Striving for Sustainability CSF Measures in Türkiye's Forest Management

Striving for Sustainability CSF Measures in Türkiye's Forest Management | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Striving for Sustainability CSF Measures in Türkiye's Forest Management Gökçe Gençay, Üstüner Birben This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Forests play a key role in mitigating climate change. They are one of the major sinks for carbon, and the idea of how to use these important resources more efficiently and effectively has led to the emergence of a new trend in forestry in recent years. Climate Smart Forestry (CSF) aims to reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) and seeks to fortify forests against potential climate change consequences in the future while increasing production and incomes sustainably from forests, in line with the main purpose of other climate smart initiatives. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the measures, indicators, and criteria that promote CSF. Following this, the strengths and weaknesses of Türkiye’s forestry legislation and practices were analyzed using the nine criteria derived from academic literature for CSF. Thus, the degree to which Turkish forestry practices and legislation are consistent with the CSF and its reflections were assessed. Analysis shows that the adapting forest to the future has the highest positive coverage in the sense of CSF among the Turkish Forestry legislation and practices. Furthermore, defining and establishing standards for CSF will help establish a framework by which other nations may assess their own progress in this area. Introduction Climate change has been on the international agenda, and scientific studies have proven that it is an environmental problem of global importance. For example, in a study investigating planetary boundaries, which are thought to cause unacceptable and irreversible environmental changes if exceeded (Rockström et al., 2009 ), it was determined that the rate of biodiversity loss, climate change, and human interference with the nitrogen cycle - nine planetary boundaries - had already been exceeded. The number of climate change models is expected to increase significantly in the twenty-first century, suggesting a rise in global warming according to modeling projections (Solomon et al., 2007 ). Furthermore, it is predicted that more intense climatic events and chronic global warming will increase vegetation mortality and decrease forest cover in many locations during this century (McDowell et al., 2008 ). Although existing forests are able to adapt to climate change, it is expected that forests will experience greater tree mortality from drought and heat. However, tree mortality will increase in the coming years, along with productivity declines (McDowell et al., 2008 ), posing significant challenges for managing the benefits of forests and ecosystem services (Allen et al., 2015 ). The majority of these models highlight the importance of worst-case scenarios and projections in alerting scientists and decision-makers to potential future threats (Bellard et al., 2012 ). These findings, as well as the fact that the consequences of climate change have become even more noticeable, have intensified worries for the future and prompted various steps to be implemented (Canadell and Raupach, 2008 ; Coşkun and Gençay, 2011 ), while the value of forests continues to gain importance day by day. Despite the accepted importance of ecosystem services provided by forests, global forest area shrank by 81.7 million hectares over the past 60 years (1960–2019), losing the equivalent of Borneo Island (10% more). This decline is driven by a stark imbalance: forest loss (437.3 million hectares) vastly outpaced forest gain (355.6 million hectares) Estoque et al, 2022 ). Despite these losses, it has been determined that reforestation and afforestation practices in many regions of the world can reduce global warming through carbon sequestration in addition to the maintenance and development of existing forests (Bonan, 2008 ; Gençay, 2020 ). For example, forests store 20–50 times more carbon per hectare than cleared fields, and deforestation may result in the loss of 100–200 MgC/ha (Houghton and Hackler, 1999 ). As a result, changes in land use and practices that might lead to deforestation have a major role in altering the global carbon cycle and potentially contributing to global climate change (Foley et al., 2005 ; Gençay et al., 2018 ). Climate change-related forest disturbances alter the amount of carbon stored in trees and dead wood, as well as its severity, frequency, and volume (Dale et al, 2001 ). Studies show that forests are under pressure from accelerating global climate change, which may pose risks to both forests and forest managers (Keenan, 2015 ), and it’s crucial to understand when and how species interactions will change in order to adapt forest ecosystems to climate change (Forrester, 2014 ). It has been determined that land use changes, which cause deforestation, are driven not just by population increase and poverty, but also by many global influences that change, increase, or weaken local variables, which are also the key determinants of land use change (Lambin et al, 2001 ). With all of these negative developments, it is critical to support policy decision-making processes and forest management throughout the world by researching the causes of potential future climate-related tree deaths before they occur (Allen et al, 2010 ). Climate change adaptation strategies should be part of the risk management component in sustainable forest management plans (Spittlehouse and Stewart, 2003 ). It is believed that attempting to maintain ecosystems sustainably by managing forests using past management strategies will not be enough. New approaches to forest management are required (Linder, 2000 ; Millar et al., 2007 ; Lindner et al, 2014 ; Seidl et al, 2017 ). All these pursuits eventually led to the emergence of the Climate-Smart Forestry (CSF) trend. The term “Climate-Smart Forestry” first appeared in 2008 (Nitschke and Innes, 2008 ) and the concept of CSF was first used in 2015 (Nabuurs et al., 2015 ). CSF's definition was developed on three main thematic areas: 1) mitigation, 2) adaptation, and 3) social dimension, and integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social, and environmental) (CA15226, 2016; Bowditch et al., 2020 ). CSF also aims to create synergies within the forest functions, bioeconomy, biodiversity protection, ecosystem services, and climate change adaptation (Hetemaki et al., 2022). It is believed that the evaluation of these CSFs should be facilitated for CSF to become mainstream in forest policies and forest management in Europe (Nabuurs et al., 2015 ) and to enable rapid transformations (Santopuoli et al., 2020). This is because practical actions are required for the adoption of strategies and techniques to mitigate the effects of climate change (Giongo et al., 2022 ). CSF, which is currently in its early stages, will affect land use policy and economics, including forestry, and has the potential to establish new business models for climate change adaptation and mitigation goals (Yousefpour, 2022 ). Carbon reduction targets are expected to be met by 2050 if adequate strategies are developed in accordance with the CSF’s key objectives (Nabuurs et al., 2017 ). CSF has been briefly defined in the literature as the ability of forest management to both adapt to and mitigate climate change (Yousefpour, 2022 ). The crucial question in realizing this promise is how to maximize the ability of forests to reduce carbon emissions while also making forests climate change-adaptive (Hanewinkel et al, 2022 ). However, it remains unclear how increased CO2 and temperature will impact the potential to further mitigate climate change as there are no long-term projections of how they will affect tree growth (Yousefpour et al, 2012 ). According to the FAO report (2022), cleared, overused, degraded, and generally improperly managed forests contribute to climate change negatively, but most of the experience in strengthening forest adaptation capacity in the face of climate change has been gained through afforestation and agroforestry. Indeed, there is a growing consensus that the most broad and rapid effect of forests, which provide several advantages in combating climate change, may be achieved by maintaining and storing carbon in forests (Kauppi et al, 2018 ). Since forests are already under strain from global climate change, rising temperatures and vapor pressure deficits expose them to greater drought and heat stress worldwide (Leuschner et al, 2022 ). Therefore, there is a need for enhanced forest management that allows forests to improve their stress resilience and adaptive capacity to deal with all these challenges (Ammer et al, 2018 ). It is expected that CSF will help to strengthen this ability and create new adaptation techniques. The CSF, which is still in its early stages, is viewed as an emerging branch of sustainable forest management based on European forest criteria and indicators (Kasanin and Burton, 2021; Bowditch et al, 2020 ). In addition, it is emphasized that regional characteristics, ecosystems, and socio-economic conditions will be taken into account in the CSF. In fact, CSF attempts to promote forest ecosystem services by considering social and regional factors while also bringing long-term benefits to the community (Brnkalakova et al, 2021 ), just like the commitment of "taking into account the different capacities of the parties" placed by the Paris Agreement, which has an important role in climate change mitigation and adaptation (Gençay et al, 2019). CSF has quickly become a popular topic in politics and industry in the US, as well as in Europe. The United States Department of Agriculture was so supportive of the Climate-Smart Farming (CSF) initiative that they provided financial backing and officially incorporated it into their policy in early 2022. This commitment was highlighted when the USDA announced a substantial USD 1 billion program known as 'Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities' (Shephard et al., 2022 ). As a result, policies and practices supporting CSF aims and objectives have begun to spread around the globe. Depending on various factors, such as the socio-ecological and technological framework, the impacts of climate change, and cultural aspects, CSF measures, practices, and applications may differ from region to region and from country to country. For CSF to be successful, a balance must be achieved between these factors (Verkerk et al., 2020 ). For these reasons, in the CSF, it is suggested that measures to reduce carbon emissions should be created while taking into consideration regional or national factors (Nabuurs et al, 2018). In fact, it is true that most measures compatible with CSF are mostly compatible with the criteria and indicators of Sustainable Forest Management SFM, and CSF also fills the gaps in terms of shortcomings and problematic parts of SFM (Weatherall et al, 2022 ). After examining examples of measurements, techniques, indicators, and criteria that support CSF worldwide, we have identified the following primary categories that characterize and explain CSF. Previous research studies were evaluated under each category. Additionally, we attempted to analyze and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Turkish forestry against CSF, considering geographical variances. Materials and Methods The study is primarily based on the verbal analysis method. The verbal analysis method is an approach used by researchers to understand, interpret, and decipher textual data with the goal of comprehending the embedded meanings. This method typically involves a partially or entirely qualitative approach and focuses on the in-depth examination of written, oral, or visual data. Researchers engage in a careful reading of texts to identify specific themes, patterns, and elements of meaning. Verbal analysis centers on exploring participants' emotions, experiences, and perspectives by delving into the content of the data. Commonly employed in qualitative research, this method aims to develop an understanding of participants' feelings, experiences, and viewpoints, providing researchers with an opportunity to gain profound insights (Milesand Huberman, 1994; Bryman, 2016 ). Therefore, initially, publications related to CSF in the international literature were reviewed. As a result, it was determined that CSF is built on three components that reinforce each other and focus on the objective (Bowditch et al., 2020 ; Verkerk et al., 2020 ): 1- Adaptation, 2- Mitigation, 3- Social Dimension. Then, nine criteria (indicators) that affect the main objectives of CSF were identified and discussed through examples from different countries, and these findings are presented in the first part of the findings section. Subsequently, the inclusion levels of these indicators in Türkiye’s national environmental and forestry legislation; policies, and governance documents (national development plans, strategy documents, action plans, council decisions) were investigated. Ultimately, Table 1 evaluates the alignment of CSF objectives with indicators at the national scale in Türkiye. If the indicators necessary to achieve the objectives were identified at a positive and sufficient level, a positive value was assigned. Conversely, if there was insufficient or negative regulation, a negative value was assigned. Lastly, the positive and negative outcomes of the indicators that fulfill the objectives were examined. For each indicator, if regulations were identified that fulfill all three objectives, they were categorized as Strengths. If they fulfill two objectives, they were categorized as areas for Opportunities in regulation. If they fulfill only one objective, they were categorized as Weaknesses aspects in regulation. Finally, regulations that do not fulfill any of the objectives were categorized as Threats. Additionally, in the results and recommendations section, the adequacy of each objective in relation to the indicators was also analyzed. Findings Climate-smart forestry and the situation in Türkiye The Mediterranean basin, including Türkiye, is defined as one of the most sensitive regions to the negative effects of climate change, and it has begun to be affected by the negative aspects of global warming, especially the decrease in water resources and desertification and ecological deterioration due to these (URL 1). Türkiye always consistently follows the latest developments in the fight against climate change. It participates in international meetings, becomes a party to conventions and gives due importance to mitigating climate change in national management plans and legislative changes. Many obligations were accepted by Türkiye at the Stockholm + 50 Conference in 2022 on the fight against climate change, and suggestions were made such as the necessity of strengthening national environmental legislation and practices (Türkeş, 2022 ). In this context, the most important political and administrative change in Türkiye is the establishment of the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change and its affiliated the Presidency of Climate Change (October 29, 2021). The Presidency, which is responsible for determining policies, strategies and actions at the national and international level, conducting negotiation processes and ensuring coordination with institutions and organizations within the scope of Türkiye’s efforts to combat and adapt to climate change. It is in charge of carrying out all kinds of work necessary for mitigation and raising awareness of climate change with a human and nature-friendly approach to all segments of the society (URL 2). There has not been a practices or policies’ directly targeting CSF in Türkiye yet, policies in line with the objectives of SFM are implemented and forestry studies are carried out since 1937. For this reason, Sustainable Forest Management criteria were used while evaluating the indicators of CSF. The policies, strategies, legal and administrative legislation created within the scope of mitigating climate change, and the final reports of the commissions/management branches on the subject are examined; the extent to which the measures developed and taken to mitigate climate change comply with the objectives of CSF has been analyzed comparatively in the case of Türkiye in Table 1. The criteria influencing the three pillars of CSF (reduce carbon emissions, adaptation, social dimension) were examined within the framework of Turkish Forestry Legislation and policy documents. Subsequently, the existence and adequacy levels of these criteria and the elements identified as sub-indicators were presented in Table 1, with a positive (+) assessment. Table 1: The current situation in Türkiye regarding CSF indicators Indicators * of CSF A. Reduce carbon emissions Adaptation Social dimension Afforestation + + + Improvement of forest genetic resources - + - Change in species selection - + - Wood and firewood substitute - - - Reducing deforestation + + - Promotion of new technologies + + - Socio-economic influence - + + Updating policy and management plans + + + Fragmentation of forest property (none) + + + *Sub indicators: Reduce carbon emissions ( increase carbon sequestration, reduce carbon-emitting production), Adaptation ( adapting forests to the future, enhancing resilience), Social dimension ( participation and incentives, land use, access to technology, uninterrupted ecosystem services). In Türkiye, as 99.9% of forests are owned by the State, research and development activities related to forests and their implementation are carried out on state-owned forests. In this regard, the OGM, as a government agency, has been collaborating with numerous organizations in recent years to carry out pilot projects and research on climate change adaptation and GHG. These efforts aim to ensure that forests can effectively adapt to climate change (ÇMUSEP, 2019 ). 1- Afforestation and Reforestation Increasing the amount of forestlands, which serve as significant carbon sinks in the battle against climate change, has long been a goal. International agreements have emphasized the positive impact of afforestation on climate change, leading to intensified afforestation initiatives in practice. Afforestation projects are the most well-managed "artificial" forestry initiatives for carbon sequestration, with high potential for both carbon sequestration and economic gain (Reyer et al., 2009 ). Zomer et al. ( 2008 ) found that terrestrial ecosystems have significant potential for carbon sequestration through afforestation and reforestation. Some studies have noted the potential for afforesting abandoned agricultural lands with suitable tree species to expand forest areas (Nabuurs et al., 2017 ). Additionally, creating forested areas can improve water quality (Yousefpour, 2022 ). In Scotland, where afforestation is a key policy priority against climate change, carbon sequestration capacities provided by afforestation and peatland restoration have been evaluated. However, using simple targets (e.g., planted trees) as key progress indicators can be misleading and potentially result in policy failure (Brown, 2020 ). According to studies conducted in this context, afforestation and reforestation initiatives are emphasized globally. However, all variables, such as land and species selection, seed and seedling quality, and socioeconomic purposes, should be taken into account to increase success and provide maximum benefit (Le et al., 2012 ). When the Turkish forestry legislation is examined, it is observed that the Forest Law No. 6831 dated 1956 includes regulations on the importance of afforestation and reforestation and the areas where they will be carried out, but topics such as climate change, carbon reduction and adaptation are not addressed. In addition to the relevant main law, the National Afforestation and Erosion Control Mobilization Law, which came into effect in 1995, also aims to increase forest areas and tree wealth, but is not related to climate change. However, it is seen that the social dimension of afforestation is supported in both laws in terms of providing benefits to society and encouraging it. At the Sustainable Forest Management Working Group report, in addition to legal regulations, it was determined that the main strength is maximizing the benefits from a unit area and afforestation, but there are some shortcomings (due to the absence of any regulation related to climate change adaptation in legal frameworks concerning Turkish forestry, this issue has been identified as a weakness) in the current forestry legislation regarding climate change and adaptation. From a social dimension, however, leaving buffer areas in afforestation activities, especially around forest villages, has been a positive incentive for plantation of walnut, almond, chestnut, lime, stone pine, pistachio, wild olive, carob, or rapidly growing species such as poplar, acacia, eucalyptus, etc. that produce non-wood products to the extent that growing conditions allow and that the local people want to plant. These areas are subject to private afforestation (SOY Report, 2019 ). In Türkiye's Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011–2023), it was decided to integrate afforestation activities carried out within the scope of a nationwide campaign with efforts to adapt to climate change. Similarly, the plan specifies that afforestation activities and related research within the scope of forest fire fighting will be planned and sustained in consideration of changing climate conditions. This makes it possible to say that the afforestation process is evolving towards CSF (TİDUSEP, 2012 ). 2- Using genetically improved tree species Managing genetic diversity is crucial for increasing the resilience of forest ecosystems to climate change (Vinceti et al., 2020 ; FAO, 2022 ). The selection of species and origins is seen as region-specific measures (Nabuurs et al., 2015 ). Although it has been emphasized that local seed resources are used to minimize the possibility of incompatibility and promote adaptation in many regions of Europe, this is not sufficient to increase adaptation in the fight against climate change, and more focus should be placed on increasing the genetic diversity of the seed source (Hazarika et al., 2021 ). However, there are gaps in knowledge and education on this topic, and it has not yet attracted international attention. Phenotypic variety, the intensity of selection, fertility, interspecies competition, and biotic interactions are among the numerous factors that determine how well tree species adapt to climate change (Aitken et al., 2008 ). Therefore, it is essential to take a series of measures, from legislative regulation to accelerating the detection of adaptation potentials for the use of genetically improved tree resources. In Türkiye, research and implementation studies related to the improvement of forest trees, conservation of forest genetic resources, and seed quality control are carried out by the General Directorate of Forestry. Genetic improvement and biotechnology studies are conducted on forest trees to establish forests with high productivity in terms of growth rate and wood quality. In-situ and ex-situ conservation of forest genetic resources is also provided, and activities related to quality control and certification of forest tree seeds and seed production technology are carried out. Education and research activities on these issues have been conducted for many years (İDOSOYÜE, 2021 ). In this context, it is seen that one of the goals listed under the title “Conservation of Biological Diversity and Genetic Resources of Forests” in the “Strategic Plan for Climate Change Adaptation in Forestry” prepared by OGM in 2020 is to “obtain improved seed material by considering current and future climate conditions”. Therefore, it is possible to say that there are genetic resource improvement studies in Türkiye aimed at adapting to the negative effects of climate change (İDOSOYÜE, 2021 ). Within the scope of the National Biodiversity Action Plan (2007–2023), some goals related to climate change and genetic resources have been set. According to this action plan, it is aimed to determine the effects of climate change on biological diversity, monitor these effects, and take necessary measures to protect ecosystems and species that may be negatively affected. Another article in the same plan, which aims to protect biological diversity against climate change, includes “identifying species that are at risk of extinction according to different climate change scenarios such as temperature increase and precipitation change and collecting their seeds to protect them in gene banks”. Therefore, it is possible to say that there are genetic resource improvement efforts in Türkiye aimed at adapting to the negative effects of climate change (SOY Report, 2019 ). 3- Increasing biodiversity, changing species selection and conservation Adaptation strategies in forestry are urgently needed since trees regenerating in forest stands today will have to endure drastically changing climatic conditions during their lifetime (Kolström et al, 2011 ). These changes will not only affect tree growth but also mortality rates and competitive relationships between species. FAO's CSF report highlights the importance of adapting forests to future challenging climatic conditions and increasing their resilience against extreme weather events (FAO, 2022 ). For instance, the vulnerability of northern forests in Sweden to climate change was exposed by major forest fires in 2014 and 2018, underscoring the need for protective measures such as species changes (Kauppi et al, 2018 ). The increase in disasters such as drought, fire, insect epidemics, strong wind, excessive precipitation, and floods further reveals the necessity of forest protection. Higher species diversity can significantly increase the resilience of approximately half of global forests to drought, which is one of the most common factors that can significantly reduce forest growth (Isbel et al, 2015; Liu et al, 2022 ). According to a study, regional forest fires will increase and have the potential to overshadow the direct effects of climate change on species distribution and migration, with the severity of fire seasons estimated to increase between 10% and 50% in the middle of the next century in the United States (Flannigan et al, 2020). A study examining the eight possible effects of climate change on forests (drought, insect and pathogen outbreaks, introduced species, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, and landslides) reveals that each effect may interact with each other, highlighting the need for additional research and new methods on the subject (Dale et al, 2001 ). In afforestation projects in Türkiye, the main goal is to reforest and maximize the benefits from a unit area. It has been determined that there is no legal regulation in Türkiye regarding the increase of biodiversity and support for changes in species selection in the fight against climate change. However, in the Forestry Working Group Report of Türkiye’s latest development plan (2019–2023), it is stated that planting drought-resistant tree species should be encouraged and various studies should be conducted to understand their ecosystem-level effects. It is also emphasized that scientific studies on the impact of climate change on forests should be supported and adaptation proposals should be implemented (OOÜCGR, 2018 ). According to the Desertification Combat Action Plan prepared by the OGM, “various actions and projects are planned to be carried out in Türkiye to determine and increase the adaptation capacity of forests to climate change and to measure the reactions of species to drought stress” (ÇMUSEP, 2019 ). In one of these projects, the effects of climate change on selected species were evaluated and adaptation strategies were developed in Konya region through a project to increase the resilience of the Mediterranean forest ecosystem and thus increase its capacity to withstand and adapt to changing climate conditions. The results have been integrated into the forest management plans in the region (İDOSOYÜE, 2021 ). In another project carried out by the OGM, the expected climatic changes in the next 20–80 years in the distribution areas of the main forest types in the Seyhan Basin, located within the Mediterranean forest ecosystem, were evaluated through modeling. As a result, it is predicted that areas where conditions will worsen for red pine: in the 2050s, 56.2% of the current red pine forests will no longer be suitable for red pine. Areas where conditions will worsen for black pine: in the 2050s, it is predicted that 68.5% of the current black pine forests will no longer be suitable for black pine. Areas where conditions will worsen for fir: by the year 2050, it is predicted that 85.7% of the current fir forests will no longer be suitable for fir. Areas where conditions will worsen for cedar: it is expected that the suitability of living areas will decrease in 93.1% of the current cedar forests (Zeydanlı et al, 2010). The predicted loss rates indicate that serious losses will occur. Similar studies have identified the insufficient scientific research on the adaptation of Türkiye’s native forest tree species to climate change as a weak point in terms of the CSF (SOY Report, 2019 ). 4- Providing wood and firewood substitution The use of wood-based products from sustainably managed forests to replace energy-intensive materials like concrete, aluminum, and steel is widely recognized as a significant strategy for reducing fossil energy use and mitigating climate change (Semelsberger et al, 2006 ; Gustavsson et al., 2017 ). A study that considered variables like wood product types, substitute materials, geographical regions, methodological techniques, and assumptions found a consensus that wood product substitution reduces greenhouse gas emissions (Sathre & O’Connor, 2010 ). Another study found that using wood instead of concrete in construction significantly reduced net CO2 emissions for a reinforced concrete structure compared to a wooden building (Gustavsson et al, 2006 ). Furthermore, sustainably managed forests can provide an alternative to fossil fuels. Replacing large areas of coppice forests previously used for firewood production with renewable and more productive mixed forests can create additional stands (Nabuurs et al, 2017 ). According to the CSF economy, the need to use wood substitute products is indisputable in evaluating measures (Clay and Cooper, 2022 ). It is believed that using wood products can reduce future atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration in the construction sector (Howard et al, 2021 ), and replacing fossil fuels with renewable carbon-neutral alternatives such as bioenergy is also important (Rittmann, 2008 ). However, some studies suggest that replacing forests for wood production may reduce their carbon absorption potential (Hanewinkel et al, 2022 ). There is no national regulation in Türkiye regarding the use of firewood instead of wood product substitution and petroleum-based products, which has been brought to the agenda with the CSF trend for mitigating climate change. However, in the Forest Law, the supply of firewood and timber to forest villagers has been defined, but it has not been associated with climate change. According to the law, forest villagers living in villages within the productive forests are given firewood for once for their needs, such as home, barn, hayloft, granary, and coop, provided that they have lived in the village continuously for at least five years and are in need. This regulation indirectly encourages forest villagers to use wood products. However, the main purpose was not to mitigate climate change but to contribute to the livelihoods of forest villagers.In other reports and documents related to wood and fuelwood substitution, no regulation or decision has been found apart from the Forest legislation. 5- To halt deforestation Reducing and preventing deforestation is seen as the most important factor in slowing down global climate change. The very existence of forests is an essential element in climate change mitigation. As a result, just as afforestation and restoring degraded forest areas are deemed essential, actions to halt or avoid deforestation will also help to forest preservation. For instance, it is believed that steps to avoid or reduce deforestation caused by changes in land use, as well as to prevent forest fires and other types of forest offenses, will be beneficial. In addition to these, it is considered necessary to determine the potential rates of climate-related tree deaths that may cause deforestation and to support good forestry management practices (Allen et al, 2010 ). Reduced deforestation is one of CFS's primary objectives. For this reason, preventing deforestation is crucial for optimizing benefits and forest resilience for climate change. The emphasis is on preventing commercial timber harvesting, reforestation, afforestation, and capacity development in Europe where deforestation and forest damage are illegal (Kauppi et al, 2018 ). There is no direct regulation in the main legislation regarding the halting deforestation associated with climate change. However, action plans or projects aimed at reducing natural or artificial factors causing deforestation have been identified. In light of the expected climate change in the future, which is expected to lead to longer and more severe periods of heat and drought in Türkiye; the increase in the frequency, extent, and duration of forest fires has been considered in the “Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011–2023)” for the protection of forests against fires. It is recognized that additional measures need to be taken to address these challenges and mitigate the impacts of climate change on forest fires. Additionally, according to this plan, in order to combat wildfires more effectively, silvicultural practices in forests will be intensified, starting from sensitive areas to forest fires, and protection activities, including building fire-resistant forests and fire safety strips, will be expanded. The necessary risk preparation and prevention measures for forest fires caused by effects of climate change will be included in local or regional planning studies. (TİDUSEP, 2012 ). There are some negative legal and administrative regulations that contribute to deforestation in addition to positive efforts to reduce deforestation. One of these is non-forestry activities permitted in forest areas, which lead to deforestation by losing the forest characteristics of permitted areas, and have a negative impact on climate change. For instance, mining activities allowed in forest areas are regulated under Article 16 of the Forest Law, requiring restoration of the area after the expiration of the permit. However, it is observed that successful practices are not reported in practice (Gençay ve Durkaya, 2023). Another negative regulation that causes deforestation is the 2nd article of the Forest Law, which allows areas that have lost their forest characteristics and cannot be reforested to be removed from the forest boundaries. Since its first implementation, approximately more than 500.000 ha of forestlands can no longer be considered as forests due to this legal regulation. Although this figure represents a significant area, the practice still continues (Gençay et al, 2018 ). 6- Using technologies for Climate Change Mitigation Accelerating the development of new low-carbon technologies and promoting their global application are key challenges for offsetting atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Dechezleprêtre et al, 2011 ). Various studies and models are needed in CSF to forecast/predict/project forest resilience, prepare forests for climate change, and improve their future CO2 reduction potential. One of the requirements of CSF was the necessity of using and sharing new technologies, which was also stated in the Paris agreement. The application of new technologies, such as on-site sensor tracking, has been regarded as an essential move toward increased forest productivity and tree growth (Torresan et al, 2022). New technological innovations that adapt to a warming climate offer an opportunity to build resilience to the effects of climate change in the future, especially because of the significant challenges posed by climate variability (Adenle et al, 2015 ). For instance, it has been claimed that new technologies, such as alternative fuels for vehicles, can be used to reduce reliance on oil, which has a significant effect on climate change, but these won't be the only answer (Chapman, 2007 ). It can be seen that there is a lack of regulation in the Turkish national forest legislation to encourage new technologies aimed at reducing the effects of climate change, which is also required by the Paris Agreement. Although there is a general encouragement of technology, there is no direct regulation that will reduce climate change and can be considered within the scope of climate-smart forestry. However, there are indirect suggestions in action plans and projects, such as establishing a monitoring system that will facilitate and guide combatting forest damages and integrating it into the Forest Inventory and Monitoring System, developing new methods and techniques to increase effectiveness in combating diseases and insect damage. Although climate change studies are not directly mentioned in the Development Plans, more emphasis is given on "reduction" and supporting R&D activities for relevant sectors such as industry and energy. In addition, one of the goals in Türkiye’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011–2023) is to “develop the necessary infrastructure for R&D studies that will provide significant benefits in predicting the effects of climate change in Türkiye” (TİDUSEP, 2012 ). 7- Strengthening and Enhancing socio-economic impacts The social dimension, identified as one of the core pillars of CSF, is a fresh look at the problem, but deserves more attention (Weatherall et al, 2022 ). While no one can escape the effects of climate change, it has been observed that some social groups experience greater resource loss and greater impacts on livelihoods and cultural identity than others (Thomas et al, 2019 ). It is particularly important to empower vulnerable groups in the face of climate change, as climate change has different impacts on residents and disproportionately affects individuals and groups with scarce resources or socially isolated (Gasper et al, 2011 ). For example, intensive afforestation in Iceland in the last 30 years has set an example for the development of a new incentive tool with the participation of local farmers (Brnkalakova, et al, 2021 ). Studies such as determining socio-economic conditions and making social risk analysis, which are an important criterion supporting CSF, were determined as the least studied (1%) part in climate change studies (Yousefpour et al, 2012 ). For this reason, it is necessary to strengthen its effect by conducting more studies on this subject. In Türkiye, the action plan for rural development includes taking into account climate change adaptation activities to support the socio-economic development of forest villagers. For example, the effective participation, awareness, and education of local people in conservation activities can make a positive contribution. The Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan of Türkiye has set goals for educating forest villagers about the importance of protecting forests and how to conserve energy and improve insulation, particularly through educating women and villagers (TİDUSEP, 2012 ).. Similarly, one of the goals of the Climate Change Adaptation Strategic Plan in Forestry is to develop programs to prevent the negative effects of climate change on the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities in forestlands. To achieve this goal, a list of actions has been proposed (OİDUSP, 2020 ): A framework methodology that assesses the vulnerability of people who rely on forests for their livelihoods to climate change risks, identifies their needs, and prioritizes actions accordingly should be adopted. In order to reduce social pressure on forests, it is necessary to define adaptation measures to climate change to increase the adaptive capacity, livelihoods, and income-generating activities of people who depend on forests for their livelihoods. Increasing support for research on how the impacts of climate change on natural resources will affect society. Implementation of capacity building and awareness-raising activities on employment opportunities and livelihoods. Preparation of a sector workforce report focusing on the potential impacts of climate change on forest villagers and workers (reforestation, production, etc.) Supporting people who rely on forests for their livelihoods through economic incentives and alternative income sources. In addition to these, in Türkiye, there is a shortage of workforce in all forestry activities due to continuous migration from forest villages and their surroundings, and the lack of a database on local forest labor potential is considered a weak point in terms of sustainable forest management (SOY Report, 2019 ). 8- Updating policy and management plans The ability of the above-mentioned criteria to contribute to the mitigating climate change depends on integrating these criteria into forest management plans and putting them into practice. For this reason, the importance and realization possibilities of each criterion that can contribute to CSF should be carefully evaluated and the policy and management plans should be revised according to the results of this evaluation and updated when necessary. If not, none of these studies will go beyond a simple determination and will not contribute to the forestry practices. However, the success of sustainable forest management has been seen as dependent on the inclusion of risk and uncertainty in long-term planning (Nitschke and Innes, 2008 ), highlighting the need for more practical actions to adopt climate change mitigation strategies and techniques (Giongo et al, 2022 ). What is desired and expected from the forest managers is to achieve simultaneous goals such as preparing the forests for a future compatible with climate change mitigation and benefiting from them at the best possible multi-purpose/use level. This can be considered as a difficulty but important threshold of CSF on the way to success. It is critical for decision-makers in charge of forest management and governance to realize that they must make long-term management choices while there is still considerable uncertainty in their thinking about the effects of climate change. However, it is still difficult to convince/advise forest decision makers on the planning of measures related to climate change impacts (Lindner et al, 2014 ). After the increase in awareness about climate change, many observations, measures, plans, and agreements have been made until today. In this context, it is clear that policy and management plans should be kept up to date to facilitate adaptation to changing conditions and to ensure better processes and more effective results. The main policies and measures that stand out in the fight against climate change in Türkiye focus on the energy, transportation, industrial operations, agriculture, waste, and forestry sectors (TÇDR, 2020 ). When it comes to climate change regulations based on the Climate Change Strategy Paper, it is possible to say that there are legal shortcomings, but it is seen that administrative regulations such as action plans, strategic plans, and management plans follow the current situation and developments on the subject and implement changes accordingly. Furthermore, it has been identified as a strength that the OGM has a plan that directly and indirectly includes climate change strategies in the national SFM (SOY Report, 2019 ) Another important finding is the inclusion of the objective “to develop long-term and effective research programs and analyses in the field of climate adaptation” under the “supporting research and analysis in climate change adaptation” strategy in the “Strategic Plan for Climate Change Adaptation in Forestry” prepared in 2020. Such regulations included in these plans indicate a positive situation in terms of keeping policy and management plans up to date. 9- Reducing fragmentation of forest property Fragmentation of forestlands is seen as a problem that makes management challenging when trying to find methods to reduce or halt the effects of climate change around the globe. In the United States, for example, there has been increasing concern as larger tracts of forestlands are divided and sold, thus, forests become more fragmented and management becomes more difficult and less coordinated across the land (Dedrick et al, 2000 ). The situation is similar in European forests as well. Fragmentation of forest property has been seen as a negative situation for policy makers and forest management (Nabuuers et al, 2015), and in a study reported by many European countries, fragmentation of forest property was accepted as a negative factor in sustainable forest management (Hirsch, & Schmithüsen, 2010 ). In addition to that, the forest property fragmentation and the passive management of some private forest owners are also considered as restraining the wood supply (Petucco et al, 2015 ). It is obvious that there is a need for policies to prevent forest property fragmentation, which we can consider as a negative situation within the scope of CSF. The fragmentation of forest ownership has been identified as an undesired negative situation in the fight against climate change. In Türkiye, 99.9% of forest areas are owned by the State, and this ownership right cannot be transferred according to the 1982 Turkish Constitution. This situation is seen as an important and effective protection method. In this context, concerns about ownership fragmentation are invalid for Türkiye. Thus, this situation does not create a negative situation for Turkish forestry. On the contrary, the fact that state forest ownership cannot be transferred and is managed by the state creates a positive situation. In fact, it is stated in the Turkish Constitution that the supervision and control of the remaining forest areas (0.01% private forests and forests owned by public institutions) will also be carried out by the State. Since this indicator is not current, a positive value has been assigned in the assessment table, indicating that its absence contributes positively to CSF in the case of Türkiye. Conclusion Climate change is expected to have significant social, economic, and environmental impacts on terrestrial ecosystems that will be particularly felt in human settlements. These impacts may include flooding, reduced drinking water supply, erosion, decreased wood production, and the threat of intense forest fires that could change the traditional way of life of forest communities. Therefore, it is thought that the effects of climate change will be particularly pronounced for forest dwellers, just as they will be felt by all segments of society. Despite the lack of any legal regulation in the legislation, it is apparent that there are some objectives in strategic plans, action plans, and similar arrangements. The desire for a more effective utilization of forests, which is considered as an important tool in combating with this problem, has led to the emergence of the concept of Climate-Smart Forestry (CSF) in recent years. CSF consists of three fundamental elements: mitigation, adaptation, and social dimension. The intersection of these three elements forms the essence of CSF. In other words, forests should not only contribute to carbon reduction in the fight against climate change but also adapt to the changing climate, while minimizing the potential harm caused by climate change to forest-dependent communities. It is believed that this approach will maximize the benefits obtained from forests. Our study began with the identification of indicators representing these three fundamental elements as follow: Afforestation, genetic resource improvement, Change in species selection, substitution of wood and fuelwood, Reducing deforestation, promotion of new technologies, Socio-economic influence, Updating policy and management plans, fragmentation of forest property. The success of these indicators in terms of their inclusion and implementation at the legal and administrative levels in Türkiye is detailed in the findings section. Based on the evaluation, indicators that fulfill all three elements of CSF are categorized as Strengths, indicators that fulfill two elements are categorized as capable of Opportunities, indicators that fulfill only one element are categorized as Weaknesses, and indicators that fulfill none of the elements are categorized as Threats. Table 2 Evaluation of CSF indicators Strengths (+ + +) Afforestation Updating policy and management plans Fragmentation of forest property Opportunities (- + + ) Reducing deforestation Promoting new technologies Enhancing socio-economic impact Weaknesses (+ - - ) Genetic resource improvement Change in species selection Threats (- - - ) Substitution of wood and fuelwood When Table 2 is evaluated, the indicators of Reforestation, Updating policy and management plans and Fragmentation of forest property have been identified as the strongest aspects of Turkish forestry in terms of CSF. Türkiye has been engaged in intensive efforts in reforestation for many years, and according to the data from the General Directorate of Forestry, it can be observed that reforestation rates and the overall forest area have been consistently increasing (OGM, 2020). Türkiye is an active member of international processes related to forestry rand climate change, and actively participates in all negotiations conducted within the framework of the United Nations, striving to implement the decisions taken in these negotiations (SOY Report, 2019 ). In this context, one of the primary strengths is the updating of forestry policies and management plans according to new conditions and becoming a party to relevant agreements. Another strength is the absence of fragmentation in forest ownership. In Türkiye, most of the forest ownership belongs to the state and is not transferred. Since any negative occurrence in this regard is unlikely, all three factors have been evaluated positively. As opportunities, three indicators have been identified: Reducing deforestation, promoting new technologies, and enhancing socio-economic impact. Among these, reducing deforestation has been seen as inadequate from a social perspective. In other words, no specific regulation has been identified to prevent deforestation in order to support the social dimension. On the contrary, it has been observed that certain activities aimed at supporting the social dimension could contribute to deforestation. Examples of non-forestry activities permitted within forest areas include mining operations and the construction of educational and healthcare facilities. While these activities may serve the public interest, they can also cause to deforestation. Another example, which is a specific situation to Türkiye, is the allocation of areas that have lost or been deprived of their forest characteristics and taken outside the boundaries of forests for agricultural, livestock, or settlement purposes (Gençay et al, 2018 ). Therefore, there is a need for regulations that will enable certain activities to reduce deforestation, especially those that will enhance the socioeconomic wealth of the community. For example, intensive afforestation efforts have been carried out in Iceland in the last 30 years to promote local farmers for the sustainable and climate-smart forestry (Brnkalakova et al., 2021 ). There is also private afforestation incentive in Türkiye (Gençay, 2020 ), but it does not include supporting the public in the changing climate conditions as an element of the CSF's social dimension. Afforestation incentives in Türkiye mostly focus on financially profitable species and projects. It has been determined that the promotion of new technology is also insufficient in the social dimension. However, it is noteworthy that in 2023, administrative regulations promoting the installation of solar energy systems within unproductive forest areas and clearings have come into effect. In this context, it is possible to say that technology promotion is an indicator with potential for development. It is understood that there is insufficient attention given to the socio-economic impact, which is the latest indicator in this group, worldwide. Therefore, new studies and implementations are needed in this field. If only one of the criteria determined for the CSF is considered, it can be said that the elements of genetic resource improvement and species selection change are seen as positive only in terms of adapting forests to the future. It has been observed that there is no provision in the legislation to address the efforts required to prevent a decrease in the living standards of the people who will be most affected by climate change, whether through improving genetic resources or making species selection changes. However, it is evident that when genetic resources are enhanced and species are altered, all three elements will experience positive effects. In other words, even without a specific written goal or strategy, the implementation of the adaptation element will complement the other aspects. Finally, the indicator of substitution of wood and fuelwood is not yet included in the legislation in Türkiye. This issue should be considered as a weak aspect from the perspective of the CSF. For example, in Ireland, wood substitution is considered a key factor that would contribute to significant emission reduction in the next 50 years (Nabuurs et al., 2018). In the case of Germany, an increase in forest areas and emission reduction is expected with the use of biofuels (Hanewinkel et al., 2022 ). When examining the goals of the CSF, it is clear that the element of adapting forests to the future holds the highest positive value. This is of great importance and value because starting work today and achieving successful results in adapting forests to the future would be a significant achievement in the battle against climate change in the coming years. In other words, the successful implementation of the adaptation process ensures sustainable forestry and establishes a favorable foundation for the realization of other elements. If forests cannot be effectively passed down to future generations within the framework of SFM, neither the goals of carbon reduction nor the objectives of improving socio-economic power through forest resources can be accomplished. In this regard, it is a positive finding that Türkiye fulfills many indicators, which is the most crucial aspect. In conclusion, it is possible to say that Türkiye’s Forestry legislation plays an effective role in combating climate change, but it can meet all the expectations/objectives of the CSF if its inadequate or weak elements are improved. Based on these findings, there is a need in the forestry sector to strengthen measures for adapting to climate change by following current policies, prioritizing research and development, establishing a strengthened institutional infrastructure, and ensuring a professional and educated workforce, as well as promoting awareness among forest communities. Declarations “All authors have read, understood, and have complied as applicable with the statement on "Ethical responsibilities of Authors" as found in the Instructions for Authors and are aware that with minor exceptions, no changes can be made to authorship once the paper is submitted.” Conflict of interest the authors declare no competing interests. Funding No funding was obtained for this study. Author Contribution Gökçe Gençay suggested the subject and the method of the manuscript; Gökçe Gençay and Üstüner Birben designed the research process, conceptualization, and methodology. Gökçe Gençay wrote legal analysis and Üstüner Birben did CSF analysis. Gökçe Gençay and Üstüner Birben wrote the conclusion sections and final draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements The authors thank the anonymous reviewers who provided valuable feedback that improved this manuscript. Availability of data and material Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study. References Adenle, A. A., Azadi, H., & Arbiol, J. (2015). Global assessment of technological innovation for climate change adaptation and mitigation in developing world. Journal of environmental management, 161, 261-275. Aitken, S. N., Yeaman, S., Holliday, J. A., Wang, T., & Curtis‐McLane, S. (2008). Adaptation, migration or extirpation: climate change outcomes for tree populations. Evolutionary applications, 1(1), 95-111. Allen, C. D., Macalady, A. K., Chenchouni, H., Bachelet, D., McDowell, N., Vennetier, M., ... & Cobb, N. (2010). A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. Forest ecology and management, 259(4), 660-684. Allen, C. D., Breshears, D. D., & McDowell, N. G. (2015). On underestimation of global vulnerability to tree mortality and forest die‐off from hotter drought in the Anthropocene. Ecosphere, 6(8), 1-55. Ammer, C., Fichtner, A., Fischer, A., Gossner, M. M., Meyer, P., Seidl, R., ... & Wagner, S. (2018). Key ecological research questions for Central European forests. Basic and Applied Ecology, 32, 3-25. Bellard, C., Bertelsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., & Courchamp, F. (2012). Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecology letters, 15(4), 365-377. Brnkalakova, S., Světlík, J., Brynleifsdóttir, S. J., Snorrason, A., Baštáková, V., & Kluvankova, T. (2021). Afforesting Icelandic land: A promising approach for climate-smart forestry?. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1781-1790. Brown, I. (2020). Challenges in delivering climate change policy through land use targets for afforestation and peatland restoration. Environmental Science & Policy, 107, 36-45.Chapman, L. (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of transport geography, 15(5), 354-367. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford university press. Bonan, G. B. (2008). Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. science, 320(5882), 1444-1449. Bowditch, E., Santopuoli, G., Binder, F., Del Rio, M., La Porta, N., Kluvankova, T., ... & Tognetti, R. (2020). What is Climate-Smart Forestry? A definition from a multinational collaborative process focused on mountain regions of Europe. Ecosystem Services, 43, 101113. Chapman, L. (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of transport geography, 15(5), 354-367. Canadell, J. G., & Raupach, M. R. (2008). Managing forests for climate change mitigation. science, 320(5882), 1456-1457. Clay, K., & Cooper, L. (2022). Safeguarding against Harm in a Climate-Smart Forest Economy: Definitions, Challenges, and Solutions. Sustainability, 14(7), 4209. COST Action CA15226 (2016), CLIMO (Climate- Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions). Available via https://www.cost.eu/cost-action/climate-smart-forestry-in-mountainregions/#tabs|Name:parties|https://www.cost.eu/cost-action/climate-smart-forestry-inmountain-regions/#tabs|Name:parties. Accessed 25 June 2020 Coşkun, A. A., & Gençay, G. (2011). Kyoto Protocol and “deforestation”: A legal analysis on Turkish environment and forest legislation. Forest Policy and Economics, 13(5), 366-377. ÇMUSEP, 2019. Çölleşmeyle Mücadele Ulusal Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı 2019-2030. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı Çölleşme ve Erozyonla Mücadele Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara. Dale, V. H., Joyce, L. A., McNulty, S., Neilson, R. P., Ayres, M. P., Flannigan, M. D., ... & Wotton, B. M. (2001). Climate change and forest disturbances: climate change can affect forests by altering the frequency, intensity, duration, and timing of fire, drought, introduced species, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, or landslides. BioScience, 51(9), 723-734. Dechezleprêtre, A., Glachant, M., Haščič, I., Johnstone, N., & Ménière, Y. (2011). Invention and transfer of climate change–mitigation technologies: a global analysis. Review of environmental economics and policy. Dedrick, J. P., Hall, T. E., Hull IV, R. B., & Johnson, J. E. (2000). The Forest Bank™: an experiment in managing fragmented forests. Journal of Forestry, 98(3), 22-25. Dale, V. H., Joyce, L. A., McNulty, S., Neilson, R. P., Ayres, M. P., Flannigan, M. D., ... & Wotton, B. M. (2001). Climate change and forest disturbances: climate change can affect forests by altering the frequency, intensity, duration, and timing of fire, drought, introduced species, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, or landslides. BioScience, 51(9), 723-734. FAO, 2022. Climate-Smart Forestry. https://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture-sourcebook/production-resources/module-b3-forestry/b3-overview/es/?type=111 Flannigan, M. D., Stocks, B. J., & Wotton, B. M. (2000). Climate change and forest fires. Science of the total environment, 262(3), 221-229. Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., ... & Snyder, P. K. (2005). Global consequences of land use. science , 309 (5734), 570-574. Forrester, D. I. (2014). The spatial and temporal dynamics of species interactions in mixed-species forests: from pattern to process. Forest Ecology and Management, 312, 282-292. Gasper, R., Blohm, A., & Ruth, M. (2011). Social and economic impacts of climate change on the urban environment. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 150-157. Gençay, G., Birben, Ü., & Durkaya, B. (2018). Effects of legal regulations on land use change: 2/B applications in Turkish forest law. Journal of sustainable forestry, 37(8), 804-819. Gençay, G. (2020). Legal framework of private afforestation: The case of Turkey. Land Use Policy, 96, 104673. Giongo, M., Santos, M. M., da Silva, D. B., Cachoeira, J. N., & Santopuoli, G. (2022). Climate-Smart Forestry in Brazil. Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions, 545. Gregor, K., Knoke, T., Krause, A., Reyer, C. P., Lindeskog, M., Papastefanou, P., ... & Rammig, A. (2022). Trade‐Offs for Climate‐Smart Forestry in Europe Under Uncertain Future Climate. Earth's Future, 10(9), e2022EF002796. Gustavsson, L., Pingoud, K., & Sathre, R. (2006). Carbon dioxide balance of wood substitution: comparing concrete-and wood-framed buildings. Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change, 11(3), 667-691. Gustavsson, L., Haus, S., Lundblad, M., Lundström, A., Ortiz, C. A., Sathre, R., ... & Wikberg, P. E. (2017). Climate change effects of forestry and substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, 612-624. Hanewinkel, M., Lessa Derci Augustynczik, A., & Yousefpour, R. (2022). Climate-Smart Forestry Case Study: Germany. In Forest Bioeconomy and Climate Change (pp. 197-209). Springer, Cham. Estoque, R. C., Dasgupta, R., Winkler, K., Avitabile, V., Johnson, B. A., Myint, S. W., ... & Lasco, R. D. (2022). Spatiotemporal pattern of global forest change over the past 60 years and the forest transition theory. Environmental Research Letters, 17(8), 084022. Hazarika, R., Bolte, A., Bednarova, D., Chakraborty, D., Gaviria, J., Kanzian, M., ... & Schueler, S. (2021). Multi-actor perspectives on afforestation and reforestation strategies in Central Europe under climate change. Annals of Forest Science, 78(3), 1-31. Hetemäki L, Verkerk H. Climate-smart forestry approach. In: Hetemäki L, Kangas A, Peltola H, editors. Forest bioeconomy and climate change. Springer; 2022. p. 165–72. Hirsch, F., & Schmithüsen, F. J. (2010). Private forest ownership in Europe (Vol. 26). ETH Zurich. Houghton, R. A., & Hackler, J. L. (1999). Emissions of carbon from forestry and land‐use change in tropical Asia. Global Change Biology, 5(4), 481-492. Howard, C., Dymond, C. C., Griess, V. C., Tolkien-Spurr, D., & van Kooten, G. C. (2021). Wood product carbon substitution benefits: a critical review of assumptions. Carbon Balance and Management, 16(1), 1-11. Isbell, F., Craven, D., Connolly, J., Loreau, M., Schmid, B., Beierkuhnlein, C., ... & Eisenhauer, N. (2015). Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes. Nature, 526(7574), 574-577. İDOSOYÜE, 2021. İklim değişikliğinin ormanlar ve sürdürülebilir orman yönetimi üzerindeki etkileri- Türkiye Raporu. Orman Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara. Jactel, H., Bauhus, J., Boberg, J., Bonal, D., Castagneyrol, B., Gardiner, B., ... & Brockerhoff, E. G. (2017). Tree diversity drives forest stand resistance to natural disturbances. Current Forestry Reports, 3(3), 223-243. Jandl, R., Ledermann, T., Kindermann, G., Freudenschuss, A., Gschwantner, T., & Weiss, P. (2018). Strategies for climate-smart forest management in Austria. Forests, 9(10), 592. Kašanin-Grubin, M., & Burton, P. J. (2021). Some options for Climate-Smart Forestry in Europe’s mountain regions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), v-vii. Kauppi, P., Hanewinkel, M., Lundmark, T., Nabuurs, G. J., Peltola, H., Trasobares, A., & Hetemäki, L. (2018). Climate smart forestry in Europe. European Forest Institute. Keenan, R. J. (2015). Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management: a review. Annals of Forest Science, 72(2), 145-167. Kolström, M., Lindner, M., Vilén, T., Maroschek, M., Seidl, R., Lexer, M. J., ... & Corona, P. (2011). Reviewing the science and implementation of climate change adaptation measures in European forestry. Forests, 2(4), 961-982. Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., ... & Xu, J. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global environmental change, 11(4), 261-269. Le, H. D., Smith, C., Herbohn, J., & Harrison, S. (2012). More than just trees: assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(1), 5-19. Leuschner, C., Förster, A., Diers, M., & Culmsee, H. (2022). Are northern German Scots pine plantations climate smart? The impact of large-scale conifer planting on climate, soil and the water cycle. Forest Ecology and Management, 507, 120013. Lindner, M., Fitzgerald, J. B., Zimmermann, N. E., Reyer, C., Delzon, S., van Der Maaten, E., ... & Hanewinkel, M. (2014). Climate change and European forests: what do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management?. Journal of environmental management, 146, 69-83. Linder, M. (2000). Developing adaptive forest management strategies to cope with climate change. Tree Physiology, 20(5-6), 299-307. Liu, D., Wang, T., Peñuelas, J., & Piao, S. (2022). Drought resistance enhanced by tree species diversity in global forests. Nature Geoscience, 1-5. Millar, C. I., Stephenson, N. L., & Stephens, S. L. (2007). Climate change and forests of the future: managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecological applications, 17(8), 2145-2151. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage. McDowell, N., Pockman, W. T., Allen, C. D., Breshears, D. D., Cobb, N., Kolb, T., ... & Yepez, E. A. (2008). Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought?. New phytologist, 178(4), 719-739. Nabuurs, G. J., Delacote, P., Ellison, D., Hanewinkel, M., Lindner, M., Nesbit, M., ... & Savaresi, A. (2015). A new role for forests and the forest sector in the EU post-2020 climate targets. European Forest Institute. Nabuurs, G. J., Delacote, P., Ellison, D., Hanewinkel, M., Hetemäki, L., & Lindner, M. (2017). By 2050 the mitigation effects of EU forests could nearly double through climate smart forestry. Forests, 8(12), 484. Nitschke, C. R., & Innes, J. L. (2008). Integrating climate change into forest management in South-Central British Columbia: an assessment of landscape vulnerability and development of a climate-smart framework. Forest Ecology and Management, 256(3), 313-327. OGM, 2021. Türkiye Orman Varlığı 2020. Orman Genel müdürlüğü, Orman İdaresi ve Planlama Dairesi Başkanlığı. Ankara. OİDUSP, 2020. Ormancılıkta İklim Değişikliğine Uyum Stratejik Planı 2020. Orman Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara. OOÜCGR, 2018. Ormancılık ve Orman Ürünleri Çalışma Grubu Raporu, On birinci Kalkınma Planı (2019-2023). Ankara. Petucco, C., Abildtrup, J., & Stenger, A. (2015). Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners’ management priorities on the timber harvest decision—a case study in France. Journal of Forest Economics, 21(3), 152-166. Reyer, C., Guericke, M., & Ibisch, P. L. (2009). Climate change mitigation via afforestation, reforestation and deforestation avoidance: and what about adaptation to environmental change?. New Forests, 38(1), 15-34. Rittmann, B. E. (2008). Opportunities for renewable bioenergy using microorganisms. Biotechnology and bioengineering, 100(2), 203-212. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., ... & Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. nature, 461(7263), 472-475. Santopuoli, G., Temperli, C., Alberdi, I., Barbeito, I., Bosela, M., Bottero, A., ... & Tognetti, R. (2021). Pan-European sustainable forest management indicators for assessing Climate-Smart Forestry in Europe. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1741-1750. Sathre, R., & O’Connor, J. (2010). Meta-analysis of greenhouse gas displacement factors of wood product substitution. Environmental science & policy, 13(2), 104-114. Seidl, R., Thom, D., Kautz, M., Martin-Benito, D., Peltoniemi, M., Vacchiano, G., ... & Reyer, C. P. (2017). Forest disturbances under climate change. Nature climate change , 7 (6), 395-402. Semelsberger, T. A., Borup, R. L., & Greene, H. L. (2006). Dimethyl ether (DME) as an alternative fuel. Journal of power sources, 156(2), 497-511. Shephard, N. T., Narine, L., Peng, Y., & Maggard, A. (2022). Climate Smart Forestry in the Southern United States. Forests, 13(9), 1460. Solomon, S., Manning, M., Marquis, M., & Qin, D. (2007). Climate change 2007-the physical science basis: Working group I contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC (Vol. 4). Cambridge university press. SOY Report, 2019. Sürdürülebilir Orman Yönetimi Grubu Çalışma Belgesi. Tarım Orman Şurası. Ankara. Spittlehouse, D. L., and R. B. Stewart. 2003. Adaptation toclimate change in forest management. BC Journal ofEcosystems and Management 4(1):1–11. TÇDR, 2020. 6.Türkiye Çevre Durum Raporu. Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi, İzin ve Denetim Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara. Thomas, K., Hardy, R. D., Lazrus, H., Mendez, M., Orlove, B., Rivera‐Collazo, I., ... & Winthrop, R. (2019). Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10(2), e565. TİDUSEP, 2012. Türkiye’nin İklim Değişikliği Uyum Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı (2011–2023). Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Ankara Torresan, C., Benito Garzón, M., O’grady, M., Robson, T. M., Picchi, G., Panzacchi, P., ... & Kneeshaw, D. (2021). A new generation of sensors and monitoring tools to support climate-smart forestry practices. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1751-1765. Türkeş, 2022. 2022 Stockholm+ 50 Konferansı’ndan öneriler, Yeşil Gazete. https://yesilgazete.org/2022-stockholm-50-konferansindan-oneriler/ (Erişim Tarihi 10.05.2023). URL 1. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/paris-anlasmasi.tr.mfa (Paris Agrement) URL 2. https://iklim.gov.tr/hakkimizda-i-4 Weatherall, A., Nabuurs, G. J., Velikova, V., Santopuoli, G., Neroj, B., Bowditch, E., ... & Tognetti, R. (2022). Defining Climate-Smart Forestry. Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions, 35-58. Verkerk, P. J., Costanza, R., Hetemäki, L., Kubiszewski, I., Leskinen, P., Nabuurs, G. J., ... & Palahí, M. (2020). Climate-smart forestry: the missing link. Forest Policy and Economics, 115, 102164. Vinceti, B., Manica, M., Lauridsen, N., Verkerk, P. J., Lindner, M., & Fady, B. (2020). Managing forest genetic resources as a strategy to adapt forests to climate change: perceptions of European forest owners and managers. European Journal of Forest Research, 139(6), 1107-1119. Yousefpour, R., Jacobsen, J. B., Thorsen, B. J., Meilby, H., Hanewinkel, M., & Oehler, K. (2012). A review of decision-making approaches to handle uncertainty and risk in adaptive forest management under climate change. Annals of forest science, 69(1), 1-15. Yousefpour, R. (2022). Climate-smart forestry—potential and practicalities. CABI Reviews, (2022). Zeydanlı, U., Turak, A., Bilgin, C., Kınıkoğlu, Y., Yalçın, S., Doğan, H. 2010. İklim Değişikliği ve Ormancılık: Modellerden Uygulamaya. Ankara. Doğa Koruma Merkezi. Zomer, R. J., Trabucco, A., Bossio, D. A., & Verchot, L. V. (2008). Climate change mitigation: A spatial analysis of global land suitability for clean development mechanism afforestation and reforestation. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 126(1-2), 67-80. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3836742","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":269142528,"identity":"84402a3e-57ca-4187-bdaa-f9f6e08e4df8","order_by":0,"name":"Gökçe Gençay","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Bartin University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gökçe","middleName":"","lastName":"Gençay","suffix":""},{"id":269142529,"identity":"7b857d10-05f3-4b70-b672-7845fac9115b","order_by":1,"name":"Üstüner Birben","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Çankırı Karatekin University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Üstüner","middleName":"","lastName":"Birben","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-01-05 08:44:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50563270,"identity":"c2dded4c-1ed5-45a6-ad0c-a51a380e5fdc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-02 14:43:14","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":447998,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3836742/v1/12f1cdbd-9cfe-4132-81bc-74be86e6e869.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Striving for Sustainability CSF Measures in Türkiye's Forest Management","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eClimate change has been on the international agenda, and scientific studies have proven that it is an environmental problem of global importance. For example, in a study investigating planetary boundaries, which are thought to cause unacceptable and irreversible environmental changes if exceeded (Rockstr\u0026ouml;m et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), it was determined that the rate of biodiversity loss, climate change, and human interference with the nitrogen cycle - nine planetary boundaries - had already been exceeded. The number of climate change models is expected to increase significantly in the twenty-first century, suggesting a rise in global warming according to modeling projections (Solomon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, it is predicted that more intense climatic events and chronic global warming will increase vegetation mortality and decrease forest cover in many locations during this century (McDowell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Although existing forests are able to adapt to climate change, it is expected that forests will experience greater tree mortality from drought and heat. However, tree mortality will increase in the coming years, along with productivity declines (McDowell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), posing significant challenges for managing the benefits of forests and ecosystem services (Allen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The majority of these models highlight the importance of worst-case scenarios and projections in alerting scientists and decision-makers to potential future threats (Bellard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings, as well as the fact that the consequences of climate change have become even more noticeable, have intensified worries for the future and prompted various steps to be implemented (Canadell and Raupach, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Coşkun and Gen\u0026ccedil;ay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), while the value of forests continues to gain importance day by day. Despite the accepted importance of ecosystem services provided by forests, global forest area shrank by 81.7\u0026nbsp;million hectares over the past 60 years (1960\u0026ndash;2019), losing the equivalent of Borneo Island (10% more). This decline is driven by a stark imbalance: forest loss (437.3\u0026nbsp;million hectares) vastly outpaced forest gain (355.6\u0026nbsp;million hectares) Estoque et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Despite these losses, it has been determined that reforestation and afforestation practices in many regions of the world can reduce global warming through carbon sequestration in addition to the maintenance and development of existing forests (Bonan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Gen\u0026ccedil;ay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). For example, forests store 20\u0026ndash;50 times more carbon per hectare than cleared fields, and deforestation may result in the loss of 100\u0026ndash;200 MgC/ha (Houghton and Hackler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). As a result, changes in land use and practices that might lead to deforestation have a major role in altering the global carbon cycle and potentially contributing to global climate change (Foley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Gen\u0026ccedil;ay et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eClimate change-related forest disturbances alter the amount of carbon stored in trees and dead wood, as well as its severity, frequency, and volume (Dale et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). Studies show that forests are under pressure from accelerating global climate change, which may pose risks to both forests and forest managers (Keenan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), and it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to understand when and how species interactions will change in order to adapt forest ecosystems to climate change (Forrester, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). It has been determined that land use changes, which cause deforestation, are driven not just by population increase and poverty, but also by many global influences that change, increase, or weaken local variables, which are also the key determinants of land use change (Lambin et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith all of these negative developments, it is critical to support policy decision-making processes and forest management throughout the world by researching the causes of potential future climate-related tree deaths before they occur (Allen et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Climate change adaptation strategies should be part of the risk management component in sustainable forest management plans (Spittlehouse and Stewart, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). It is believed that attempting to maintain ecosystems sustainably by managing forests using past management strategies will not be enough. New approaches to forest management are required (Linder, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Millar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Lindner et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Seidl et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll these pursuits eventually led to the emergence of the Climate-Smart Forestry (CSF) trend. The term \u0026ldquo;Climate-Smart Forestry\u0026rdquo; first appeared in 2008 (Nitschke and Innes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) and the concept of CSF was first used in 2015 (Nabuurs et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). CSF's definition was developed on three main thematic areas: 1) mitigation, 2) adaptation, and 3) social dimension, and integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social, and environmental) (CA15226, 2016; Bowditch et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). CSF also aims to create synergies within the forest functions, bioeconomy, biodiversity protection, ecosystem services, and climate change adaptation (Hetemaki et al., 2022). It is believed that the evaluation of these CSFs should be facilitated for CSF to become mainstream in forest policies and forest management in Europe (Nabuurs et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and to enable rapid transformations (Santopuoli et al., 2020). This is because practical actions are required for the adoption of strategies and techniques to mitigate the effects of climate change (Giongo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). CSF, which is currently in its early stages, will affect land use policy and economics, including forestry, and has the potential to establish new business models for climate change adaptation and mitigation goals (Yousefpour, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Carbon reduction targets are expected to be met by 2050 if adequate strategies are developed in accordance with the CSF\u0026rsquo;s key objectives (Nabuurs et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCSF has been briefly defined in the literature as the ability of forest management to both adapt to and mitigate climate change (Yousefpour, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The crucial question in realizing this promise is how to maximize the ability of forests to reduce carbon emissions while also making forests climate change-adaptive (Hanewinkel et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). However, it remains unclear how increased CO2 and temperature will impact the potential to further mitigate climate change as there are no long-term projections of how they will affect tree growth (Yousefpour et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the FAO report (2022), cleared, overused, degraded, and generally improperly managed forests contribute to climate change negatively, but most of the experience in strengthening forest adaptation capacity in the face of climate change has been gained through afforestation and agroforestry. Indeed, there is a growing consensus that the most broad and rapid effect of forests, which provide several advantages in combating climate change, may be achieved by maintaining and storing carbon in forests (Kauppi et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Since forests are already under strain from global climate change, rising temperatures and vapor pressure deficits expose them to greater drought and heat stress worldwide (Leuschner et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, there is a need for enhanced forest management that allows forests to improve their stress resilience and adaptive capacity to deal with all these challenges (Ammer et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is expected that CSF will help to strengthen this ability and create new adaptation techniques. The CSF, which is still in its early stages, is viewed as an emerging branch of sustainable forest management based on European forest criteria and indicators (Kasanin and Burton, 2021; Bowditch et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, it is emphasized that regional characteristics, ecosystems, and socio-economic conditions will be taken into account in the CSF. In fact, CSF attempts to promote forest ecosystem services by considering social and regional factors while also bringing long-term benefits to the community (Brnkalakova et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), just like the commitment of \"taking into account the different capacities of the parties\" placed by the Paris Agreement, which has an important role in climate change mitigation and adaptation (Gen\u0026ccedil;ay et al, 2019). CSF has quickly become a popular topic in politics and industry in the US, as well as in Europe. The United States Department of Agriculture was so supportive of the Climate-Smart Farming (CSF) initiative that they provided financial backing and officially incorporated it into their policy in early 2022. This commitment was highlighted when the USDA announced a substantial USD 1\u0026nbsp;billion program known as 'Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities' (Shephard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). As a result, policies and practices supporting CSF aims and objectives have begun to spread around the globe. Depending on various factors, such as the socio-ecological and technological framework, the impacts of climate change, and cultural aspects, CSF measures, practices, and applications may differ from region to region and from country to country. For CSF to be successful, a balance must be achieved between these factors (Verkerk et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). For these reasons, in the CSF, it is suggested that measures to reduce carbon emissions should be created while taking into consideration regional or national factors (Nabuurs et al, 2018). In fact, it is true that most measures compatible with CSF are mostly compatible with the criteria and indicators of Sustainable Forest Management SFM, and CSF also fills the gaps in terms of shortcomings and problematic parts of SFM (Weatherall et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter examining examples of measurements, techniques, indicators, and criteria that support CSF worldwide, we have identified the following primary categories that characterize and explain CSF. Previous research studies were evaluated under each category. Additionally, we attempted to analyze and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Turkish forestry against CSF, considering geographical variances.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study is primarily based on the verbal analysis method. The verbal analysis method is an approach used by researchers to understand, interpret, and decipher textual data with the goal of comprehending the embedded meanings. This method typically involves a partially or entirely qualitative approach and focuses on the in-depth examination of written, oral, or visual data. Researchers engage in a careful reading of texts to identify specific themes, patterns, and elements of meaning. Verbal analysis centers on exploring participants' emotions, experiences, and perspectives by delving into the content of the data. Commonly employed in qualitative research, this method aims to develop an understanding of participants' feelings, experiences, and viewpoints, providing researchers with an opportunity to gain profound insights (Milesand Huberman, 1994; Bryman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, initially, publications related to CSF in the international literature were reviewed. As a result, it was determined that CSF is built on three components that reinforce each other and focus on the objective (Bowditch et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Verkerk et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e): 1- Adaptation, 2- Mitigation, 3- Social Dimension. Then, nine criteria (indicators) that affect the main objectives of CSF were identified and discussed through examples from different countries, and these findings are presented in the first part of the \u003cspan refid=\"Sec3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003efindings\u003c/span\u003e section. Subsequently, the inclusion levels of these indicators in T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s national environmental and forestry legislation; policies, and governance documents (national development plans, strategy documents, action plans, council decisions) were investigated. Ultimately, Table\u0026nbsp;1 evaluates the alignment of CSF objectives with indicators at the national scale in T\u0026uuml;rkiye. If the indicators necessary to achieve the objectives were identified at a positive and sufficient level, a positive value was assigned. Conversely, if there was insufficient or negative regulation, a negative value was assigned.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, the positive and negative outcomes of the indicators that fulfill the objectives were examined. For each indicator, if regulations were identified that fulfill all three objectives, they were categorized as Strengths. If they fulfill two objectives, they were categorized as areas for Opportunities in regulation. If they fulfill only one objective, they were categorized as Weaknesses aspects in regulation. Finally, regulations that do not fulfill any of the objectives were categorized as Threats. Additionally, in the results and recommendations section, the adequacy of each objective in relation to the indicators was also analyzed.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eClimate-smart forestry and the situation in T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Mediterranean basin, including T\u0026uuml;rkiye, is defined as one of the most sensitive regions to the negative effects of climate change, and it has begun to be affected by the negative aspects of global warming, especially the decrease in water resources and desertification and ecological deterioration due to these (URL 1). T\u0026uuml;rkiye always consistently follows the latest developments in the fight against climate change. It participates in international meetings, becomes a party to conventions and gives due importance to mitigating climate change in national management plans and legislative changes. Many obligations were accepted by T\u0026uuml;rkiye at the Stockholm\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;50 Conference in 2022 on the fight against climate change, and suggestions were made such as the necessity of strengthening national environmental legislation and practices (T\u0026uuml;rkeş, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, the most important political and administrative change in T\u0026uuml;rkiye is the establishment of the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change and its affiliated the Presidency of Climate Change (October 29, 2021). The Presidency, which is responsible for determining policies, strategies and actions at the national and international level, conducting negotiation processes and ensuring coordination with institutions and organizations within the scope of T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s efforts to combat and adapt to climate change. It is in charge of carrying out all kinds of work necessary for mitigation and raising awareness of climate change with a human and nature-friendly approach to all segments of the society (URL 2).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere has not been a practices or policies\u0026rsquo; directly targeting CSF in T\u0026uuml;rkiye yet, policies in line with the objectives of SFM are implemented and forestry studies are carried out since 1937. For this reason, Sustainable Forest Management criteria were used while evaluating the indicators of CSF. The policies, strategies, legal and administrative legislation created within the scope of mitigating climate change, and the final reports of the commissions/management branches on the subject are examined; the extent to which the measures developed and taken to mitigate climate change comply with the objectives of CSF has been analyzed comparatively in the case of T\u0026uuml;rkiye in Table\u0026nbsp;1. The criteria influencing the three pillars of CSF (reduce carbon emissions, adaptation, social dimension) were examined within the framework of Turkish Forestry Legislation and policy documents. Subsequently, the existence and adequacy levels of these criteria and the elements identified as sub-indicators were presented in Table\u0026nbsp;1, with a positive (+) assessment.\u003c/p\u003e \n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;1: The current situation in T\u0026uuml;rkiye regarding CSF indicators\u003c/p\u003e \n\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndicators\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e of CSF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA. Reduce carbon emissions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdaptation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial dimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImprovement of forest genetic resources\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChange in species selection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWood and firewood substitute\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReducing deforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePromotion of new technologies\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocio-economic influence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpdating policy and management plans\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFragmentation of forest property (none)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e+\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e*Sub indicators: Reduce carbon emissions (\u003c/b\u003eincrease carbon sequestration, reduce carbon-emitting production), \u003cb\u003eAdaptation (\u003c/b\u003eadapting forests to the future, enhancing resilience), \u003cb\u003eSocial dimension (\u003c/b\u003eparticipation and incentives, land use, access to technology, uninterrupted ecosystem services).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn T\u0026uuml;rkiye, as 99.9% of forests are owned by the State, research and development activities related to forests and their implementation are carried out on state-owned forests. In this regard, the OGM, as a government agency, has been collaborating with numerous organizations in recent years to carry out pilot projects and research on climate change adaptation and GHG. These efforts aim to ensure that forests can effectively adapt to climate change (\u0026Ccedil;MUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e1- Afforestation and Reforestation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIncreasing the amount of forestlands, which serve as significant carbon sinks in the battle against climate change, has long been a goal. International agreements have emphasized the positive impact of afforestation on climate change, leading to intensified afforestation initiatives in practice. Afforestation projects are the most well-managed \"artificial\" forestry initiatives for carbon sequestration, with high potential for both carbon sequestration and economic gain (Reyer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Zomer et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) found that terrestrial ecosystems have significant potential for carbon sequestration through afforestation and reforestation. Some studies have noted the potential for afforesting abandoned agricultural lands with suitable tree species to expand forest areas (Nabuurs et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, creating forested areas can improve water quality (Yousefpour, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In Scotland, where afforestation is a key policy priority against climate change, carbon sequestration capacities provided by afforestation and peatland restoration have been evaluated. However, using simple targets (e.g., planted trees) as key progress indicators can be misleading and potentially result in policy failure (Brown, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). According to studies conducted in this context, afforestation and reforestation initiatives are emphasized globally. However, all variables, such as land and species selection, seed and seedling quality, and socioeconomic purposes, should be taken into account to increase success and provide maximum benefit (Le et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen the Turkish forestry legislation is examined, it is observed that the Forest Law No. 6831 dated 1956 includes regulations on the importance of afforestation and reforestation and the areas where they will be carried out, but topics such as climate change, carbon reduction and adaptation are not addressed. In addition to the relevant main law, the National Afforestation and Erosion Control Mobilization Law, which came into effect in 1995, also aims to increase forest areas and tree wealth, but is not related to climate change. However, it is seen that the social dimension of afforestation is supported in both laws in terms of providing benefits to society and encouraging it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the Sustainable Forest Management Working Group report, in addition to legal regulations, it was determined that the main strength is maximizing the benefits from a unit area and afforestation, but there are some shortcomings (due to the absence of any regulation related to climate change adaptation in legal frameworks concerning Turkish forestry, this issue has been identified as a weakness) in the current forestry legislation regarding climate change and adaptation. From a social dimension, however, leaving buffer areas in afforestation activities, especially around forest villages, has been a positive incentive for plantation of walnut, almond, chestnut, lime, stone pine, pistachio, wild olive, carob, or rapidly growing species such as poplar, acacia, eucalyptus, etc. that produce non-wood products to the extent that growing conditions allow and that the local people want to plant. These areas are subject to private afforestation (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn T\u0026uuml;rkiye's Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011\u0026ndash;2023), it was decided to integrate afforestation activities carried out within the scope of a nationwide campaign with efforts to adapt to climate change. Similarly, the plan specifies that afforestation activities and related research within the scope of forest fire fighting will be planned and sustained in consideration of changing climate conditions. This makes it possible to say that the afforestation process is evolving towards CSF (TİDUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2- Using genetically improved tree species\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eManaging genetic diversity is crucial for increasing the resilience of forest ecosystems to climate change (Vinceti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The selection of species and origins is seen as region-specific measures (Nabuurs et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Although it has been emphasized that local seed resources are used to minimize the possibility of incompatibility and promote adaptation in many regions of Europe, this is not sufficient to increase adaptation in the fight against climate change, and more focus should be placed on increasing the genetic diversity of the seed source (Hazarika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). However, there are gaps in knowledge and education on this topic, and it has not yet attracted international attention. Phenotypic variety, the intensity of selection, fertility, interspecies competition, and biotic interactions are among the numerous factors that determine how well tree species adapt to climate change (Aitken et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, it is essential to take a series of measures, from legislative regulation to accelerating the detection of adaptation potentials for the use of genetically improved tree resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn T\u0026uuml;rkiye, research and implementation studies related to the improvement of forest trees, conservation of forest genetic resources, and seed quality control are carried out by the General Directorate of Forestry. Genetic improvement and biotechnology studies are conducted on forest trees to establish forests with high productivity in terms of growth rate and wood quality. In-situ and ex-situ conservation of forest genetic resources is also provided, and activities related to quality control and certification of forest tree seeds and seed production technology are carried out. Education and research activities on these issues have been conducted for many years (İDOSOY\u0026Uuml;E, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, it is seen that one of the goals listed under the title \u0026ldquo;Conservation of Biological Diversity and Genetic Resources of Forests\u0026rdquo; in the \u0026ldquo;Strategic Plan for Climate Change Adaptation in Forestry\u0026rdquo; prepared by OGM in 2020 is to \u0026ldquo;obtain improved seed material by considering current and future climate conditions\u0026rdquo;. Therefore, it is possible to say that there are genetic resource improvement studies in T\u0026uuml;rkiye aimed at adapting to the negative effects of climate change (İDOSOY\u0026Uuml;E, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin the scope of the National Biodiversity Action Plan (2007\u0026ndash;2023), some goals related to climate change and genetic resources have been set. According to this action plan, it is aimed to determine the effects of climate change on biological diversity, monitor these effects, and take necessary measures to protect ecosystems and species that may be negatively affected. Another article in the same plan, which aims to protect biological diversity against climate change, includes \u0026ldquo;identifying species that are at risk of extinction according to different climate change scenarios such as temperature increase and precipitation change and collecting their seeds to protect them in gene banks\u0026rdquo;. Therefore, it is possible to say that there are genetic resource improvement efforts in T\u0026uuml;rkiye aimed at adapting to the negative effects of climate change (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e3- Increasing biodiversity, changing species selection and conservation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdaptation strategies in forestry are urgently needed since trees regenerating in forest stands today will have to endure drastically changing climatic conditions during their lifetime (Kolstr\u0026ouml;m et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). These changes will not only affect tree growth but also mortality rates and competitive relationships between species. FAO's CSF report highlights the importance of adapting forests to future challenging climatic conditions and increasing their resilience against extreme weather events (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, the vulnerability of northern forests in Sweden to climate change was exposed by major forest fires in 2014 and 2018, underscoring the need for protective measures such as species changes (Kauppi et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The increase in disasters such as drought, fire, insect epidemics, strong wind, excessive precipitation, and floods further reveals the necessity of forest protection. Higher species diversity can significantly increase the resilience of approximately half of global forests to drought, which is one of the most common factors that can significantly reduce forest growth (Isbel et al, 2015; Liu et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). According to a study, regional forest fires will increase and have the potential to overshadow the direct effects of climate change on species distribution and migration, with the severity of fire seasons estimated to increase between 10% and 50% in the middle of the next century in the United States (Flannigan et al, 2020). A study examining the eight possible effects of climate change on forests (drought, insect and pathogen outbreaks, introduced species, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, and landslides) reveals that each effect may interact with each other, highlighting the need for additional research and new methods on the subject (Dale et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn afforestation projects in T\u0026uuml;rkiye, the main goal is to reforest and maximize the benefits from a unit area. It has been determined that there is no legal regulation in T\u0026uuml;rkiye regarding the increase of biodiversity and support for changes in species selection in the fight against climate change. However, in the Forestry Working Group Report of T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s latest development plan (2019\u0026ndash;2023), it is stated that planting drought-resistant tree species should be encouraged and various studies should be conducted to understand their ecosystem-level effects. It is also emphasized that scientific studies on the impact of climate change on forests should be supported and adaptation proposals should be implemented (OO\u0026Uuml;CGR, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). According to the Desertification Combat Action Plan prepared by the OGM, \u0026ldquo;various actions and projects are planned to be carried out in T\u0026uuml;rkiye to determine and increase the adaptation capacity of forests to climate change and to measure the reactions of species to drought stress\u0026rdquo; (\u0026Ccedil;MUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn one of these projects, the effects of climate change on selected species were evaluated and adaptation strategies were developed in Konya region through a project to increase the resilience of the Mediterranean forest ecosystem and thus increase its capacity to withstand and adapt to changing climate conditions. The results have been integrated into the forest management plans in the region (İDOSOY\u0026Uuml;E, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn another project carried out by the OGM, the expected climatic changes in the next 20\u0026ndash;80 years in the distribution areas of the main forest types in the Seyhan Basin, located within the Mediterranean forest ecosystem, were evaluated through modeling. As a result, it is predicted that areas where conditions will worsen for red pine: in the 2050s, 56.2% of the current red pine forests will no longer be suitable for red pine. Areas where conditions will worsen for black pine: in the 2050s, it is predicted that 68.5% of the current black pine forests will no longer be suitable for black pine. Areas where conditions will worsen for fir: by the year 2050, it is predicted that 85.7% of the current fir forests will no longer be suitable for fir. Areas where conditions will worsen for cedar: it is expected that the suitability of living areas will decrease in 93.1% of the current cedar forests (Zeydanlı et al, 2010). The predicted loss rates indicate that serious losses will occur. Similar studies have identified the insufficient scientific research on the adaptation of T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s native forest tree species to climate change as a weak point in terms of the CSF (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4- Providing wood and firewood substitution\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of wood-based products from sustainably managed forests to replace energy-intensive materials like concrete, aluminum, and steel is widely recognized as a significant strategy for reducing fossil energy use and mitigating climate change (Semelsberger et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Gustavsson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). A study that considered variables like wood product types, substitute materials, geographical regions, methodological techniques, and assumptions found a consensus that wood product substitution reduces greenhouse gas emissions (Sathre \u0026amp; O\u0026rsquo;Connor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Another study found that using wood instead of concrete in construction significantly reduced net CO2 emissions for a reinforced concrete structure compared to a wooden building (Gustavsson et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, sustainably managed forests can provide an alternative to fossil fuels. Replacing large areas of coppice forests previously used for firewood production with renewable and more productive mixed forests can create additional stands (Nabuurs et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). According to the CSF economy, the need to use wood substitute products is indisputable in evaluating measures (Clay and Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). It is believed that using wood products can reduce future atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration in the construction sector (Howard et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and replacing fossil fuels with renewable carbon-neutral alternatives such as bioenergy is also important (Rittmann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). However, some studies suggest that replacing forests for wood production may reduce their carbon absorption potential (Hanewinkel et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is no national regulation in T\u0026uuml;rkiye regarding the use of firewood instead of wood product substitution and petroleum-based products, which has been brought to the agenda with the CSF trend for mitigating climate change. However, in the Forest Law, the supply of firewood and timber to forest villagers has been defined, but it has not been associated with climate change. According to the law, forest villagers living in villages within the productive forests are given firewood for once for their needs, such as home, barn, hayloft, granary, and coop, provided that they have lived in the village continuously for at least five years and are in need. This regulation indirectly encourages forest villagers to use wood products. However, the main purpose was not to mitigate climate change but to contribute to the livelihoods of forest villagers.In other reports and documents related to wood and fuelwood substitution, no regulation or decision has been found apart from the Forest legislation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e5- To halt deforestation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReducing and preventing deforestation is seen as the most important factor in slowing down global climate change. The very existence of forests is an essential element in climate change mitigation. As a result, just as afforestation and restoring degraded forest areas are deemed essential, actions to halt or avoid deforestation will also help to forest preservation. For instance, it is believed that steps to avoid or reduce deforestation caused by changes in land use, as well as to prevent forest fires and other types of forest offenses, will be beneficial. In addition to these, it is considered necessary to determine the potential rates of climate-related tree deaths that may cause deforestation and to support good forestry management practices (Allen et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Reduced deforestation is one of CFS's primary objectives. For this reason, preventing deforestation is crucial for optimizing benefits and forest resilience for climate change. The emphasis is on preventing commercial timber harvesting, reforestation, afforestation, and capacity development in Europe where deforestation and forest damage are illegal (Kauppi et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is no direct regulation in the main legislation regarding the halting deforestation associated with climate change. However, action plans or projects aimed at reducing natural or artificial factors causing deforestation have been identified. In light of the expected climate change in the future, which is expected to lead to longer and more severe periods of heat and drought in T\u0026uuml;rkiye; the increase in the frequency, extent, and duration of forest fires has been considered in the \u0026ldquo;Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011\u0026ndash;2023)\u0026rdquo; for the protection of forests against fires. It is recognized that additional measures need to be taken to address these challenges and mitigate the impacts of climate change on forest fires. Additionally, according to this plan, in order to combat wildfires more effectively, silvicultural practices in forests will be intensified, starting from sensitive areas to forest fires, and protection activities, including building fire-resistant forests and fire safety strips, will be expanded. The necessary risk preparation and prevention measures for forest fires caused by effects of climate change will be included in local or regional planning studies. (TİDUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere are some negative legal and administrative regulations that contribute to deforestation in addition to positive efforts to reduce deforestation. One of these is non-forestry activities permitted in forest areas, which lead to deforestation by losing the forest characteristics of permitted areas, and have a negative impact on climate change. For instance, mining activities allowed in forest areas are regulated under Article 16 of the Forest Law, requiring restoration of the area after the expiration of the permit. However, it is observed that successful practices are not reported in practice (Gen\u0026ccedil;ay ve Durkaya, 2023). Another negative regulation that causes deforestation is the 2nd article of the Forest Law, which allows areas that have lost their forest characteristics and cannot be reforested to be removed from the forest boundaries. Since its first implementation, approximately more than 500.000 ha of forestlands can no longer be considered as forests due to this legal regulation. Although this figure represents a significant area, the practice still continues (Gen\u0026ccedil;ay et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e6- Using technologies for Climate Change Mitigation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccelerating the development of new low-carbon technologies and promoting their global application are key challenges for offsetting atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Dechezlepr\u0026ecirc;tre et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Various studies and models are needed in CSF to forecast/predict/project forest resilience, prepare forests for climate change, and improve their future CO2 reduction potential. One of the requirements of CSF was the necessity of using and sharing new technologies, which was also stated in the Paris agreement. The application of new technologies, such as on-site sensor tracking, has been regarded as an essential move toward increased forest productivity and tree growth (Torresan et al, 2022). New technological innovations that adapt to a warming climate offer an opportunity to build resilience to the effects of climate change in the future, especially because of the significant challenges posed by climate variability (Adenle et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, it has been claimed that new technologies, such as alternative fuels for vehicles, can be used to reduce reliance on oil, which has a significant effect on climate change, but these won't be the only answer (Chapman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt can be seen that there is a lack of regulation in the Turkish national forest legislation to encourage new technologies aimed at reducing the effects of climate change, which is also required by the Paris Agreement. Although there is a general encouragement of technology, there is no direct regulation that will reduce climate change and can be considered within the scope of climate-smart forestry. However, there are indirect suggestions in action plans and projects, such as establishing a monitoring system that will facilitate and guide combatting forest damages and integrating it into the Forest Inventory and Monitoring System, developing new methods and techniques to increase effectiveness in combating diseases and insect damage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough climate change studies are not directly mentioned in the Development Plans, more emphasis is given on \"reduction\" and supporting R\u0026amp;D activities for relevant sectors such as industry and energy. In addition, one of the goals in T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2011\u0026ndash;2023) is to \u0026ldquo;develop the necessary infrastructure for R\u0026amp;D studies that will provide significant benefits in predicting the effects of climate change in T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rdquo; (TİDUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e7- Strengthening and Enhancing socio-economic impacts\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe social dimension, identified as one of the core pillars of CSF, is a fresh look at the problem, but deserves more attention (Weatherall et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). While no one can escape the effects of climate change, it has been observed that some social groups experience greater resource loss and greater impacts on livelihoods and cultural identity than others (Thomas et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). It is particularly important to empower vulnerable groups in the face of climate change, as climate change has different impacts on residents and disproportionately affects individuals and groups with scarce resources or socially isolated (Gasper et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). For example, intensive afforestation in Iceland in the last 30 years has set an example for the development of a new incentive tool with the participation of local farmers (Brnkalakova, et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Studies such as determining socio-economic conditions and making social risk analysis, which are an important criterion supporting CSF, were determined as the least studied (1%) part in climate change studies (Yousefpour et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). For this reason, it is necessary to strengthen its effect by conducting more studies on this subject.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn T\u0026uuml;rkiye, the action plan for rural development includes taking into account climate change adaptation activities to support the socio-economic development of forest villagers. For example, the effective participation, awareness, and education of local people in conservation activities can make a positive contribution. The Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan of T\u0026uuml;rkiye has set goals for educating forest villagers about the importance of protecting forests and how to conserve energy and improve insulation, particularly through educating women and villagers (TİDUSEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e)..\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, one of the goals of the Climate Change Adaptation Strategic Plan in Forestry is to develop programs to prevent the negative effects of climate change on the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities in forestlands. To achieve this goal, a list of actions has been proposed (OİDUSP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eA framework methodology that assesses the vulnerability of people who rely on forests for their livelihoods to climate change risks, identifies their needs, and prioritizes actions accordingly should be adopted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn order to reduce social pressure on forests, it is necessary to define adaptation measures to climate change to increase the adaptive capacity, livelihoods, and income-generating activities of people who depend on forests for their livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncreasing support for research on how the impacts of climate change on natural resources will affect society.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eImplementation of capacity building and awareness-raising activities on employment opportunities and livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreparation of a sector workforce report focusing on the potential impacts of climate change on forest villagers and workers (reforestation, production, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupporting people who rely on forests for their livelihoods through economic incentives and alternative income sources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to these, in T\u0026uuml;rkiye, there is a shortage of workforce in all forestry activities due to continuous migration from forest villages and their surroundings, and the lack of a database on local forest labor potential is considered a weak point in terms of sustainable forest management (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e8- Updating policy and management plans\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ability of the above-mentioned criteria to contribute to the mitigating climate change depends on integrating these criteria into forest management plans and putting them into practice. For this reason, the importance and realization possibilities of each criterion that can contribute to CSF should be carefully evaluated and the policy and management plans should be revised according to the results of this evaluation and updated when necessary. If not, none of these studies will go beyond a simple determination and will not contribute to the forestry practices. However, the success of sustainable forest management has been seen as dependent on the inclusion of risk and uncertainty in long-term planning (Nitschke and Innes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), highlighting the need for more practical actions to adopt climate change mitigation strategies and techniques (Giongo et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). What is desired and expected from the forest managers is to achieve simultaneous goals such as preparing the forests for a future compatible with climate change mitigation and benefiting from them at the best possible multi-purpose/use level. This can be considered as a difficulty but important threshold of CSF on the way to success. It is critical for decision-makers in charge of forest management and governance to realize that they must make long-term management choices while there is still considerable uncertainty in their thinking about the effects of climate change. However, it is still difficult to convince/advise forest decision makers on the planning of measures related to climate change impacts (Lindner et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the increase in awareness about climate change, many observations, measures, plans, and agreements have been made until today. In this context, it is clear that policy and management plans should be kept up to date to facilitate adaptation to changing conditions and to ensure better processes and more effective results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main policies and measures that stand out in the fight against climate change in T\u0026uuml;rkiye focus on the energy, transportation, industrial operations, agriculture, waste, and forestry sectors (T\u0026Ccedil;DR, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). When it comes to climate change regulations based on the Climate Change Strategy Paper, it is possible to say that there are legal shortcomings, but it is seen that administrative regulations such as action plans, strategic plans, and management plans follow the current situation and developments on the subject and implement changes accordingly. Furthermore, it has been identified as a strength that the OGM has a plan that directly and indirectly includes climate change strategies in the national SFM (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother important finding is the inclusion of the objective \u0026ldquo;to develop long-term and effective research programs and analyses in the field of climate adaptation\u0026rdquo; under the \u0026ldquo;supporting research and analysis in climate change adaptation\u0026rdquo; strategy in the \u0026ldquo;Strategic Plan for Climate Change Adaptation in Forestry\u0026rdquo; prepared in 2020. Such regulations included in these plans indicate a positive situation in terms of keeping policy and management plans up to date.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e9- Reducing fragmentation of forest property\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFragmentation of forestlands is seen as a problem that makes management challenging when trying to find methods to reduce or halt the effects of climate change around the globe. In the United States, for example, there has been increasing concern as larger tracts of forestlands are divided and sold, thus, forests become more fragmented and management becomes more difficult and less coordinated across the land (Dedrick et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). The situation is similar in European forests as well. Fragmentation of forest property has been seen as a negative situation for policy makers and forest management (Nabuuers et al, 2015), and in a study reported by many European countries, fragmentation of forest property was accepted as a negative factor in sustainable forest management (Hirsch, \u0026amp; Schmith\u0026uuml;sen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). In addition to that, the forest property fragmentation and the passive management of some private forest owners are also considered as restraining the wood supply (Petucco et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). It is obvious that there is a need for policies to prevent forest property fragmentation, which we can consider as a negative situation within the scope of CSF.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe fragmentation of forest ownership has been identified as an undesired negative situation in the fight against climate change. In T\u0026uuml;rkiye, 99.9% of forest areas are owned by the State, and this ownership right cannot be transferred according to the 1982 Turkish Constitution. This situation is seen as an important and effective protection method. In this context, concerns about ownership fragmentation are invalid for T\u0026uuml;rkiye. Thus, this situation does not create a negative situation for Turkish forestry. On the contrary, the fact that state forest ownership cannot be transferred and is managed by the state creates a positive situation. In fact, it is stated in the Turkish Constitution that the supervision and control of the remaining forest areas (0.01% private forests and forests owned by public institutions) will also be carried out by the State.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince this indicator is not current, a positive value has been assigned in the assessment table, indicating that its absence contributes positively to CSF in the case of T\u0026uuml;rkiye.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eClimate change is expected to have significant social, economic, and environmental impacts on terrestrial ecosystems that will be particularly felt in human settlements. These impacts may include flooding, reduced drinking water supply, erosion, decreased wood production, and the threat of intense forest fires that could change the traditional way of life of forest communities. Therefore, it is thought that the effects of climate change will be particularly pronounced for forest dwellers, just as they will be felt by all segments of society. Despite the lack of any legal regulation in the legislation, it is apparent that there are some objectives in strategic plans, action plans, and similar arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe desire for a more effective utilization of forests, which is considered as an important tool in combating with this problem, has led to the emergence of the concept of Climate-Smart Forestry (CSF) in recent years. CSF consists of three fundamental elements: mitigation, adaptation, and social dimension. The intersection of these three elements forms the essence of CSF. In other words, forests should not only contribute to carbon reduction in the fight against climate change but also adapt to the changing climate, while minimizing the potential harm caused by climate change to forest-dependent communities. It is believed that this approach will maximize the benefits obtained from forests.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur study began with the identification of indicators representing these three fundamental elements as follow: Afforestation, genetic resource improvement, Change in species selection, substitution of wood and fuelwood, Reducing deforestation, promotion of new technologies, Socio-economic influence, Updating policy and management plans, fragmentation of forest property. The success of these indicators in terms of their inclusion and implementation at the legal and administrative levels in T\u0026uuml;rkiye is detailed in the \u003cspan refid=\"Sec3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003efindings\u003c/span\u003e section. Based on the evaluation, indicators that fulfill all three elements of CSF are categorized as Strengths, indicators that fulfill two elements are categorized as capable of Opportunities, indicators that fulfill only one element are categorized as Weaknesses, and indicators that fulfill none of the elements are categorized as Threats.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvaluation of CSF indicators\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrengths (+ + +)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpdating policy and management plans Fragmentation of forest property\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOpportunities (- + + )\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReducing deforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePromoting new technologies\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnhancing socio-economic impact\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWeaknesses (+ - - )\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenetic resource improvement\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChange in species selection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThreats (- - - )\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubstitution of wood and fuelwood\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e is evaluated, the indicators of Reforestation, Updating policy and management plans and Fragmentation of forest property have been identified as the strongest aspects of Turkish forestry in terms of CSF. T\u0026uuml;rkiye has been engaged in intensive efforts in reforestation for many years, and according to the data from the General Directorate of Forestry, it can be observed that reforestation rates and the overall forest area have been consistently increasing (OGM, 2020). T\u0026uuml;rkiye is an active member of international processes related to forestry rand climate change, and actively participates in all negotiations conducted within the framework of the United Nations, striving to implement the decisions taken in these negotiations (SOY Report, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In this context, one of the primary strengths is the updating of forestry policies and management plans according to new conditions and becoming a party to relevant agreements. Another strength is the absence of fragmentation in forest ownership. In T\u0026uuml;rkiye, most of the forest ownership belongs to the state and is not transferred. Since any negative occurrence in this regard is unlikely, all three factors have been evaluated positively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs opportunities, three indicators have been identified: Reducing deforestation, promoting new technologies, and enhancing socio-economic impact. Among these, reducing deforestation has been seen as inadequate from a social perspective. In other words, no specific regulation has been identified to prevent deforestation in order to support the social dimension. On the contrary, it has been observed that certain activities aimed at supporting the social dimension could contribute to deforestation. Examples of non-forestry activities permitted within forest areas include mining operations and the construction of educational and healthcare facilities. While these activities may serve the public interest, they can also cause to deforestation. Another example, which is a specific situation to T\u0026uuml;rkiye, is the allocation of areas that have lost or been deprived of their forest characteristics and taken outside the boundaries of forests for agricultural, livestock, or settlement purposes (Gen\u0026ccedil;ay et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, there is a need for regulations that will enable certain activities to reduce deforestation, especially those that will enhance the socioeconomic wealth of the community. For example, intensive afforestation efforts have been carried out in Iceland in the last 30 years to promote local farmers for the sustainable and climate-smart forestry (Brnkalakova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). There is also private afforestation incentive in T\u0026uuml;rkiye (Gen\u0026ccedil;ay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), but it does not include supporting the public in the changing climate conditions as an element of the CSF's social dimension. Afforestation incentives in T\u0026uuml;rkiye mostly focus on financially profitable species and projects. It has been determined that the promotion of new technology is also insufficient in the social dimension. However, it is noteworthy that in 2023, administrative regulations promoting the installation of solar energy systems within unproductive forest areas and clearings have come into effect. In this context, it is possible to say that technology promotion is an indicator with potential for development. It is understood that there is insufficient attention given to the socio-economic impact, which is the latest indicator in this group, worldwide. Therefore, new studies and implementations are needed in this field.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIf only one of the criteria determined for the CSF is considered, it can be said that the elements of genetic resource improvement and species selection change are seen as positive only in terms of adapting forests to the future. It has been observed that there is no provision in the legislation to address the efforts required to prevent a decrease in the living standards of the people who will be most affected by climate change, whether through improving genetic resources or making species selection changes. However, it is evident that when genetic resources are enhanced and species are altered, all three elements will experience positive effects. In other words, even without a specific written goal or strategy, the implementation of the adaptation element will complement the other aspects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the indicator of substitution of wood and fuelwood is not yet included in the legislation in T\u0026uuml;rkiye. This issue should be considered as a weak aspect from the perspective of the CSF. For example, in Ireland, wood substitution is considered a key factor that would contribute to significant emission reduction in the next 50 years (Nabuurs et al., 2018). In the case of Germany, an increase in forest areas and emission reduction is expected with the use of biofuels (Hanewinkel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen examining the goals of the CSF, it is clear that the element of adapting forests to the future holds the highest positive value. This is of great importance and value because starting work today and achieving successful results in adapting forests to the future would be a significant achievement in the battle against climate change in the coming years. In other words, the successful implementation of the adaptation process ensures sustainable forestry and establishes a favorable foundation for the realization of other elements. If forests cannot be effectively passed down to future generations within the framework of SFM, neither the goals of carbon reduction nor the objectives of improving socio-economic power through forest resources can be accomplished. In this regard, it is a positive finding that T\u0026uuml;rkiye fulfills many indicators, which is the most crucial aspect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, it is possible to say that T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s Forestry legislation plays an effective role in combating climate change, but it can meet all the expectations/objectives of the CSF if its inadequate or weak elements are improved. Based on these findings, there is a need in the forestry sector to strengthen measures for adapting to climate change by following current policies, prioritizing research and development, establishing a strengthened institutional infrastructure, and ensuring a professional and educated workforce, as well as promoting awareness among forest communities.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;All authors have read, understood, and have complied as applicable with the statement on \"Ethical responsibilities of Authors\" as found in the Instructions for Authors and are aware that with minor exceptions, no changes can be made to authorship once the paper is submitted.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003ch2\u003eConflict of interest\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ethe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo funding was obtained for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e Gen\u0026ccedil;ay suggested the subject and the method of the manuscript; G\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e Gen\u0026ccedil;ay and \u0026Uuml;st\u0026uuml;ner Birben designed the research process, conceptualization, and methodology. G\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e Gen\u0026ccedil;ay wrote legal analysis and \u0026Uuml;st\u0026uuml;ner Birben did CSF analysis. G\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e Gen\u0026ccedil;ay and \u0026Uuml;st\u0026uuml;ner Birben wrote the conclusion sections and final draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors thank the anonymous reviewers who provided valuable feedback that improved this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAvailability of data and material\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdenle, A. A., Azadi, H., \u0026amp; Arbiol, J. (2015). Global assessment of technological innovation for climate change adaptation and mitigation in developing world. Journal of environmental management, 161, 261-275.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAitken, S. N., Yeaman, S., Holliday, J. A., Wang, T., \u0026amp; Curtis‐McLane, S. (2008). Adaptation, migration or extirpation: climate change outcomes for tree populations. Evolutionary applications, 1(1), 95-111. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAllen, C. D., Macalady, A. K., Chenchouni, H., Bachelet, D., McDowell, N., Vennetier, M., ... \u0026amp; Cobb, N. (2010). A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. Forest ecology and management, 259(4), 660-684.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAllen, C. D., Breshears, D. D., \u0026amp; McDowell, N. G. (2015). On underestimation of global vulnerability to tree mortality and forest die‐off from hotter drought in the Anthropocene. Ecosphere, 6(8), 1-55. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmmer, C., Fichtner, A., Fischer, A., Gossner, M. M., Meyer, P., Seidl, R., ... \u0026amp; Wagner, S. (2018). Key ecological research questions for Central European forests. Basic and Applied Ecology, 32, 3-25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBellard, C., Bertelsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., \u0026amp; Courchamp, F. (2012). Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecology letters, 15(4), 365-377.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrnkalakova, S., Světl\u0026iacute;k, J., Brynleifsd\u0026oacute;ttir, S. J., Snorrason, A., Ba\u0026scaron;t\u0026aacute;kov\u0026aacute;, V., \u0026amp; Kluvankova, T. (2021). Afforesting Icelandic land: A promising approach for climate-smart forestry?. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1781-1790.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, I. (2020). Challenges in delivering climate change policy through land use targets for afforestation and peatland restoration. Environmental Science \u0026amp; Policy, 107, 36-45.Chapman, L. (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of transport geography, 15(5), 354-367.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford university press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBonan, G. B. (2008). Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. science, 320(5882), 1444-1449.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBowditch, E., Santopuoli, G., Binder, F., Del Rio, M., La Porta, N., Kluvankova, T., ... \u0026amp; Tognetti, R. (2020). What is Climate-Smart Forestry? A definition from a multinational collaborative process focused on mountain regions of Europe. Ecosystem Services, 43, 101113.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChapman, L. (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of transport geography, 15(5), 354-367. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCanadell, J. G., \u0026amp; Raupach, M. R. (2008). Managing forests for climate change mitigation. science, 320(5882), 1456-1457.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClay, K., \u0026amp; Cooper, L. (2022). Safeguarding against Harm in a Climate-Smart Forest Economy: Definitions, Challenges, and Solutions. Sustainability, 14(7), 4209. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCOST Action CA15226 (2016), CLIMO (Climate- Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions). Available via https://www.cost.eu/cost-action/climate-smart-forestry-in-mountainregions/#tabs|Name:parties|https://www.cost.eu/cost-action/climate-smart-forestry-inmountain-regions/#tabs|Name:parties. Accessed 25 June 2020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCoşkun, A. A., \u0026amp; Gen\u0026ccedil;ay, G. (2011). Kyoto Protocol and \u0026ldquo;deforestation\u0026rdquo;: A legal analysis on Turkish environment and forest legislation. Forest Policy and Economics, 13(5), 366-377. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Ccedil;MUSEP, 2019. \u0026Ccedil;\u0026ouml;lleşmeyle M\u0026uuml;cadele Ulusal Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı 2019-2030. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı \u0026Ccedil;\u0026ouml;lleşme ve Erozyonla M\u0026uuml;cadele Genel M\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;. Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDale, V. H., Joyce, L. A., McNulty, S., Neilson, R. P., Ayres, M. P., Flannigan, M. D., ... \u0026amp; Wotton, B. M. (2001). Climate change and forest disturbances: climate change can affect forests by altering the frequency, intensity, duration, and timing of fire, drought, introduced species, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, or landslides. BioScience, 51(9), 723-734.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDechezlepr\u0026ecirc;tre, A., Glachant, M., Ha\u0026scaron;čič, I., Johnstone, N., \u0026amp; M\u0026eacute;ni\u0026egrave;re, Y. (2011). Invention and transfer of climate change\u0026ndash;mitigation technologies: a global analysis. Review of environmental economics and policy.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDedrick, J. P., Hall, T. E., Hull IV, R. B., \u0026amp; Johnson, J. E. (2000). The Forest Bank\u0026trade;: an experiment in managing fragmented forests. Journal of Forestry, 98(3), 22-25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDale, V. H., Joyce, L. A., McNulty, S., Neilson, R. P., Ayres, M. P., Flannigan, M. D., ... \u0026amp; Wotton, B. M. (2001). Climate change and forest disturbances: climate change can affect forests by altering the frequency, intensity, duration, and timing of fire, drought, introduced species, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, or landslides. BioScience, 51(9), 723-734.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO, 2022. Climate-Smart Forestry. https://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture-sourcebook/production-resources/module-b3-forestry/b3-overview/es/?type=111 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlannigan, M. D., Stocks, B. J., \u0026amp; Wotton, B. M. (2000). Climate change and forest fires. Science of the total environment, 262(3), 221-229.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFoley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., ... \u0026amp; Snyder, P. K. (2005). Global consequences of land use. \u003cem\u003escience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e309\u003c/em\u003e(5734), 570-574.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eForrester, D. I. (2014). The spatial and temporal dynamics of species interactions in mixed-species forests: from pattern to process. Forest Ecology and Management, 312, 282-292.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGasper, R., Blohm, A., \u0026amp; Ruth, M. (2011). Social and economic impacts of climate change on the urban environment. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 150-157.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGen\u0026ccedil;ay, G., Birben, \u0026Uuml;., \u0026amp; Durkaya, B. (2018). Effects of legal regulations on land use change: 2/B applications in Turkish forest law. Journal of sustainable forestry, 37(8), 804-819.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGen\u0026ccedil;ay, G. (2020). Legal framework of private afforestation: The case of Turkey. Land Use Policy, 96, 104673.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGiongo, M., Santos, M. M., da Silva, D. B., Cachoeira, J. N., \u0026amp; Santopuoli, G. (2022). Climate-Smart Forestry in Brazil. Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions, 545.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGregor, K., Knoke, T., Krause, A., Reyer, C. P., Lindeskog, M., Papastefanou, P., ... \u0026amp; Rammig, A. (2022). Trade‐Offs for Climate‐Smart Forestry in Europe Under Uncertain Future Climate. Earth\u0026apos;s Future, 10(9), e2022EF002796.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGustavsson, L., Pingoud, K., \u0026amp; Sathre, R. (2006). Carbon dioxide balance of wood substitution: comparing concrete-and wood-framed buildings. Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change, 11(3), 667-691.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGustavsson, L., Haus, S., Lundblad, M., Lundstr\u0026ouml;m, A., Ortiz, C. A., Sathre, R., ... \u0026amp; Wikberg, P. E. (2017). Climate change effects of forestry and substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, 612-624.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHanewinkel, M., Lessa Derci Augustynczik, A., \u0026amp; Yousefpour, R. (2022). Climate-Smart Forestry Case Study: Germany. In Forest Bioeconomy and Climate Change (pp. 197-209). Springer, Cham.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEstoque, R. C., Dasgupta, R., Winkler, K., Avitabile, V., Johnson, B. A., Myint, S. W., ... \u0026amp; Lasco, R. D. (2022). Spatiotemporal pattern of global forest change over the past 60 years and the forest transition theory. Environmental Research Letters, 17(8), 084022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHazarika, R., Bolte, A., Bednarova, D., Chakraborty, D., Gaviria, J., Kanzian, M., ... \u0026amp; Schueler, S. (2021). Multi-actor perspectives on afforestation and reforestation strategies in Central Europe under climate change. Annals of Forest Science, 78(3), 1-31. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHetem\u0026auml;ki L, Verkerk H. Climate-smart forestry approach. In: Hetem\u0026auml;ki L, Kangas A, Peltola H, editors. Forest bioeconomy and climate change. Springer; 2022. p. 165\u0026ndash;72. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHirsch, F., \u0026amp; Schmith\u0026uuml;sen, F. J. (2010). Private forest ownership in Europe (Vol. 26). ETH Zurich.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoughton, R. A., \u0026amp; Hackler, J. L. (1999). Emissions of carbon from forestry and land‐use change in tropical Asia. Global Change Biology, 5(4), 481-492.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoward, C., Dymond, C. C., Griess, V. C., Tolkien-Spurr, D., \u0026amp; van Kooten, G. C. (2021). Wood product carbon substitution benefits: a critical review of assumptions. Carbon Balance and Management, 16(1), 1-11.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIsbell, F., Craven, D., Connolly, J., Loreau, M., Schmid, B., Beierkuhnlein, C., ... \u0026amp; Eisenhauer, N. (2015). Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes. Nature, 526(7574), 574-577.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eİDOSOY\u0026Uuml;E, 2021. İklim değişikliğinin ormanlar ve s\u0026uuml;rd\u0026uuml;r\u0026uuml;lebilir orman y\u0026ouml;netimi \u0026uuml;zerindeki etkileri- T\u0026uuml;rkiye Raporu. Orman Genel M\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;, Ankara.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJactel, H., Bauhus, J., Boberg, J., Bonal, D., Castagneyrol, B., Gardiner, B., ... \u0026amp; Brockerhoff, E. G. (2017). Tree diversity drives forest stand resistance to natural disturbances. Current Forestry Reports, 3(3), 223-243.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJandl, R., Ledermann, T., Kindermann, G., Freudenschuss, A., Gschwantner, T., \u0026amp; Weiss, P. (2018). Strategies for climate-smart forest management in Austria. Forests, 9(10), 592.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKa\u0026scaron;anin-Grubin, M., \u0026amp; Burton, P. J. (2021). Some options for Climate-Smart Forestry in Europe\u0026rsquo;s mountain regions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), v-vii. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKauppi, P., Hanewinkel, M., Lundmark, T., Nabuurs, G. J., Peltola, H., Trasobares, A., \u0026amp; Hetem\u0026auml;ki, L. (2018). Climate smart forestry in Europe. European Forest Institute.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeenan, R. J. (2015). Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management: a review. Annals of Forest Science, 72(2), 145-167.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKolstr\u0026ouml;m, M., Lindner, M., Vil\u0026eacute;n, T., Maroschek, M., Seidl, R., Lexer, M. J., ... \u0026amp; Corona, P. (2011). Reviewing the science and implementation of climate change adaptation measures in European forestry. Forests, 2(4), 961-982.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., ... \u0026amp; Xu, J. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global environmental change, 11(4), 261-269.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLe, H. D., Smith, C., Herbohn, J., \u0026amp; Harrison, S. (2012). More than just trees: assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(1), 5-19.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeuschner, C., F\u0026ouml;rster, A., Diers, M., \u0026amp; Culmsee, H. (2022). Are northern German Scots pine plantations climate smart? The impact of large-scale conifer planting on climate, soil and the water cycle. Forest Ecology and Management, 507, 120013. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLindner, M., Fitzgerald, J. B., Zimmermann, N. E., Reyer, C., Delzon, S., van Der Maaten, E., ... \u0026amp; Hanewinkel, M. (2014). Climate change and European forests: what do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management?. Journal of environmental management, 146, 69-83.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLinder, M. (2000). Developing adaptive forest management strategies to cope with climate change. Tree Physiology, 20(5-6), 299-307.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, D., Wang, T., Pe\u0026ntilde;uelas, J., \u0026amp; Piao, S. (2022). Drought resistance enhanced by tree species diversity in global forests. Nature Geoscience, 1-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMillar, C. I., Stephenson, N. L., \u0026amp; Stephens, S. L. (2007). Climate change and forests of the future: managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecological applications, 17(8), 2145-2151.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMiles, M. B., \u0026amp; Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcDowell, N., Pockman, W. T., Allen, C. D., Breshears, D. D., Cobb, N., Kolb, T., ... \u0026amp; Yepez, E. A. (2008). Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought?. New phytologist, 178(4), 719-739.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNabuurs, G. J., Delacote, P., Ellison, D., Hanewinkel, M., Lindner, M., Nesbit, M., ... \u0026amp; Savaresi, A. (2015). A new role for forests and the forest sector in the EU post-2020 climate targets. European Forest Institute.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNabuurs, G. J., Delacote, P., Ellison, D., Hanewinkel, M., Hetem\u0026auml;ki, L., \u0026amp; Lindner, M. (2017). By 2050 the mitigation effects of EU forests could nearly double through climate smart forestry. Forests, 8(12), 484.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNitschke, C. R., \u0026amp; Innes, J. L. (2008). Integrating climate change into forest management in South-Central British Columbia: an assessment of landscape vulnerability and development of a climate-smart framework. Forest Ecology and Management, 256(3), 313-327.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOGM, 2021. T\u0026uuml;rkiye Orman Varlığı 2020. Orman Genel m\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;, Orman İdaresi ve Planlama Dairesi Başkanlığı. Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOİDUSP, 2020. Ormancılıkta İklim Değişikliğine Uyum Stratejik Planı 2020. Orman Genel M\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;, Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOO\u0026Uuml;CGR, 2018. Ormancılık ve Orman \u0026Uuml;r\u0026uuml;nleri \u0026Ccedil;alışma Grubu Raporu, On birinci Kalkınma Planı (2019-2023). Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePetucco, C., Abildtrup, J., \u0026amp; Stenger, A. (2015). Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners\u0026rsquo; management priorities on the timber harvest decision\u0026mdash;a case study in France. Journal of Forest Economics, 21(3), 152-166.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReyer, C., Guericke, M., \u0026amp; Ibisch, P. L. (2009). Climate change mitigation via afforestation, reforestation and deforestation avoidance: and what about adaptation to environmental change?. New Forests, 38(1), 15-34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRittmann, B. E. (2008). Opportunities for renewable bioenergy using microorganisms. Biotechnology and bioengineering, 100(2), 203-212.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRockstr\u0026ouml;m, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, \u0026Aring;., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., ... \u0026amp; Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. nature, 461(7263), 472-475.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSantopuoli, G., Temperli, C., Alberdi, I., Barbeito, I., Bosela, M., Bottero, A., ... \u0026amp; Tognetti, R. (2021). Pan-European sustainable forest management indicators for assessing Climate-Smart Forestry in Europe. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1741-1750. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSathre, R., \u0026amp; O\u0026rsquo;Connor, J. (2010). Meta-analysis of greenhouse gas displacement factors of wood product substitution. Environmental science \u0026amp; policy, 13(2), 104-114.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeidl, R., Thom, D., Kautz, M., Martin-Benito, D., Peltoniemi, M., Vacchiano, G., ... \u0026amp; Reyer, C. P. (2017). Forest disturbances under climate change. \u003cem\u003eNature climate change\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(6), 395-402. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSemelsberger, T. A., Borup, R. L., \u0026amp; Greene, H. L. (2006). Dimethyl ether (DME) as an alternative fuel. Journal of power sources, 156(2), 497-511.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShephard, N. T., Narine, L., Peng, Y., \u0026amp; Maggard, A. (2022). Climate Smart Forestry in the Southern United States. Forests, 13(9), 1460. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSolomon, S., Manning, M., Marquis, M., \u0026amp; Qin, D. (2007). Climate change 2007-the physical science basis: Working group I contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC (Vol. 4). Cambridge university press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSOY Report, 2019. S\u0026uuml;rd\u0026uuml;r\u0026uuml;lebilir Orman Y\u0026ouml;netimi Grubu \u0026Ccedil;alışma Belgesi. Tarım Orman Şurası. Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpittlehouse, D. L., and R. B. Stewart. 2003. Adaptation toclimate change in forest management. BC Journal ofEcosystems and Management 4(1):1\u0026ndash;11. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eT\u0026Ccedil;DR, 2020. 6.T\u0026uuml;rkiye \u0026Ccedil;evre Durum Raporu. \u0026Ccedil;evre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, \u0026Ccedil;evresel Etki Değerlendirmesi, İzin ve Denetim Genel M\u0026uuml;d\u0026uuml;rl\u0026uuml;ğ\u0026uuml;. Ankara. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThomas, K., Hardy, R. D., Lazrus, H., Mendez, M., Orlove, B., Rivera‐Collazo, I., ... \u0026amp; Winthrop, R. (2019). Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10(2), e565.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTİDUSEP, 2012. T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;nin İklim Değişikliği Uyum Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı (2011\u0026ndash;2023). \u0026Ccedil;evre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı, Ankara\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTorresan, C., Benito Garz\u0026oacute;n, M., O\u0026rsquo;grady, M., Robson, T. M., Picchi, G., Panzacchi, P., ... \u0026amp; Kneeshaw, D. (2021). A new generation of sensors and monitoring tools to support climate-smart forestry practices. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 51(12), 1751-1765. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eT\u0026uuml;rkeş, 2022. 2022 Stockholm+ 50 Konferansı\u0026rsquo;ndan \u0026ouml;neriler, Yeşil Gazete. https://yesilgazete.org/2022-stockholm-50-konferansindan-oneriler/ (Erişim Tarihi 10.05.2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eURL 1. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/paris-anlasmasi.tr.mfa (Paris Agrement)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eURL 2. https://iklim.gov.tr/hakkimizda-i-4 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeatherall, A., Nabuurs, G. J., Velikova, V., Santopuoli, G., Neroj, B., Bowditch, E., ... \u0026amp; Tognetti, R. (2022). Defining Climate-Smart Forestry. Climate-Smart Forestry in Mountain Regions, 35-58.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVerkerk, P. J., Costanza, R., Hetem\u0026auml;ki, L., Kubiszewski, I., Leskinen, P., Nabuurs, G. J., ... \u0026amp; Palah\u0026iacute;, M. (2020). Climate-smart forestry: the missing link. Forest Policy and Economics, 115, 102164.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVinceti, B., Manica, M., Lauridsen, N., Verkerk, P. J., Lindner, M., \u0026amp; Fady, B. (2020). Managing forest genetic resources as a strategy to adapt forests to climate change: perceptions of European forest owners and managers. European Journal of Forest Research, 139(6), 1107-1119. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYousefpour, R., Jacobsen, J. B., Thorsen, B. J., Meilby, H., Hanewinkel, M., \u0026amp; Oehler, K. (2012). A review of decision-making approaches to handle uncertainty and risk in adaptive forest management under climate change. Annals of forest science, 69(1), 1-15.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYousefpour, R. (2022). Climate-smart forestry\u0026mdash;potential and practicalities. CABI Reviews, (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZeydanlı, U., Turak, A., Bilgin, C., Kınıkoğlu, Y., Yal\u0026ccedil;ın, S., Doğan, H. 2010. İklim Değişikliği ve Ormancılık: Modellerden Uygulamaya. Ankara. Doğa Koruma Merkezi.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZomer, R. J., Trabucco, A., Bossio, D. A., \u0026amp; Verchot, L. V. (2008). Climate change mitigation: A spatial analysis of global land suitability for clean development mechanism afforestation and reforestation. Agriculture, ecosystems \u0026amp; environment, 126(1-2), 67-80.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eForests play a key role in mitigating climate change. They are one of the major sinks for carbon, and the idea of how to use these important resources more efficiently and effectively has led to the emergence of a new trend in forestry in recent years. Climate Smart Forestry (CSF) aims to reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) and seeks to fortify forests against potential climate change consequences in the future while increasing production and incomes sustainably from forests, in line with the main purpose of other climate smart initiatives. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the measures, indicators, and criteria that promote CSF. Following this, the strengths and weaknesses of T\u0026uuml;rkiye\u0026rsquo;s forestry legislation and practices were analyzed using the nine criteria derived from academic literature for CSF. Thus, the degree to which Turkish forestry practices and legislation are consistent with the CSF and its reflections were assessed. Analysis shows that the adapting forest to the future has the highest positive coverage in the sense of CSF among the Turkish Forestry legislation and practices. Furthermore, defining and establishing standards for CSF will help establish a framework by which other nations may assess their own progress in this area.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Striving for Sustainability CSF Measures in Türkiye's Forest Management","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-01-25 10:54:04","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3836742/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"c1ad4286-d7ae-473c-b7e7-eb7b0d19e4f5","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 25th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-02-06T17:32:22+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-01-25 10:54:04","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3836742","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3836742","identity":"rs-3836742","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}