Preserving forest legacy was an important objective throughout Romanian history and so is today. Artificial forest regeneration (including both reforestation and afforestation) was widely used to ensure the forest continuity, following forest harvesting, or to create new forests on non-forest lands. As Romania has undergone various political changes that affected the socio-economic environment, these changes also left significant marks on forest cover dynamics. In this paper, we chronologically present the historical initiatives to preserve and increase forest cover in Romania, the current practices, available funding and future perspectives on artificial forest regeneration. Increasing forest cover from the current level of 27% to, and beyond European average of 33% seems an ambitious target for Romania. However, that may be achievable if the sources of funding for afforestation would diversify and increase, the available funds would be more effectively accessed, national forestry regulations would be less bureaucratic and the guidelines on artificial forest regeneration would be up to date and less restrictive. The whole framework of forestation should be revised to comply with recent social, economic and environmental realities, and modern criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management should be explicitly included. The new goals should also be tailored to the changes regarding the property type, climate related trends and new requirements of the forest certification systems.

Seedlings are the foundation for many terrestrial ecosystems and are a critical consideration and investment for implementing global forest and landscape restoration programs. Global leaders have pledged to restore millions of hectares during the next decade, necessitating many millions of established plants. Although natural regeneration and direct seeding will likely meet a portion of that need, large quantities of high-quality, nursery-grown seedlings are also required. Insufficient plant quantities or poor-quality plants result in unsuccessful outplanting programs. Such failures have considerable economic and environmental consequences and will result in an inability to meet restoration goals. Nonetheless, the importance of restoration nurseries is often overlooked when making large-scale restoration commitments. Technology already exists to produce high-quality plants to meet a variety of goals. This technology cannot be applied, however, unless adequate resources and training are made available by overcoming political and socioeconomic barriers. In this article, we discuss the important role of nurseries to meet global restoration commitments and review three case studies where increased support to nursery programs resulted in improved restoration success.

Direct seeding has been considered a forest restoration option for centuries. Over the past half century, the use of this practice has declined in developed countries as forest regeneration programs have advanced with the production of quality seedlings that can successfully establish restoration sites. Direct seeding is being reconsidered as a restoration option as the potential size of the worldwide forest restoration program has grown because of massive deforestation in third-world nations and due to global climate change. This review examines direct seeding from a number of perspectives. First, merits of using this practice in restoration programs are defined. Major merits of this option are that it can be done quickly, over hard to reach and large disturbed areas, and at a relatively low cost. Second, current research findings from restoration programs are discussed. The major finding is that seedling establishment rates are low (i.e. typically around 20% of seeds planted) due to site conditions, seed predation and vegetation competition, and field performance (i.e. survival and growth) is lower than planted seedlings. Third, operational practices for the application in restoration programs are reviewed. To successfully conduct direct seeding programs practitioners need to consider seedbed receptivity, seed distribution and seeding rate. Fourth, potential new practices are presented. Some of these new practices attempt to create a more effective means to disperse seed across the site, minimize seed predation or create a more favorable microsite environment. This review provides a synthesis of what is known about direct seeding, thereby allowing practitioners to make a rational decision of whether to apply this practice towards their forest restoration program.