A mixed methods approach to better understand and steer multifunctional forestry in mountain regions of Europe

Despite decades of debates around multifunctional forestry (MFF), the definition of MFF is not agreed upon and the basic contention remains between those who support forests for timber, and those who give precedence to biodiversity and socio-cultural benefits of woodlands. These perspectives are deeply polarised. The contradictions between them are difficult to resolve, while many thought-provoking nuances in human values and attitudes towards forests remain hidden behind these basic polarizations. To advance knowledge of stakeholder values, attitudes, perceptions and preferences, important for informing the planning and implementation of MFF in mountain regions of Europe, we develop and apply an innovative combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, including literature surveys, interviews, workshops and Q-methodology. We use this approach in the Ukraine's Carpathians, the Scottish Highlands and Swiss Alps. It has enabled us to reveal both diversity and overlaps in-between and to develop a more nuanced understanding of MFF than is the general perception of basic polarised positions of Productivists vs Nature Protectionists . The achievement of this goal, with five groups of subjective perceptions identified and explained in this paper, is important for advancing the state-of-the-art in forest social science, as well as for bridging a knowledge gap between the multifunctional forestry concept and its operationalisation.