Collection and consumption of non-wood forest products in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many non-wood forest products (NWFPs) such as mushrooms and berries are collected and consumed in Europe; but both national statistical and scientific data on this topic are reported only for a limited number of countries, products and case-study areas. Without an adequate quantitative basis, their importance as source of food and income, their links to recreation and cultural heritage, are all under-valued in forest-focused and forest-related policies. In this study, we aimed to address this gap by assessing the consumption and collection of NWFPs through a statistically representative survey in 28 European countries with over 17 000 respondents. Our results show that 90 per cent of households consume NWFPs and about one-quarter collects them. The consumption and collection rates, as well as the number of collected products and their contribution to household income, increase from the west to east of Europe. The vast majority of collected products are consumed fresh. Households with higher income consume a more diverse range of NWFPs, especially in Western Europe. The relation between income and collection is more ambiguous, but there is some indication that the collection rate is higher than average among higher-income households in North and Western Europe and among lower-income households in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. Households for which NWFP collection is the main income source are predominantly located in Eastern Europe, and they focus their activities on few key products. Our results also identify recreational, hobby and professional collectors whose characteristics vary across socio-economic variables and geographical gradient. Recreational collectors in Western and Southern Europe collect 8 kg of NWFPs from five different products, while recreational collectors in Central-Eastern and North-Baltic Europe collect about four times more from 10 different products. Hobby collectors collect ~100 kg of NWFP per year and professional collectors half a ton, where both groups focus on 8–12 different products. Professional collectors are predominantly located in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. We end the study by pointing to future research directions and with a series of policy recommendations on how NWFPs could be addressed along the geographical, income and urban–rural gradient with respect to their role in forest recreation as a food and income source.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".