This study explores the perspectives and adaptive strategies of forest stakeholders across five regions of Europe, North to South-Finland, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, and Greece-regarding climate change challenges in forestry. 129 stakeholders were surveyed, including forest owners, professionals, environmental NGOs, government representatives, and recreationists, who pointed at soil quality, biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and timber production as the main concerns. Regional threats varied, with storms and pests prevailing in Finland, illegal logging in Lithuania, Romania and Serbia, and fires and unsustainable grazing in Greece. Proposed solutions emphasise active forest management, stakeholder engagement and policy reforms. While Finland and Serbia are optimistic about future forest resilience, Lithuania and Romania are neutral. Greece shows mixed reactions, mainly due to concerns about the political will to implement effective forest policy. The study highlights nuanced regional responses to climate-related forest challenges and the need for region-specific approaches to forest management and policy, with broader implications for environmental governance strategies.

Drought events are among the costliest natural disasters and are increasing in frequency and intensity. Various methods exist to assess the economic effects of drought, yet their practical applications and advantages are often unclear. This paper evaluates three conceptual market- based methods to assess drought's direct and distributive economic effects on agriculture, using production data from a regional soil water balance model and historical price data for the 2018 drought event in Flanders (Belgium). Additionally, semi-structured interviews with 11 agricultural stakeholders (farmers, government experts, sector federation representatives, and potato processors) are applied to explore their perception of two main topics: 1) assessing drought's effects and 2) the advantages and disadvantages of the three methods. Our results align with existing estimations that certain farmers could benefit from a drought event due to a socalled natural hedge. Although the calculations show that consumers are always negatively affected, respondents view the impact on consumers as limited in the Flemish context. Furthermore, respondents view droughts as less damaging and more manageable than flooding or heat waves but express concerns about future water availability. The producer surplus method gained the most support but requires refinement for practical use. Refined producer surplus calculations could support cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses to determine drought's financial effects on agriculture. Investment in adaptation measures could reduce farmers' vulnerability to drought while enabling short-term benefits from price increases. These results could aid in designing efficient drought-management policies and form a basis for further research on the economic effects of drought events.

Mismanagement and human activities in the environment have a significant effect on increasing the loss of soil. Therefore, the current research is planned to incorporate management responses in the direction of soil erosion changes from the past (2011), the current situation (2021), and the future (2031) through the RUSLE and DPSIR models. In this regard, first, the Landsat 5 and 8 satellite images of 2011 and 2021 have been used to prepare the land cover map of the Eskandari Watershed. Then, the prediction of land cover change was done using the Markov model, and soil erosion was calculated with RUSLE. Then, by organizing a workshop with the presence of stakeholders and experts, the driving force-pressures-state-impacts-responses (DPSIR) were investigated in the direction of soil erosion changes. Finally, the stakeholder's responses were ranked and components were prioritized by the TOPSIS method. The results show that soil erosion in 2011, 2021, and 2031 is 4.49, 7.13, and 11.44 ton/h/y, respectively. In addition, the main driver for increasing soil erosion in the region is the expansion of agricultural land (82.0%). The pressure of destruction and change of land use (90.1%) is one of the most important reasons for the development of improper agriculture (86.5%) in the region, which has the most main effect on the increase of flood and erosion damage (82.5%). In this regard; strengthening of supervisory and executive mechanisms and modification of laws with a score of 0.741 is an appropriate management response in the Eskandari Watershed. Also, the implementation of comprehensive watershed management programs (0.694) and management and organizational cohesion (0.551) are assigned the next priorities respectively. Finally; the results of prioritization based on the weights obtained regarding the contribution of the components in the direction of increasing soil erosion showed that the pressure component (0.302) has the highest contribution and the impact (0.24), driver (0.231) and state (0.227) components are respectively in the next priorities. While; the suggested with the implementation of management responses; the contribution of pressure, impact, state, and driver components on soil erosion in the watershed should be reduced to 0.396, 0.272, 0.247, and 0.085 respectively. In this regard; the current research is significant in terms of the attention of managers and experts in the implementation of corrective management based on the results obtained. So; to prevent the increase of soil loss and improve the watershed situation, the policies of the land sector should be carried out in a larger context and with internal and external cooperation.

Many species have been intentionally introduced to new regions for their benefits. Some of these alien species cause damage, others do not (or at least have not yet). There are several approaches to address this problem: prohibit taxa that will cause damage, try to limit damages while preserving benefits, or promote taxa that are safe. In the present article, we unpack the safe list approach, which we define as a list of taxa alien to the region of interest that are considered of sufficiently low risk of invasion and impact that the taxa can be widely used without concerns of negative impacts. We discuss the potential use of safe lists in the management of biological invasions; disentangle aspects related to the purpose, development, implementation, and impact of safe lists; and provide guidance for those considering to develop and implement such lists.