014). Water-related ecosystem services of forests: learning from regional cases. In Forests under pressure: local responses to global issues. International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) Vol. 32, pp. 423-440.
  4. European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, Guidelines on biodiversity-friendly afforestation, reforestation and tree planting, Publications Office of the European Union. (2023a). https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/731
    a b
  5. Rosati, A., Borek, R. & Canali, S. Agroforestry and organic agriculture. Agroforestry Systems 95(5), 805–821. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00559-6
  6. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions revision of the EU pollinators initiative a new deal for pollinators. EUR-Lex. (2023). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM:2023:35:FIN
  7. Zulian, G., Maes, J. & Paracchini, M. L. Linking land cover data and crop yields for mapping and assessment of pollination services in Europe. Land 2(3), 472–492. (2013). https://doi.org/10.3390/land2030472
  8. Proesmans, W., Bonte, D., Smagghe, G., Meeus, I. & Verheyen, K. Importance of forest fragments as pollinator habitat varies with season and guild. Basic and Applied Ecology 34, 95–107. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2018.08.004
  9. Bianchi, F. J. J. A., Goedhart, P. W. & Baveco, J. M. Enhanced pest control in cabbage crops near forest in The Netherlands. Landscape Ecology 23(5), 595–602. (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-008-9219-6
  10. Paredes, D., Rosenheim, J. A., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Winter, S. & Karp, D. S. (2021). Landscape simplification increases vineyard pest outbreaks and insecticide use. Ecology Letters 24(1), 73–83. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13622
  11. Jacobs, S. R., Webber, H., Niether, W., Grahmann, K., Lüttschwager, D., Schwartz, C., Breuer, L. & Bellingrath-Kimura, S. D. Modification of the microclimate and water balance through the integration of trees into temperate cropping systems. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 323. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2022.109065
  12. Augere-Granier, M-L. Agroforestry in the European Union. (2020). Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/651982/EPRS_BRI(2020)651982_EN.pdf
    a b
  13. Lasco, R. D., Delfino, R. J. P. & Espaldon, M. L. O. Agroforestry systems: helping smallholders adapt to climate risks while mitigating climate change. WIREs Climate Change 5(6), 825–833. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.301
  14. IPCC. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report, Summary for Policymakers. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Lee, H. & Romero, J. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. (2023). https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001
  15. FAO. Agroforestry. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved February 10, 2025. (2025). Available at: https://www.fao.org/agroforestry/about-agroforestry/overview/
  16. European Commission. Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. Document 32013R1305. (2013, updated in 2023). http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1305/oj
  17. EU. Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869 (2022/0195(COD)). (2024). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj
  18. den Herder, M., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, R., Palma, J., Sidiropoulou, A., Santiago Freijanes, J. J., Crous-Duran, J., Paulo, J., Tomé, M., Pantera, A., Papanastasis, V., Mantzanas, K., Pachana, P., Papadopoulos, A., Plieninger, T. & Burgess, P. J. Current extent and trends of agroforestry in the EU27. (2016). Available at: https://www.agforward.eu/documents/D1_2_Extent_of_Agroforestry.pdf
    a b
  19. Mosquera-Losada, M. R., Santiago-Freijanes, J. J., Rois-Díaz, M., Moreno, G., den Herder, M., Aldrey-Vázquez, J. A., Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., Pantera, A., Pisanelli, A. & Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A. Agroforestry in Europe: A land management policy tool to combat climate change. Land Use Policy 78, 603–613. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.052
  20. Fagerholm, N., Torralba, M., Burgess, P. J. & Plieninger, T. A systematic map of ecosystem services assessments around European agroforestry. Ecological Indicators 62, 47–65. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.016
  21. den Herder, M., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, R. M., Palma, J. H. N., Sidiropoulou, A., Santiago Freijanes, J. J., Crous-Duran, J., Paulo, J. A., Tomé, M., Pantera, A., Papanastasis, V. P., Mantzanas, K., Pachana, P., Papadopoulos, A., Plieninger, T. & Burgess, P. J. Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 241, 121–132. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.005
  22. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions revision of the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 Bringing nature back into our lives. COM(2020) 380 final. (2020). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0380#footnote32
  23. Novak, S. Fodder trees on dairy farms. Agroforestry Innovation 45. AGFORWARD. (2017). Available at: https://euraf.isa.utl.pt/files/pub/45_fodder_trees_on_dairy_farms.pdf
  24. Kay, S., Graves, A., Palma, J. H. N., Moreno, G., Roces-Díaz, J. v., Aviron, S., Chouvardas, D., Crous-Duran, J., Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., García de Jalón, S., Măcicăşan, V., Mosquera-Losada, M. R., Pantera, A., Santiago-Freijanes, J. J., Szerencsits, E., Torralba, M., Burgess, P. J. & Herzog, F. Agroforestry is paying off – Economic evaluation of ecosystem services in European landscapes with and without agroforestry systems. Ecosystem Services (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100896
  25. Dauby, V., Venn, R., Wright, J., Schumutz, U. & Migliorini, P. Transforming European Food Systems with Agroforestry. (2024). Available at: https://agromixproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/AGROMIX-WHITE-PAPER-24102024.pdf
  26. Martinez de Arano, I., Maltoni, S., Picardo, A. & Mutke, S. Non-wood forest products for people, nature and the green economy. Recommendations for policy priorities in Europe. A white paper based on lessons learned from around the Mediterranean. (Knowledge to Action). European Forest Institute. (2021). https://doi.org/10.36333/k2a05
    a b
  27. Weiss, G., Emery, M. R., Corradini, G. & Živojinović, I. New values of non-wood forest products. Forests 11, 2. (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020165
    a b
  28. Shackleton, C. M. & de Vos, A. How many people globally actually use non-timber forest products? Forest Policy and Economics 135, 102659. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102659
  29. Lovrić, M., da Re, R., Vidale, E., Prokofieva, I., Wong, J., Pettenella, D., Verkerk, P. J. & Mavsar, R. Non-wood forest products in Europe – A quantitative overview. Forest Policy and Economics 116. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102175
  30. Köhl, M., Torres, D.G., Marchetti, M., Tomé, M., de Arano, I.M., Corona, P., Thorsen, J.B., Lasserre, B., Pettenella, D., Zasada, M., Zingg, A. & Weiss, G. Criterion 3: Maintenance and encouragement of productive functions of forests (wood and non-wood). In FOREST EUROPE, 2020: State of Europe’s Forests 2015. (2015). Available at: https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/soef_21_12_2015.pdf
  31. Lanz, A., Marchetti, M., Bosela, M., Lasserre, B., Pettenella, D., Adame, P., Nunes, L., Linser, S. & Päivinen, R. Criterion 3: Maintenance and encouragement of productive functions of forests (wood and non-wood). In FOREST EUROPE, 2020: State of Europe’s Forests 2020. (2020). Available at: https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SoEF_2020.pdf
  32. Prokofieva, I., Lovric, M., Pettenella, D., Weiss, G., Wolfslehner, B. & Wong, J. What is the potential contribution of non-wood forest products to the European forest-based bioeconomy? In Winkel, G. Towards a sustainable European forest-based bioeconomy – assessment and the way forward. European Forest Institute (EFI) 132–140. (2017). Available at: https://efi.int/publications-bank/towards-sustainable-european-forest-based-bioeconomy-assessment-and-way-forward
  33. Sisak, L., Riedl, M. & Dudik, R. Non-market non-timber forest products in the Czech Republic-Their socio-economic effects and trends in forest land use. Land Use Policy 50, 390–398. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.10.006
    a b
  34. Buntgen, U., Latorre, J., Egli, S. & Martinez-Peña, F. Socio-economic, scientific, and political benefits of mycotourism. Ecosphere 8(7). (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1870
  35. di Cori, V., Franceschinis, C., Robert, N., Pettenella, D. M. & Thiene, M. Moral foundations and willingness to pay for non-wood forest products: A study in three European countries. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(23). (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313445
  36. Svanberg, I. & Lindh, H. Mushroom hunting and consumption in twenty-first century post-industrial Sweden. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 15(1). (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-019-0318-z
  37. Jalinik, M., Pawłowicz, T., Borowik, P. & Oszako, T. Mushroom Picking as a Special Form of Recreation and Tourism in Woodland Areas—A Case Study of Poland. Forests 15(3). (2024). https://doi.org/10.3390/f15030573
  38. di Cori, V., Robert, N., Franceschinis, C., Pettenella, D. M. & Thiene, M. Framework Proposal to Quantify the Contribution of Non-Wood Forest Products to the European Union Forest-Based Bioeconomy. Forests. (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/f13030362