A quantitative indicator framework for stand level evaluation and monitoring of environmentally sustainable forest management

Abstract An indicator framework was designed as an operational science-based tool for the evaluation of the environmental aspects of sustainable forest management at stand level in Flanders (Belgium). The framework aims to assess the effects of forest management on forest composition, structure and functioning. It consists of seven principles and 19 criteria, to which 157 potential indicators, selected from literature, were assigned; 40 of these were considered as suitable by an expert panel, based on 10 operational selection criteria. All indicators were quantitative variables measurable in the field. After elaboration of a measurement protocol, the indicator framework was validated in 115 forest stands, distributed over the three main forest types of Flanders. The new indicator framework exhibited greater sensitivity to forest management practices and demonstrated better discriminating power than the method that is currently used by the Flemish forest administration to estimate the naturalness and environmental quality of a forest stand. Following a detailed cost calculation of each indicator and based on the sensitivity of each indicator to forest management practices, the indicator framework was further reduced to a final set of 29 indicators. This framework can also be applied in other regions, provided that local threshold values are defined to convert indicator values to indicator scores. The selection procedure and the possible contribution of this set to the forest management in Flanders are discussed.

[1]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: A suggested framework and indicators , 1999 .

[2]  K. F. Wiersum,et al.  200 years of sustainability in forestry: Lessons from history , 1995 .

[3]  Rainer Horn,et al.  Modern forestry vehicles and their impacts on soil physical properties , 2004 .

[4]  B. Muys,et al.  Sustainable Forest Management Worldwide: A Comparative Assessment of Standards , 2004 .

[5]  David W. Orr,et al.  The Sustainability Revolution: Portrait of a Paradigm Shift , 2005 .

[6]  J. Franklin,et al.  Ecological characteristics of old-growth Douglas-fir forests. , 1981 .

[7]  Jean-Yves Pontailler,et al.  Storms drive successional dynamics in natural forests: a case study in Fontainebleau forest (France) , 1997 .

[8]  P. Giordani,et al.  Rapid biodiversity assessment in lichen diversity surveys: implications for quality assurance. , 2009, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[9]  Jean-François Ponge,et al.  Humus Index: an integrated tool for the assessment of forest floor and topsoil properties , 2002 .

[10]  Melanie Karjala,et al.  Local-level criteria and indicators: an Aboriginal perspective on sustainable forest management , 2005 .

[11]  P. Cannon,et al.  Strategies for rapid assessment of fungal diversity , 1997, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[12]  W. Adams.  The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century , 2006 .

[13]  Martin Kent,et al.  Vegetation Description and Analysis: A Practical Approach , 1992 .

[14]  J. Lhomme,et al.  Sap flow measurement by a single thermal dissipation probe: exploring the transient regime , 2009, Annals of Forest Science.

[15]  Pol Coppin,et al.  Sampling methodology for LAI measurements with LAI-2000 in small forest stands. , 2000 .

[16]  Margarida Tome,et al.  Special issue on selected results of the FORSEE project , 2011, Annals of Forest Science.

[17]  T. Palosuo,et al.  ToSIA—A tool for sustainability impact assessment of forest-wood-chains , 2010 .

[18]  R. Noss.  Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach , 1990 .

[19]  E. M. Blom,et al.  Hierarchical framework for the formulation of sustainable forest management standards. , 1997 .

[20]  Berit Hasler,et al.  Limits and targets for a regional sustainability assessment: an interdisciplinary exploration of the threshold concept , 2008 .

[21]  J. Römbke,et al.  The use of earthworms in ecological soil classification and assessment concepts. , 2005, Ecotoxicology and environmental safety.

[22]  R. Gregory,et al.  Ten common mistakes in designing biodiversity indicators for forest policy. , 2003, Journal of environmental management.

[23]  D. Hann.  Stability and density management in Douglas-fir plantations , 2001 .

[24]  Kevin L. O'Hara,et al.  Height| Diameter ratio and tree stability relationships for four northern Rocky Mountain tree species , 2001 .

[25]  M. Pérez-Soba,et al.  Sustainability Impact Assessment of land use policies , 2008 .

[26]  Bart Muys,et al.  Multipurpose conversion management of Scots pine towards mixed oak–birch stands—A long-term simulation approach , 2009 .

[27]  John L. Innes,et al.  Indicators for demonstrating sustainable forest management in British Columbia, Canada: An international review , 2008 .

[28]  R. Scholes,et al.  Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends , 2005 .

[29]  M. Meirvenne,et al.  Within-field spatial distribution of earthworm populations related to species interactions and soil apparent electrical conductivity , 2009 .

[30]  Should sustained yield be part of sustainable forest management , 2005 .

[31]  M. Vanclooster,et al.  SAFE - A hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems , 2007 .

[32]  Erwin Lindeijer,et al.  Review of land use impact methodologies , 2000 .

[33]  David W. Andison,et al.  Guiding principles for developing an indicator and monitoring framework , 2004 .

[34]  C. Oliver,et al.  Stability and density management in Douglas-fir plantations , 2000 .

[35]  E. Fager,et al.  Diversity: A Sampling Study , 1972, The American Naturalist.

[36]  Claude A. Garcia,et al.  Monitoring, indicators and community based forest management in the tropics: pretexts or red herrings? , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.