IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8228-d856487.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Multiple Forest Service Based on the Integration of Stand Structural Attributes in Mixed Oak Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Shunyun Guan

    (Research Institute of Forest Resource Information Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Management and Growth Modeling, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Staatsbetrieb Sachsenforst, Forstbezirk Neustadt, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 7, 01844 Neustadt, Germany)

  • Yuanchang Lu

    (Research Institute of Forest Resource Information Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Management and Growth Modeling, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China)

  • Xianzhao Liu

    (Research Institute of Forest Resource Information Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Management and Growth Modeling, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China)

Abstract

In order to understand forest services at stand level through the integration of structural attributes, forest structures in three main stand types were analyzed based on various structural attributes relating to the services of habitat conservation, timber production and soil water conservation in Loess Plateau, China. Forty sample plots with similar site and environment conditions were established in three types of oak stands. Twenty-two indexes such as stand density, mean DBH, mean height, etc., were selected to analyze the relationship between structural attributes and forest service. With a core set of structural attributes selected by principal component analysis, the link between the service and structural attributes and the compatibility between each service was analyzed using correlation analysis. The results show that the oak–broadleaf mixed forest has the highest structural complexity index (SCI), indicating the best habitat conservation among others, while the oak–pine mixed forest and pure oak forest have the highest timber value in different scenarios of timber price, indicating the largest potential for timber production. Little differences were found between stand types regarding the indicators for soil water conservation. The structural attributes that had a positive correlation with habitat conservation (e.g., number of shrub species, species richness of canopy layer, the proportion of broadleaves and snag density) were identified to be negative for timber production; while the attributes that had a positive correlation with timber production (e.g., stand density and proportion of pine and oaks) were found to be negative for habitat conservation. The results of the trade-off analysis showed that timber production tends to be conflicting with the other two non-timber forest services. In order to enhance the provisioning of multiple services, it was suggested to implement the interventions that could balance these services, such as structural retention and single-tree selective logging. This study could contribute to the theoretical base for the decision making in the multi-purpose sustainable management of oak forests in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Shunyun Guan & Yuanchang Lu & Xianzhao Liu, 2022. "Evaluation of Multiple Forest Service Based on the Integration of Stand Structural Attributes in Mixed Oak Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8228-:d:856487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8228/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8228/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boscolo, Marco & Vincent, Jeffrey R., 2003. "Nonconvexities in the production of timber, biodiversity, and carbon sequestration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 251-268, September.
    2. Xueliang Zheng & Lihua Chen & Wenyan Gong & Xia Yang & Yingli Kang, 2019. "Evaluation of the Water Conservation Function of Different Forest Types in Northeastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-13, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jens Abildtrup & Jacques-Alexandre Laye & Maximilien Laye & Anne Stenger, 2012. "Irreversibility and Uncertainty in Multifunctional Forest Management Allocation," Post-Print hal-01072290, HAL.
    2. Kangkang Gu & Luyao Ma & Jian Xu & Haoran Yu & Xinmu Zhang, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Evolution Characteristics and Driving Factors of Water Conservation Service in Jiangxi Province from 2001 to 2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, August.
    3. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    4. Cainelli, Giulio & Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Zoboli, Roberto, 2008. "The Relationship Between Environmental Efficiency and Manufacturing Firm’s Growth," Coalition Theory Network Working Papers 46656, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Indrajaya, Yonky & van der Werf, Edwin & Weikard, Hans-Peter & Mohren, Frits & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2016. "The potential of REDD+ for carbon sequestration in tropical forests: Supply curves for carbon storage for Kalimantan, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2007. "Environmental Efficiency, Emission Trends and Labour Productivity: Trade-Off or Joint Dynamics? Empirical Evidence Using NAMEA Panel Data," Working Papers 2007.40, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Nabhani, Abbas & Mardaneh, Elham & Sjølie, Hanne K., 2024. "Multi-objective optimization of forest ecosystem services under uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 494(C).
    8. Walter Briec & Kristiaan Kerstens & Ignace Van de Woestyne, 2022. "Nonconvexity in Production and Cost Functions: An Exploratory and Selective Review," Springer Books, in: Subhash C. Ray & Robert G. Chambers & Subal C. Kumbhakar (ed.), Handbook of Production Economics, chapter 18, pages 721-754, Springer.
    9. Tran, Ngoc Bich & Ley, Eduardo, 2012. "Green prices," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6131, The World Bank.
    10. Shiping Su & Xiaoe Liu, 2022. "The Water Storage Function of Litters and Soil in Five Typical Plantations in the Northern and Southern Mountains of Lanzhou, Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Tisdell, Clement A., 2012. "Conserving Forest Wildlife and Other Ecosystem Services: Opportunity Costs and The Valuation of Alternative Logging Regimes," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 126230, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Ian Bateman & Georgina Mace & Carlo Fezzi & Giles Atkinson & Kerry Turner, 2011. "Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 177-218, February.
    13. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & Solow, Andrew, 2005. "The Economics of Biodiversity," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1517-1560, Elsevier.
    14. Hassan, R.M. & Crafford, J.G., 2015. "Measuring the contribution of ecological composition and functional services of ecosystems to the dynamics of KwaZulu-Natal coast fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 306-313.
    15. Noack, Frederik A.W. & Manthey, Michael & Ruitenbeek, Jack H. & Mohadjer, M.R. Marvie, 2010. "Separate or mixed production of timber, livestock and biodiversity in the Caspian Forest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 67-76, November.
    16. Tisdell, Clement A., 2011. "Selective logging and the economics of conserving forest wildlife species e.g. orangutans," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 122725, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    17. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Zoboli, Roberto, 2009. "Environmental efficiency and labour productivity: Trade-off or joint dynamics? A theoretical investigation and empirical evidence from Italy using NAMEA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1182-1194, February.
    18. Hilder André Bezerra Farias & Sérgio Luiz de Medeiros Rivero & Márcia Jucá Teixeira Diniz, 2017. "Negative incentives and sustainability in the amazonian logging industry [Negative incentives and sustainability in the amazonian logging industry]," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 27(3), pages 363-391, September.
    19. Lambini, Cosmas Kombat & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Abildtrup, Jens & Pham, Van Dien & Tenhunen, John & Garcia, Serge, 2018. "Are Ecosystem Services Complementary or Competitive? An Econometric Analysis of Cost Functions of Private Forests in Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 343-352.
    20. Vincent, Jeffrey R., 2012. "Ecosystem services and green growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6233, The World Bank.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8228-:d:856487. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.