Climate change adaptation measures conflicted with the recreational demands on city forests during COVID-19 pandemic

Urban green infrastructure, including urban forests and city and community-owned forests (CCFs), faces threats from urbanization and climate change impacts like droughts and heat stress. CCFs play a crucial role in improving urban residents' physical and mental well-being, contributing to aesthetics, providing space for activities, and serving as meeting places. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly increased visitor numbers to CCFs, highlighting their importance for public health. However, this increased use conflicts with the need for climate change adaptation measures such as forest restoration and safety improvements, due to the increased risk of falling trees and branches from drought damage. This study investigates the perceived trade-offs between these competing demands, focusing on stakeholder perspectives to inform sustainable CCF management. The research questions addressed how different stakeholder groups perceive climate change adaptation challenges, identify new conflicts between the pandemic and adaptation, and propose solutions to balance recreation demand with climate adaptation.

Existing literature emphasizes the multiple functions of urban forests, including recreation, ecological protection, and economic utility. Studies have highlighted the increased recreational use of urban forests during the COVID-19 pandemic and the importance of strengthening this function. However, research on conflicts between recreational use and forest management operations, particularly during the pandemic, is limited. Previous work has examined stakeholder perceptions on climate change adaptation in urban forests in various locations, revealing differing priorities and potential conflicts among different user groups. The need for participatory decision-making involving diverse stakeholders is emphasized to ensure effective and sustainable urban forest management.

This study employed a qualitative research design using semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in urban forest management in Karlsruhe, Germany. Stakeholders were grouped into three categories: NGOs and associations, administration (including city and state forest administrations), and scientists and professionals. A total of 16 stakeholders participated in interviews conducted via Zoom in 2021 due to pandemic restrictions. The interviews followed a structured guide encompassing questions about: (1) perceptions of the existing climate change adaptation plan (CAP) for Karlsruhe's urban forests; (2) the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban forest management; and (3) emerging conflicts and potential solutions for balancing climate adaptation with increased recreational use. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using MAXQDA software. Qualitative content analysis was employed to identify recurring themes and patterns in the responses. Quantitative analysis was also conducted to calculate interview similarity and compare the frequency of different codes across stakeholder groups. The homogeneity of arguments within and between stakeholder groups was analyzed using a document similarity analysis. Data visualization techniques were employed to present the key findings.

Analysis revealed significant divergence in stakeholder perspectives. NGOs and associations showed high internal agreement (74%), while the administration group showed the lowest internal consistency (67%). Regarding climate change adaptation, NGOs and associations were more aware of Karlsruhe's CAP than other groups and viewed it negatively. The administration largely held a positive view. Key challenges highlighted included financing, the use of non-native tree species, and the prioritization of economic over ecological aspects. Location-adjusted planning and increased research were identified as potential solutions. Regarding conflicts between climate adaptation and recreational use, stakeholder opinions centered around visitor behavior, functional conflicts (such as between near-natural forest management and visitor needs), and accessibility. Negative visitor behavior (littering, straying from paths) was especially highlighted by NGOs and the administration. Functional conflicts arose from the tension between the ecological objectives of near-natural forest management (e.g., leaving deadwood for wildlife) and safety concerns for visitors. A lack of sufficient recreational infrastructure also was identified as a conflict by the administration. Proposed solutions included visitor monitoring, infrastructure improvements, communication and education campaigns, and controlled visitor management, but no consensus emerged on the best approach. A forest ban was rejected by all stakeholders. The recreational function of the urban forest during the pandemic was frequently emphasized by all stakeholders.

The study's findings reveal the complex interplay of ecological, social, and economic factors in urban forest management. The contrasting perspectives of different stakeholder groups highlight the need for integrative approaches that consider diverse values and priorities. The debate on non-native species reflects broader discussions on ecological integrity versus ecosystem service provision in urban settings. The tension between near-natural forest management and visitor safety demonstrates the difficulties inherent in balancing ecological goals with recreational demands. The lack of consensus on solutions reflects the multifaceted nature of these challenges and the need for more research and experimentation. The strong emphasis on communication and education highlights the importance of fostering a shared understanding and responsibility among urban dwellers.

This study demonstrates the conflict between climate change adaptation and the increased recreational demands on city forests. The diverse opinions among stakeholders highlight the need for integrated management approaches that consider ecological, social, and economic aspects. Further research should focus on developing effective communication and education strategies, assessing the impacts of various visitor management strategies, and investigating the long-term impacts of the pandemic on urban forest use. Spatial prioritization of forest functions and detailed mapping of ecological and recreational values will improve forest management strategies.

The study's limitations include the exclusion of private companies and certain international organizations from the stakeholder interviews. The focus on Karlsruhe limits the generalizability of the findings, while the qualitative nature of the study prevents establishing causal relationships. The relatively short duration of the interviews could have also limited the depth of stakeholder responses.