Shifting from even-aged management to less intensive forestry in varying proportions of forest land in Finland: impacts on carbon storage, harvest removals, and harvesting costs

Abstract

Many studies have reported increased multi-functionality and financial profits due to a shift from even-to uneven-aged forest management. However, little is known (from long-term experiences or predictions) how alternative management systems could affect national-scale wood production and carbon storage, if adopted over very large areas. We analysed these effects using an area-based framework, in which multiple Markov chain models were used to simulate the development of forests according to different management systems. Classification of forests to wood availability categories was used to determine the system to be applied. We enhanced the framework to allow shifts between management systems that correspond to enforced or voluntary changes in forest use. Simulations of extensive shifts from conventional even-aged management to alternative silvicultural systems revealed interesting developmental patterns that cannot be directly deduced from studies that upscale from smaller areas. Our results show that the amount of carbon stored by Finnish forests can be increased by applying less intensive management systems, although this has trade-offs in terms of harvests and associated financial costs. The level of trade-offs differed depending on the type of forest that shifted between management systems and whether areas were also assumed to be completely set aside from forestry. These differences were further pronounced if the desired harvest levels and their allocation changed along with the management system. If the studied attributes were considered at the same relative scale and with equal weighting, the extensive shifts to alternative management systems exhibited the strongest impact on harvesting costs.

Initial forest age distribution may generate computational sinks or sources of carbon: A generic approach to test assumptions underlying the EU LULUCF forest reference levels

“…Even if not demonstrated specifically for the FRL computation, projections that consistently up-/downscale between country and European levels were prepared based on harmonized definitions, assumptions, and modelling methodology, while maintaining country-specific forestry practices [ 8 ]. On the other hand, by varying these assumptions to account for the related uncertainty [ 6 , 17 ], it is possible to analyze an interval of possible future outcomes as basis for forward-looking FRLs. Developing FRL guidance based on open-source modeling environments would allow utilizing pseudo-code and metadata templates [ 18 ] for conveying the modeling instructions and assumptions that would further promote the transparency of the reporting.…”

The Effect of Alternative Forest Management Models on the Forest Harvest and Emissions as Compared to the Forest Reference Level

“…Under the "EU habitats" forest management high-biodiversity forest patches stay onsite continuously, thus, less forest area is harvested when compared to the forest under clearcut forest management. Transition from clearcut forest management to selective logging forest management or "EU habitats" management leads to an increase in standing forest biomass and a decrease in wood removals [6,9]. Under the shelterwood forest management, the forest is regularly harvested as under the clearcut forest management, however, a share of the forest is left onsite for natural regeneration and protection of the regrowth.…”

“…Vauhkonen and Packalen (2019) [9] studied scenarios of large-scale forest transition to alternative forest management in Finland. They considered a number of scenarios of transition of different shares of forests from even-aged forest management to continuous cover forest management and set-aside management.…”

Assessing the Impacts of Land-Use Zoning Decisions on the Supply of Forest Ecosystem Services

“…In this case, the sustainable felling level often refers to the economic sustainability; that is, the felling removal and yield value of the growing stock should not decrease over time. In recent years, forest decision support systems (DSS) and quantitative scenario analyses have also been frequently used in assessing the consequences of alternative forest management strategies on the development of multiple ecosystem services and their joint production possibilities e.g., [24][25][26][27][28][29]. In the previous studies, the complexity of ecosystems services is usually operationalized through indicators that measure the magnitude ("value") of a benefit to wellbeing [30].…”