Family, community, and other small-scale forests have played a vital role in society and, for many forested countries, they form the backbone of local rural livelihoods by supporting forest-based businesses, and provision of multiple ecosystem services in a sustainable socio-ecological systems framework (Zhang et al. 2005; Pagdee et al. 2006). Recently, however, the global turbulence around international trade and climate agreements (see eg Bayramoglu et al. 2018)—without mentioning the covid-19 pandemic—have reminded the world that progress is not linear. In the same way, small-scale forestry is influenced by its changing operating environment and may encounter incremental developments, regressions, and transformative leaps (Kouplevatskaya-Buttoud 2009; Haugen et al. 2016). Such developments may follow patterns witnessed in other areas of society such as technology, the economy, and policy. Regardless of the scope of impact, transformations have a systemic and revolutionary nature (Wagener 1993). Such transformations cannot be fully orchestrated, but many can be foreseen, shaped, and prepared for (Cagnin et al. 2013). In small-scale forestry, that endeavor requires a deeper understanding of change, collaboration across disciplines and sectors, and out-of-the-box thinking. Many ongoing changes in small-scale forest ownership, such as forest fragmentation, parcelization, and urbanization and connected lifestyle changes (Wiersum et al. 2005; Hatcher et al. 2013; Snyder et al. 2019), have been regarded as challenges by forestry professionals and policymakers. For example, in Europe, the increase of very small-scale ownerships has been considered problematic from the wood supply and economic viability viewpoints (Poje et al. 2016; Rizzo et al. 2019). However, this could also be viewed as a positive development when considering that it is beneficial for as many people as possible to have a connection with nature through forest ownership (Hujala et al. 2020). Such a connection