There are indeed a few forests in Iceland, with just over 2% of the country being currently forested. This has not always been the case. There is fossil evidence for a far more diverse range of trees, which grew under different climate conditions. Upon the arrival of humans just over 1000 years ago, it is estimated that between 25 and 40% of Iceland was covered in birch forests and woodlands. These disappeared quickly due to human activity in an otherwise harsh landscape.

Moreover, land degradation through soil erosion is a considerable problem. Vegetation cover has also diminished as a result of human activity, such as deforestation, sheep grazing and recreational activities, which have increased tourism and placed additional pressure on delicate plant growth. These are major environmental issues in Iceland where the conditions of an estimated 45% of its ecosystems are considered poor.

Afforestation and other forms of ecological restoration are therefore seen as vital in restoring the country’s fragile ecosystems. The first attempts to grow more trees began in the 1950s and 1960s. Yet, it was only in the 1990s that more concerted efforts began to restore some of Iceland’s woodlands. However, the importance of these actions is not only limited to afforestation.

Over the last decades, large areas in the south of Iceland and the southwestern part of the mid-highlands have changed their colours from black to green, as completely deserted sands have been transformed by Lyme grass. More recently, lupin has been used to enrich the soil in sparsely overgrown areas with ongoing erosion.

The increasing understanding of the severe consequences of climate change, as well as the strategies to combat them, resulted in several issues becoming part of Iceland’s climate strategy. Afforestation, wetland restoration and soil conversion are all measures that help to store carbon dioxide. All three elements are integral parts of developing policies that are aimed at reversing human-caused degradation of ecosystems since the settlement period and meeting the challenges of climate mitigation.

Moving these efforts forward is not without controversy. When it comes to implementing action, the interests of different groups within the population often collide.

These can be intertwined with what can prove to be complicated realities of land ownership: Who has the right to use public lands, and in what way? Many of these points of contention date back hundreds of years and require a consensual approach to aid in the attainment of regenerating Iceland’s barren landscapes.

There are also different perceptions of what Icelandic landscapes should look like. These rough and barren landscapes, that characterise large areas of the central highlands, are sometimes posited as the ideal; this is what nature in Iceland should look like. The common narrative stating that there are no trees in Iceland is reflected in a nostalgic preference for vast open lands rather than wide woodlands.

Turning Iceland into a green country – one that is green because it restores its natural ecosystems – as well as contributing to global efforts towards a more sustainable future, therefore, requires a national debate concerning how these aims should be achieved.

In the Icelandic PHOENIX pilot study, we aim to take a two-staged approach. First, we want to better understand the concerns and views of communities when it comes to ecological restoration efforts at the local level. At this stage, we engage with local residents and key stakeholders to identify their views and concerns, giving them the opportunity to envisage their proposals for a greener future. Insights from this deliberative journey through the local areas will then be used to engage with the general public in Iceland.
In the second stage, a Citizens’ Assembly will be realised, with the aim of engaging residents and citizens in developing policy proposals for ecological restoration at a national level.

This approach is designed to take two levels of participation and engagement into account, creating a level of inclusivity which is necessary to achieve a just green transition. Communities around the country could actively contribute to creating long-term restoration or revegetation policies and have a say on different matters, mostly at the local level. Additionally, it will be possible for the entire country to have a meaningful debate about the future directions of some of its environmental policies. Active involvement of people’s voices will be the key to the success of such a process that could provide a template for more democratic engagement in developing greener and more sustainable futures, for Iceland and beyond.

And maybe there is a future in which people will get lost again in Iceland’s green and pleasant forests.