Abstract
Carbon sequestration and capture have gained a central position in forest governance, alongside wood production and biodiversity conservation, resulting in calls for policy coherence and integration across the EU. While coherence is often a target in the technical assessment of the policy design, it is important to understand how incoherent policies are supported by disconnected or incongruent knowledge claims and epistemologies. We address the coherence of forest policy by analysing the content and knowledge claims in forest, bioeconomy, and biodiversity strategies of Finland, an EU member state in which forests have a strong economic, political, and cultural status. Focussing on the argumentation regarding forest carbon, our analysis shows that the policy domains remain largely disconnected and rely on differentiated knowledge bases. Despite the explicit claims about policy coherence, few genuine attempts have been made towards integration and coordination between the domains. Our analysis reveals the different logics with which climate change is to be governed, and the types of knowledge utilised and produced in the integration of forest carbon as a policy object. Our analysis suggests that policy strategies with sectoral foci facilitate incoherent policymaking due to unresolved trade-offs and knowledge disagreements. Knowledge used in the policy design and implementation processes should be discussed thoroughly, and thereby integrated.