Ecological sustainability of forestry remains a distant target due to increasing loggings and intensive silvicultural measures such as soil preparation and forest ditching. This threatens e.g. biodiversity and water protection. Finnish forest regulation consists of the Forest Act and the Nature Conservation Act, soft law guidance and forest certification. The Forest Act requires that the Finnish Forest Centre prepares regional forest programs (RFP) in cooperation with parties representing the forest sector and other relevant stakeholders and stipulates that RFPs contain the general objectives for sustainable forest management of each region. RFPs are non-binding and general in nature – typical soft law instruments. In this article we have considered RFPs as a part of forest regulation and scrutinized what kind of added value RFPs bring to ecologically sustainable forest management. We interviewed representatives of Finnish Forest Centre (9) and an environmental NGO (7) and analyzed RFPs in order to recognize the weaknesses and strengths of RFPs in making forestry more ecological, and suggested improvements in legislation and practices to make RFPs more effective. Currently RFPs are influential mainly in directing funding for nature protection and management (e.g. educating, protecting valuable forest habitats and restoring ecosystems) within a region. RFPs are also used to influence the contents of other plans such as Rural Development Plans. According to the interviews, the main benefit of RFP process is its role as a discussion forum. In addition to debating and information sharing, this can sometimes lead to concrete collaborative projects, too. In general, the added value of RFPs is modest, and most measures mentioned in RFPs would be taken by the Finnish Forest Centre in any case.
Despite the fairly insignificant impact of the RFPs, they are the only collaborative instrument for governing forestry on the regional level. The regulation of the RFPs could be improved by emphasizing the weight of environmental sustainability and the representatives of ecological knowledge and viewpoints (environmental authorities, scientists and NGOs) in the planning process. Also, other tools and practices should be developed, and more funds should be allocated for forest authorities to implement nature conservation and management measures mentioned in RFPs, including educating forest owners and loggers.