IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v118y2020ics1389934120302483.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How considering multiple criteria, uncertainty scenarios and biological interactions may influence the optimal silvicultural strategy for a mixed forest

Author

Listed:
  • Knoke, Thomas
  • Kindu, Mengistie
  • Jarisch, Isabelle
  • Gosling, Elizabeth
  • Friedrich, Stefan
  • Bödeker, Kai
  • Paul, Carola

Abstract

Assessing pre-defined strategies remains the status quo for studies supporting silvicultural decision-making for future forest management, yet, such strategies may not fully address decision-makers' preferences and uncertainty attitudes. We develop a continuous stand-level optimisation approach that integrates multiple decision criteria, uncertain input data based on ellipsoidal uncertainty sets and biological interactions. The optimisation aims to derive silvicultural strategies that closely align with the objectives and uncertainty attitudes of decision-makers. The novel approach optimises tree species composition and harvesting regimes simultaneously. In our example, the decision criteria are the soil expectation value (SEV), the volume of timber harvested, the sum of cash flows and the average amount of carbon stored in the forest. We use input data for Norway spruce (Picea abies), Silver fir (Abies alba) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica), and integrate biological stand-level interactions represented by a) enhanced survival of tree species in mixed forests and b) the growth response of trees remaining after partial harvesting. The resulting optimal silvicultural strategies ranged from a clear-cutting system (when maximising SEV and ignoring uncertainty) to continuous cover forestry (maximising SEV and considering uncertainty). Our analyses did not support single species forestry – even the clear-cutting system suggested a mixed rather than pure forest. Silvicultural strategies that consider multiple criteria stored up to 47% more carbon than the clear-cutting system, but their SEVs were up to 39% lower. Biological interactions influence the optimal stand composition and harvesting regime, while establishment costs and the discount rate affect the level achieved for each management criterion. Lower survival due to changes in climate hardly influenced the model results. Our optimisation approach is flexible and may integrate many more and different criteria. It is useful to derive silvicultural strategies to guide science-based recommendations for various forest decision-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Knoke, Thomas & Kindu, Mengistie & Jarisch, Isabelle & Gosling, Elizabeth & Friedrich, Stefan & Bödeker, Kai & Paul, Carola, 2020. "How considering multiple criteria, uncertainty scenarios and biological interactions may influence the optimal silvicultural strategy for a mixed forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:118:y:2020:i:c:s1389934120302483
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934120302483
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anja Rammig, 2020. "Tropical carbon sinks are saturating at different times on different continents," Nature, Nature, vol. 579(7797), pages 38-39, March.
    2. Olli Tahvonen, 2015. "Economics of Naturally Regenerating, Heterogeneous Forests," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(2), pages 309-337.
    3. Schwaiger, Fabian & Poschenrieder, Werner & Biber, Peter & Pretzsch, Hans, 2019. "Ecosystem service trade-offs for adaptive forest management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    4. Friedrich, Stefan & Paul, Carola & Brandl, Susanne & Biber, Peter & Messerer, Katharina & Knoke, Thomas, 2019. "Economic impact of growth effects in mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech – A simulation based study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 65-80.
    5. Knoke, Thomas & Gosling, Elizabeth & Paul, Carola, 2020. "Use and misuse of the net present value in environmental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Janne Rämö & Olli Tahvonen, 2017. "Optimizing the Harvest Timing in Continuous Cover Forestry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 853-868, August.
    7. Armstrong, Claire W., 2007. "A note on the ecological-economic modelling of marine reserves in fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 242-250, April.
    8. Roessiger, Joerg & Griess, Verena C. & Härtl, Fabian & Clasen, Christian & Knoke, Thomas, 2013. "How economic performance of a stand increases due to decreased failure risk associated with the admixing of species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 58-69.
    9. Susanne Neuner & Thomas Knoke, 2017. "Economic consequences of altered survival of mixed or pure Norway spruce under a dryer and warmer climate," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 519-531, February.
    10. Dieter, Matthias, 2001. "Land expectation values for spruce and beech calculated with Monte Carlo modelling techniques," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 157-166, June.
    11. Luz Maria Castro & Fabian Härtl & Santiago Ochoa & Baltazar Calvas & Leonardo Izquierdo & Thomas Knoke, 2018. "Integrated bio-economic models as tools to support land-use decision making: a review of potential and limitations," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 183-211, July.
    12. Fabian H. Härtl & Sebastian Höllerl & Thomas Knoke, 2017. "A new way of carbon accounting emphasises the crucial role of sustainable timber use for successful carbon mitigation strategies," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 1163-1192, December.
    13. Schou, Erik & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Kristensen, Kristian Løkke, 2012. "An economic evaluation of strategies for transforming even-aged into near-natural forestry in a conifer-dominated forest in Denmark," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 89-98.
    14. Knoke, Thomas & Paul, Carola & Härtl, Fabian & Castro, Luz Maria & Calvas, Baltazar & Hildebrandt, Patrick, 2015. "Optimizing agricultural land-use portfolios with scarce data—A non-stochastic model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 250-259.
    15. Eggers, Jeannette & Holmgren, Sara & Nordström, Eva-Maria & Lämås, Tomas & Lind, Torgny & Öhman, Karin, 2019. "Balancing different forest values: Evaluation of forest management scenarios in a multi-criteria decision analysis framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 55-69.
    16. Di Falco, Salvatore & Perrings, Charles, 2005. "Crop biodiversity, risk management and the implications of agricultural assistance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 459-466, December.
    17. Gorissen, Bram L. & Yanıkoğlu, İhsan & den Hertog, Dick, 2015. "A practical guide to robust optimization," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 124-137.
    18. Knoke, Thomas & Paul, Carola & Härtl, Fabian, 2017. "A critical view on benefit-cost analyses of silvicultural management options with declining discount rates," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 58-69.
    19. Stefan Baumgärtner & Martin F. Quaas, 2010. "Managing increasing environmental risks through agrobiodiversity and agrienvironmental policies," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 483-496, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jarisch, Isabelle & Bödeker, Kai & Bingham, Logan Robert & Friedrich, Stefan & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2022. "The influence of discounting ecosystem services in robust multi-objective optimization – An application to a forestry-avocado land-use portfolio," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Bastit, Félix & Brunette, Marielle & Montagné-Huck, Claire, 2023. "Pests, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    3. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    4. Knoke, Thomas & Gosling, Elizabeth & Thom, Dominik & Chreptun, Claudia & Rammig, Anja & Seidl, Rupert, 2021. "Economic losses from natural disturbances in Norway spruce forests – A quantification using Monte-Carlo simulations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. Félix Bastit & Marielle Brunette & Claire Montagne-Huck, 2021. "Earth, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Working Papers of BETA 2021-25, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Mengistie Kindu & Logan Robert Bingham & José G. Borges & Susete Marques & Olha Nahorna & Jeannette Eggers & Thomas Knoke, 2022. "Opportunity Costs of In Situ Carbon Storage Derived by Multiple-Objective Stand-Level Optimization—Results from Case Studies in Portugal and Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Aino Assmuth & Janne Rämö & Olli Tahvonen, 2021. "Optimal Carbon Storage in Mixed-Species Size-Structured Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(2), pages 249-275, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    2. Jarisch, Isabelle & Bödeker, Kai & Bingham, Logan Robert & Friedrich, Stefan & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2022. "The influence of discounting ecosystem services in robust multi-objective optimization – An application to a forestry-avocado land-use portfolio," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    3. Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul & Elizabeth Gosling & Isabelle Jarisch & Johannes Mohr & Rupert Seidl, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Resilience of Different Management Systems to Severe Forest Disturbance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(2), pages 343-381, February.
    4. Ochoa. M, W. Santiago & Härtl, Fabian H. & Paul, Carola & Knoke, Thomas, 2019. "Cropping systems are homogenized by off-farm income – Empirical evidence from small-scale farming systems in dry forests of southern Ecuador," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 204-219.
    5. Friedrich, Stefan & Paul, Carola & Brandl, Susanne & Biber, Peter & Messerer, Katharina & Knoke, Thomas, 2019. "Economic impact of growth effects in mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech – A simulation based study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 65-80.
    6. Elisa Gatto & Alba Marino & Guido Signorino, 2013. "Biodiversity and risk management in agriculture: what do we learn from CAP reforms? A farm-level analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa13p805, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    8. Elisa Gatto & Guido Signorino, 2014. "Crop-diversity and Cereal Production under the CAP Reform: Evidence from Italy," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(3), pages 35-50.
    9. Augeraud-Véron, Emmanuelle & Fabbri, Giorgio & Schubert, Katheline, 2021. "Volatility-reducing biodiversity conservation under strategic interactions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    10. Luz Maria Castro & Fabian Härtl & Santiago Ochoa & Baltazar Calvas & Leonardo Izquierdo & Thomas Knoke, 2018. "Integrated bio-economic models as tools to support land-use decision making: a review of potential and limitations," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 183-211, July.
    11. Zamora-Pereira, Juan Carlos & Hanewinkel, Marc & Yousefpour, Rasoul, 2023. "Robust management strategies promoting ecological resilience and economic efficiency of a mixed conifer-broadleaf forest in Southwest Germany under the risk of severe drought," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    12. Finger, Robert & Buchmann, Nina, 2014. "An ecological economic assessment of risk reducing effects of species diversity in grassland production," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182681, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Hertog, Iris Maria & Brogaard, Sara & Krause, Torsten, 2022. "Barriers to expanding continuous cover forestry in Sweden for delivering multiple ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    14. Matsushita, Kyohei & Yamane, Fumihiro & Asano, Kota, 2016. "Linkage between crop diversity and agro-ecosystem resilience: Nonmonotonic agricultural response under alternate regimes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 23-31.
    15. Zdeňka Žáková Kroupová & Lukáš Čechura & Matěj Opatrný & Zuzana Hloušková & Iveta Mlezivová, 2023. "Assessment of the impact of agricultural support on crop diversity," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(3), pages 89-100.
    16. Mintewab Bezabih & Mare Sarr, 2012. "Risk Preferences and Environmental Uncertainty: Implications for Crop Diversification Decisions in Ethiopia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(4), pages 483-505, December.
    17. Knoke, Thomas & Steinbeis, Otto-Emmanuel & Bösch, Matthias & Román-Cuesta, Rosa María & Burkhardt, Thomas, 2011. "Cost-effective compensation to avoid carbon emissions from forest loss: An approach to consider price-quantity effects and risk-aversion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1139-1153, April.
    18. Naomi Radke & Klaus Keller & Rasoul Yousefpour & Marc Hanewinkel, 2020. "Identifying decision-relevant uncertainties for dynamic adaptive forest management under climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 891-911, November.
    19. Tesfaye, Wondimagegn & Tirivayi, Nyasha, 2020. "Crop diversity, household welfare and consumption smoothing under risk: Evidence from rural Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    20. Parkatti, Vesa-Pekka & Assmuth, Aino & Rämö, Janne & Tahvonen, Olli, 2019. "Economics of boreal conifer species in continuous cover and rotation forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 55-67.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:118:y:2020:i:c:s1389934120302483. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.