Multiple actors are typically involved in forest management, namely communities, managers and researchers. In such cases, suboptimal management outcomes may, in addition to other factors, be symptomatic of a divergence in perspectives among these actors driven by fundamental differences in ecological knowledge. We examine the degree of congruence between the understandings of actors surrounding key issues of management concern in three case studies from tropical, subtropical and boreal forests. We identify commonly encountered points of divergence in ecological knowledge relating to key management processes and issues. We use these to formulate seven hypotheses about differences in the bodies of knowledge that frequently underlie communication and learning failures in forest management contexts where multiple actors are involved and outcomes are judged to be suboptimal. Finally, we present a set of propositions to acknowledge and narrow these differences. A more complete recognition of the full triangulation between all actors involved, and of the influence that fundamental differences in ecological knowledge can exert, may help lead to a more fruitful integration between local knowledge and practice, manager knowledge and practice, and contemporary science in forest management.