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

Abstract

Forestry management worldwide has become increasingly effective at obtaining high timber yields from productive forests. In New Zealand, a focus on improving an increasingly successful and largely Pinus radiata plantation forestry model over the last 150 years has resulted in some of the most productive timber forests in the temperate zone. In contrast to this success, the full range of forested landscapes across New Zealand, including native forests, are impacted by an array of pressures from introduced pests, diseases, and a changing climate, presenting a collective risk of losses in biological, social and economic value. As the national government policies incentivise reforestation and afforestation, the social acceptability of some forms of newly planted forests is also being challenged. Here, we review relevant literature in the area of integrated forest landscape management to optimise forests as nature‐based solutions, presenting ‘transitional forestry’ as a model design and management paradigm appropriate to a range of forest types, where forest purpose is placed at the heart of decision making. We use New Zealand as a case study region, describing how this purpose‐led transitional forestry model can benefit a cross section of forest types, from industrialised forest plantations to dedicated conservation forests and a range of multiple‐purpose forests in between. Transitional forestry is an ongoing multi‐decade process of change from current ‘business‐as‐usual’ forest management to future systems of forest management, embedded across a continuum of forest types. This holistic framework incorporates elements to enhance efficiencies of timber production, improve overall forest landscape resilience, and reduce some potential negative environmental impacts of commercial plantation forestry, while allowing the ecosystem functioning of commercial and non‐commercial forests to be maximised, with increased public and biodiversity conservation value. Implementation of transitional forestry addresses tensions that arise between meeting climate mitigation targets and improving biodiversity criteria through afforestation, alongside increasing demand for forest biomass feedstocks to meet the demands of near‐term bioenergy and bioeconomy goals. As ambitious government international targets are set for reforestation and afforestation using both native and exotic species, there is an increasing opportunity to make such transitions via integrated thinking that optimises forest values across a continuum of forest types, while embracing the diversity of ways in which such targets can be reached.

Close-to-nature management of tropical timber plantations is economically viable and provides biodiversity benefits

“…Nonetheless, they offer a seemingly financially viable and ecologically valuable alternative to conventional even-aged monoculture plantations that can be managed based on relatively simple management heuristics. In the broader trend towards multi-purpose forest management that has also reached tropical plantation forestry, CTN managed plantations might be an important component of 30 future tropical forest landscapes within the sparing-sharing continuum (Betts et al, 2021;Jones et al, 2023;Runting et al, 2019).…”

Financial Comparison of Continuous-Cover Forestry, Rotational Forest Management and Permanent Carbon Forest Regimes for Redwood within New Zealand

“…However, public perceptions of radiata pine clearfell regimes have recently deteriorated due to damage from severe storm events that has resulted in the flow of large quantities of forestry harvest debris into hydrological systems, resulting in a cascade of negative social and ecological issues [34]. The diversification of forestry through the implementation of systems such as CCF may provide a means of retaining wood flow and carbon sequestration while mitigating these types of risks and improving social and environmental benefits from forests [35].…”