Forest Investment Framework as a Support Tool for the Sustainable Management of Planted Forests

Abstract

Planted forest ecosystems provide a wide range of goods and services such as timber, carbon sequestration, and avoided erosion. However, only ecosystem services with market values (e.g., timber) are usually represented in decision making while those with non-market values (e.g., avoided erosion) that are difficult to quantify are often ignored. A spatial economic tool, the Forest Investment Framework (FIF), integrates data from forest growth models with spatial, biophysical, and economic data, to quantify the broader value of planted forests and to represent non-market values in sustainable forest management. In this paper, we have tested the applicability of FIF in three types of case studies: assessment of afforestation feasibility, regional economic analyses, and ecosystem service assessment. This study provides evidence that a spatial economic tool that quantifies the economic, environmental, and social values of the planted forest ecosystem is valuable in informing land management decisions for maintaining and enhancing the provision of market and non-market ecosystem services to society.

Probabilistic Risk Assessment of the Economy‐Wide Impacts From a Changing Wildfire Climate on a Regional Rural Landscape

“…For example, current climate policies in New Zealand incentivize afforestation due to its carbon sequestration benefits without considering the implications from potentially more frequent wildfires. Similar to the land‐use scenarios analyzed in this study, an “afforestation scenario” could be developed by spatially forecasting afforestation patterns based on socio‐economic and policy drivers (e.g., West et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2019). Based on the G@R metric developed in this study, a G@R under an “afforestation scenario” could be estimated and compared against the G@R of future, potential wildfire adaptation/mitigation strategies such as fire‐smart forest management practices (Hirsch et al., 2001).…”

Transitional forestry in New Zealand: re‐evaluating the design and management of forest systems through the lens of forest purpose

“…Implementation is challenged, however, by uncertain immediate economic benefits for forest landowners. Such limitations could be addressed by ecosystem service valuing frameworks that reward the range of economic returns delivered by multiple‐purpose, structurally diverse forests (Turner et al ., 2011; Yao et al ., 2019 b ), including spatially explicit modelling methods able to attribute such values directly at the stand level (Nelson et al ., 2009; Yao et al ., 2019 a ). To be available for recreation and tourism, multiple‐purpose forests with these revenue‐generating features would also, ideally, need to be accessible from major population centres.…”