What is a forest? On the face of it, it’s a simple question. But one that holds profound significance for how we value forests and more broadly, the natural world. Your answer to this question provides clues to your relationship with forests as well as how you expect them to be treated. It also shapes the arguments you find compelling - and those that you reject – in global negotiations, like those at the recent annual Conference of the Parties to the UN conventions on climate change and biological diversity, better known as the COPs. How do these ideas of the natural world get formed and why do they matter?  

The question ‘what is a forest?’ can be answered in two ways. The first idea is that a forest is a resource to be utilised, managed, enjoyed, and shaped by humans. This is the most familiar idea to people steeped in a consumer lifestyle. It is also an old idea, with diverse origins, including the Judeo-Christian belief in human ‘stewardship’ over nature, the evolution and vast influence of capitalism, and the experience of colonialism. The thread uniting these viewpoints is that nature is separate to us – a thing apart from humans. When nature is understood as separate, the commodification of a forest, its timber, its wildlife, its fruit and seeds, even its potential as a site for leisure, all follow. We may value the forest and want it to thrive but in a manner that will keep feeding the value chains we have set up. The forest is the sum of its parts.

But there is another answer to the question of ‘what is a forest?’. Another perspective sees the forest not in terms of its constituent parts, but as a familial, interconnected system that is alive. The focus is on interdependence rather than separation. We humans are not a thing apart but interconnected with nature, part of a complex, global relationship based upon reciprocation. Many indigenous peoples share this idea of a forest, and, as science deepens our understanding of Earth’s systems, ideas of connectivity are gaining currency. The forest is more than the sum of its parts.

How do we come to believe one or other view? We are not born with these ideas, nor do most of us develop our ideas of nature through intentional interaction and careful study. For most people, ideas of nature are part of a broader set of values and principles that help to form worldviews. These ideas interact with the multiple identities that we develop, one or more of which can become more salient at a given time. Depending on your worldview and identity, a forest can represent a myriad of possibilities: a fire hazard, a carbon sink, a carbon emitter, a sanctuary, an ancestral home, an empty space, a fearful place of spirits, a money-spinner, a source of scientific discovery.   

How our ideas of nature are formed matters. Ideas influence the political economy shaping climate and environmental action in three ways: 

• Ideas are powerful drivers of action but can be missed in political economy analysis

The world does not work purely according to rational self-interest for economic and political benefits. Decisions are often taken based on considerations that seem more abstract: patriotism, faith, honour, freedom, glory. In other words, our behaviour is influenced by ‘who we are’ alongside what we want. Elon Musk’s transformation from being deeply sceptical of Donald Trump to a high-profile supporter and funder of Trump’s campaign is not solely explained by his economic interests, but also by his belief that humans will colonise Mars, a vision that underpins his libertarian preferences.

• Ideas can change, which means actions and behaviour can too.  

If we only consider the political and economic interests that constrain positive action on climate and the environment, it can seem impossible to make progress. But if ideas are important then even actors with strong vested interests may be open to different approaches. Mining tycoon Richard Forrest, for instance, made his fortune from iron ore and is now on a crusade to support green technologies for energy transformation.

• Analysing ideas, alongside interests, can open more innovative pathways of change 

Currently, the most powerful ideas of a forest remain those linked to resource extraction. This does not bode well for forests, given the multiple vested interests that wish to exploit them. Nor does it bode well for humans, if you believe in interdependence. However, examining how the ideas and actions of those with power might shift can open the way for more innovative change pathways to emerge. Here we can learn from Suzane Simard, author of ‘Finding the Mother Tree’. Long criticised by the conventional (and predominantly male) forestry thinkers of the time, she nonetheless persevered, eventually revolutionising the field with her discovery that forest trees share and trade food through fungal networks that connect their roots. Paying more attention to ideas, even those ideas that seem to buck conventional wisdom, can help us think about how powerholders might come to redefine their interests, opening the way for strategies that work with and for nature, not against it.