Long‐term comparison shows protected and non‐protected forests differ in harvesting, but not in wildfires or drought‐driven dieback

Abstract While disturbances are essential for biodiversity, their escalation driven by climate change may threaten forest ecosystems. Contrasting approaches to adapt forests to disturbances—intensifying management versus encouraging natural succession towards more mature ecosystems—have sparked a debate about whether protection influences forests' vulnerability to disturbance. This question, however, has barely been investigated. Natura 2000 network is the backbone of biodiversity protection in Europe. We compared the long‐term incidence of harvesting, wildfires and drought‐driven forest dieback inside and outside Natura 2000 areas in Catalonia (NE Spain) by combining remote sensing‐derived maps of harvesting and wildfires (1985–2023), an exhaustive ground survey on forest dieback (2012–2023) and forest characteristics extracted from 3400 permanent plots inventoried in 1990, 2000 and 2015. From 1985 to 2023, remote sensing‐identified wildfires and harvesting affected 20% of the total forest area, with 60% attributed to harvesting and 40% to wildfires, highlighting the strong influence of wildfires on Mediterranean landscapes. From 2012 to 2023, the forest area affected by drought‐driven dieback (11%) matched the sum of the area of wildfires and harvesting for the same period or that of wildfires for 40 years, which suggests an increasing impact of drought‐driven dieback. Harvesting occurrence and intensity were significantly higher outside Natura 2000 sites, whereas protection did not influence wildfires or dieback, triggered by environmental and forest characteristics, that is, bioclimatic region, topography or leaf habit. Ultimately, a higher harvesting intensity did not prevent forests from experiencing drought‐driven dieback later. Synthesis and applications . Lower forest harvesting in Natura 2000 sites may align with socio‐economic barriers often claimed by local communities, but protection does not influence vulnerability to other disturbances. In a general scenario of reduced forest harvesting in the region, we argue that differences in harvesting due to protection are statistically significant but ecologically irrelevant in influencing wildfires or drought‐driven dieback. Moreover, beyond protection status, the lack of effects of the current harvesting intensities in halting drought‐driven dieback suggests they may be insufficient for supporting forests' adaptation to climate change. Additionally, other measures (e.g. promoting more drought‐tolerant tree species and genotypes) should also be considered.