Which type of forest management provides most ecosystem services?
Background: Forest ecosystems are increasingly seen as multi-functional production systems, which should provide, besides timber and economic benefits, also other ecosystem services related to biological diversity, recreational uses and environmental functions of forests. This study analyzed the p...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.
2016-04-01
|
| Series: | Forest Ecosystems |
| Online Access: | http://forestecosyst.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40663-016-0068-5 |
| Summary: | Background: Forest ecosystems are increasingly seen as multi-functional production systems, which should provide,
besides timber and economic benefits, also other ecosystem services related to biological diversity, recreational uses and
environmental functions of forests. This study analyzed the performance of even-aged rotation forest management (RFM),
continuous cover forestry (CCF) and any-aged forestry (AAF) in the production of ecosystem services. AAF allows both
even-aged and uneven-aged management schedules. The ecosystem services included in the analyses were net present
value, volume of harvested timber, cowberry and bilberry yields, scenic value of the forest, carbon balance and suitability
of the forest to Siberian jay.
Methods: Data envelopment analysis was used to derive numerical efficiency ratios for the three management systems.
Efficiency ratio is the sum of weighted outputs (ecosystem services) divided by the sum of weighted inputs. The linear
programing model proposed by Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes was used to derive the weights for calculating efficiency
scores for the silvicultural systems.
Results and conclusions: CCF provided more ecosystem services than RFM, and CCF was more efficient than RFM and
AAF in the production of ecosystem services. Multi-objective management provided more ecosystem services (except
harvested timber) than single-objective management that maximized economic profitability. The use of low discount rate
(resulting in low cutting level and high growing stock volume) led to better supply of most ecosystems services than the
use of high discount rate. RFM where NPV was maximized with high discount rate led to particularly poor provision of
most ecosystem services. In CCF the provision of ecosystem services was less sensitive to changes in discount rate and
management objective than in RFM.
Keywords: Data envelopment analysis, Production efficiency, Multi-objective management, Multi-functional forestry,
Continuous cover forestry, Rotation forest management, Any-aged forestry |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2095-6355 2197-5620 |