Dining with Marc Castellnou

Beyond outlining the potential wildfire risk scenarios for the coming summer — detailing the various factors that define this risk: the drought we are suffering, imprudently underestimated by the rains of recent weeks, forecasts pointing to a very hot summer, the unhealthy state of many of our forests, the high percentage of dead or very old trees, etc. — and noting that the causes of this scenario have much to do, beyond those derived from climate change, with the scarce or non-existent management of forest areas, and with the lack of investment in equipment and the low spending on maintenance of farmland, access roads, firebreaks, etc. A long list of factors that in no way encourage optimism and lead us to disbelief as to why we find ourselves where we are, in a domain where, it must be said, our regional government holds broad competencies.

In any case, I found that some of the approaches put forward by the guest to explain this dark scenario — after many years of bringing them to the attention of different governments, not only through the fire service but also through much of the rest of the groups that live and know the rural world, such as forest managers, farming representatives, livestock farmers, etc. — were very inspiring, even shaking, insofar as they invite us to reconsider or rethink many of the terms that define our decision-making system as a country and society.

This is not a new issue — I would not want to appear naive — but in any case the problem described, like others in various fields, points to the need for changes that reconsider the weight given to certain groups, certain professional or academic profiles, in making certain decisions, especially when we are talking about long-term policies. Just as the reconsideration of the representativeness of certain territories or groups should have a bearing on what needs to be done in specific areas and domains.

Some figures to start the reflection, the dialogue and the debate:

1. The total area of Catalonia is 3.2 million hectares, of which 41.5% are forests and 23.1% are classified as forest land. The area dedicated to cultivation is 34%. Urban areas and land for infrastructure account for around 12%.
2. Of these forest areas and land, 75.7% are privately owned while the rest belong to publicly-owned entities.
3. Only 10% of Catalonia's population lives in rural areas.
4. This 10% of the population has an approximate parliamentary representation of between 11% and 16%.
5. Over the past 35 years, forest cover has grown from 35% to almost 70%. This increase in forest area closely mirrors the loss of cultivated land.
6. I have not been able to verify the current figure for our food self-sufficiency, but what we can establish is that if land dedicated to livestock and cultivation has decreased while the population has grown, self-sufficiency has fallen significantly, and will continue to do so.
7. Proactive management versus reactive management: the cost of extinguishing one hectare in 2023 was €19,000.
8. The budget allocated by the Government through various specific programmes and funds to ensure an effective response to wildfire emergencies has been 50 million euros.
9. 0.12% of the Government's budget to manage an area representing 45% of the total territory (counting forests alone).
10. Rural areas are increasingly poor in terms of disposable income per capita. The gap with urban areas today stands at 42%: €20,400 versus €11,900 per person per year.

Some reflections...

We know some reactive costs — those of intervening after the fact. What are the proactive investments that make sense? Do we have a well-defined cost/benefit equation in this domain?

What is the cost of not doing the right things, in the right place, at the right time, and by the right people? The cost of inaction.

What is the optimal forest biomass and what does it cost to maintain? What would be the cost of losing it? How many vectors can we imagine that this cost encompasses? Health (air and water quality), protection or loss of biodiversity, climate change mitigation, local economy, material loss, drought...

Have we considered that agricultural activity today, more than belonging to the primary sector, has also moved into the tertiary sector? Perhaps partially, but the work done in fields, meadows and forests has much of the nature of a service too, and this service must, needs to be, remunerated by the whole of society that benefits from it. If the Bages fires of the past decade had not encountered the crops of the Vallès farmers, those fires would very likely have reached the Barcelonès.

Have we assessed and anticipated what will happen to the headwaters of the Llobregat and Ter rivers when the Pyrenees burn, when thousands of tonnes of ash precipitate onto the reservoirs of these river basins that supply water to the large metropolitan areas?

Are we aware that a significant proportion of the drought is due to the large volume of forest? Approximately between 30% and 60% of the water evaporated from reservoirs may be attributable to forest biomass.

Do the people who make decisions in these domains have the optimal preparation? Are these decisions we can leave in the hands of majorities, even when those majorities may lack the relevant knowledge and training?

Why is the idea so massively entrenched that exploiting, managing, and deriving economic value from forests or nature is something bad, while others of us believe it is a necessary path to making them sustainable?

Forests, even though they are largely privately owned, generate positive impact on the whole community. How do we measure and reward the contribution and positive social impact they generate?

How do we balance efforts and responsibilities? How do we measure and compensate the bioclimatic balances of the country? The contributions that rural territories make towards urban ones, the export of pollution and toxicity that are manifestly an injustice. Costs transferred from city to countryside: these transfers need to be made and sized.

How do we resolve conflicts and discrepancies of criteria between the environment, agricultural management and economic management? Are the current model and weightings between these domains the right ones? Can we improve this necessary coexistence?

Giving the decision-making process full traceability, over time and with appropriate indicators... Actions and inactions have environmental, economic and social consequences — should they also have legal ones?

Some voices claim that Collserola Park is not sustainable. Can a space of 8,000 hectares in the middle of a metropolitan area, enjoyed by thousands of citizens every day, really be unsustainable? Have we assessed and accepted what its loss would mean? Can we reformulate its funding, the resources we devote to maintaining it? Could we consider sponsorships for forests or parks like Collserola? Can we contemplate usage fees, recruit volunteers, penalise misuse of the Park's space?... Almost any proposal would be better than deeming it unsustainable and as a consequence losing it.

Many of the challenges ahead of us — or perhaps not so far ahead — may demand a longer view than the one our current system contemplates.

Topics