Biodiversity Indicators for Sustainable Forestry: Simplifying Complexity

Hagan, John M.; Whitman, Andrew A.

doi:10.1093/jof/104.4.203

Cited by 24 publications

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Corporate Biodiversity Management through Certifiable Standards

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes the motivations, internalization challenges and outcomes of implementing certifiable standards for corporate biodiversity management. For this purpose, a qualitative study based on interviews with 39 environmental managers, auditors, consultants and other experts in the field was conducted. The findings show that the adoption of new standards for biodiversity management is essentially driven by the need to improve the social acceptability of activities that can have a significant impact on natural habitats. The possible benefits of certification, particularly in terms of stakeholder relationships, and the difficulty of measuring the intangible aspects of biodiversity issues are also discussed. The study contributes to the emerging literature on organizational biodiversity management and to the debates on the symbolic versus substantial adoption of certifiable environmental standards. Managerial implications for organizations interested in biodiversity management are also discussed. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Corporate Biodiversity Management through Certifiable Standards

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Rethinking forest‐bird habitat management guidelines in the northern Lake States

Corace

2018

Wildl. Soc. Bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity challenges require more ecologically based approaches to habitat management of forest wildlife. Although active management is necessary for the conservation of many forest-dependent wildlife species, some high-severity (even-aged) forest management practices could be improved upon with greater consideration of natural disturbance models. Using examples of 3 migratory bird species of conservation priority and for which high-severity forest management practices are conducted in the northern Lake States (Kirtland's warbler [Setophaga kirtlandii], golden-winged warbler [Vermivora chrysoptera], American woodcock [Scolopax minor]), I first summarize lessons learned and then illustrates how a more ecological approach to forest-bird habitat planning and management might work. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

show abstract

A Pragmatic Approach for Developing Landbase Cumulative Effects Assessments with Aggregated Impacts Crossing Multiple Ecological Values

Sutherland

Smith²,

Waterhouse

et al. 2022

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In strategic cumulative effects assessments, significant methodological challenges exist for classifying and aggregating impacts when using multiple indicators to determine relative risks upon ecological values from anthropogenic developments. We present a strategic spatial modeling case study CEA (2012–2112) in a 909,000 ha forested landscape of Southwestern British Columbia. We explore decisions needed to calculate and aggregate modeled indicators of cumulative anthropogenic footprints on landscape conditions by examining the choice of quantitative methods. We compare how aggregated impact conclusions may differ for seven indicators grouped in two ways to represent three ecological values (Forest Ecosystems, Riparian Ecosystems and Species at Risk): four expert-defined policy-driven valued components (VCs) or three analytically derived environmental resource factors (ERFs). By explicitly demonstrating methodological choices at each step of impact estimation and aggregation, we outline a practical systematic approach to customize strategic CEAs of this type and retain transparency for interpreting impacts among values. Aggregated impacts for VCs appeared dominated by those estimated from “condition” indicators describing the degree of expected deviations in indicator states from desired conditions; aggregated impacts of ERFs were dominated by “pressure” indicators linked to underlying causal processes assumed important for describing changes in future ecological conditions. High spatial congruence occurred between impact statements for some VCs compared to ERFs representing the same ecological value; poor congruence between others likely occurred because they represented different ecological processes. Aggregated impact classifications may usefully signal impact severity and risk but are dependent on indicator grouping, hence choices for aggregation are integral to the assessment process.

show abstract

Biodiversity Indicators for Sustainable Forestry: Simplifying Complexity

Cited by 24 publications

References 8 publications

Corporate Biodiversity Management through Certifiable Standards

Corporate Biodiversity Management through Certifiable Standards

Rethinking forest‐bird habitat management guidelines in the northern Lake States

A Pragmatic Approach for Developing Landbase Cumulative Effects Assessments with Aggregated Impacts Crossing Multiple Ecological Values

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About