On the brink of transition? From pathways to methodological heuristics for improved causal analysis in forest transition research

The forest transition – a sustained shift from net loss to net gain in forest cover – has enabled macro-level explanatory accounts of the causal processes underlying reversals of net forest loss. However, criticisms emphasise the inadequate accounting of scalar and spatial interdependences giving rise to uneven dynamics, while the dominant explanatory approach of characterising pathways seem incapable of explaining heterogeneous forest transition experiences. To advance the value of the forest transition framework, this paper (1) draws on a review of 126 articles to elucidate the methodological approaches and causal-analytic strategies of three strands of forest transition research; (2) presents a series of methodological heuristics grounded in critical realism to advance more holistic and context-dependent causal analysis; and (3) illustrates the resulting methodological framework with an ongoing research project. The review demonstrates a wide diversity of methodological leanings in forest transition scholarship, ranging from regression on forest cover change and econometric analysis to local mixed-method case studies and historical narrative analyses. Less than half of studies (48 %) engage with pathways as an explanatory approach, while 22 % draw on complementary theoretical approaches. The methodological heuristics proposed reconcile competing epistemologies and carve out a causal role for emergent powers of social practices, recognising the complex and situated expressions of forest transitions while retaining ambitions for boundedly generalisable claims on causal processes. I argue that a CR-based methodological approach permits engaging seriously with multiple, interacting generative processes while asking normative questions about what types of forest transitions are desirable to whom.