Research, part of a Special Feature on Sustainability Impact Assessment of Forest Management Alternatives in Europe A Multicriteria Risk Analysis to Evaluate Impacts of Forest Management Alternatives on Forest Health in Europe

Due to climate change, forests are likely to face new hazards, which may require adaptation of our existing silvicultural practices. However, it is difficult to imagine a forest management approach that can simultaneously minimize all risks of damage. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been developed to help decision makers choose between actions that require reaching a compromise among criteria of different weights. We adapted this method and produced a multicriteria risk analysis (MCRA) to compare the risk of damage associated with various forest management systems with a range of management intensity. The objective was to evaluate the effect of four forest management alternatives (FMAs) (i.e., close to nature, extensive management with combined objectives, intensive even-aged plantations, and short-rotation forestry for biomass production) on biotic and abiotic risks of damage in eight regional case studies combining three forest biomes (Boreal, Continental, Atlantic) and five tree species (Eucalyptus globulus, Pinus pinaster, Pinus sylvestris, Picea sitchensis, and Picea abies) relevant to wood production in Europe. Specific forest susceptibility to a series of abiotic (wind, fire, and snow) and biotic (insect pests, pathogenic fungi, and mammal herbivores) hazards were defined by expert panels and subsequently weighted by corresponding likelihood. The PROMETHEE ranking method was applied to rank the FMAs from the most to the least at risk. Overall, risk was lower in short-rotation forests designed to produce wood biomass, because of the reduced stand susceptibility to the most damaging hazards. At the opposite end of the management intensity gradient, close-to-nature systems also had low overall risk, due to lower stand value exposed to damage. Intensive even-aged forestry appeared to be subject to the greatest risk, irrespective of tree species and bioclimatic zone. These results seem to be robust as no significant differences in relative ranking of the four FMAs were detected between the combinations of forest biomes and tree species.

[1]  Manfred J. Lexer,et al.  Addressing biodiversity in a stakeholder-driven climate change vulnerability assessment of forest management , 2009 .

[2]  Wolfgang Kron,et al.  Flood Risk = Hazard • Values • Vulnerability , 2005 .

[3]  F. Moreira,et al.  Regional variations in wildfire susceptibility of land-cover types in Portugal: implications for landscape management to minimize fire hazard , 2009 .

[4]  T. Pukkala,et al.  Modeling infection and spread of Heterobasidion annosum in even-aged Fennoscandian conifer stands , 2005 .

[5]  Jay Sullivan,et al.  Ice damage and forest stand management , 2008 .

[6]  Gopal Achari,et al.  A Comparative Approach for Ranking Contaminated Sites Based on the Risk Assessment Paradigm Using Fuzzy PROMETHEE , 2009, Environmental management.

[7]  Jean Pierre Brans,et al.  HOW TO SELECT AND HOW TO RANK PROJECTS: THE PROMETHEE METHOD , 1986 .

[8]  Andrea Vannini,et al.  Interactive effects of drought and pathogens in forest trees , 2006 .

[9]  Jayanath Ananda,et al.  A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning , 2009 .

[10]  B. Solberg,et al.  Economic impacts of increased forest conservation in Europe: a forest sector model analysis , 2006 .

[11]  Willem A. Landman,et al.  Climate change 2007 : the physical science basis, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, M. Marquis, K. Averyt, M.M.B. Tignor, H. LeRoy Miller, Jr. and Z. Chen (Eds.) : book review , 2010 .

[12]  T. Seager,et al.  Application of Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Environmental Decision Making , 2005, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[13]  Paul J. Burgess,et al.  Integrating environmental and economic performance to assess modern silvoarable agroforestry in Europe , 2007 .

[14]  F. Lieutier.  Host Resistance to Bark Beetles and Its Variations , 2007 .

[15]  Mark A. Liniger,et al.  The return period of wind storms over Europe , 2009 .

[16]  Manfred J. Lexer,et al.  Climate change vulnerability of sustainable forest management in the Eastern Alps , 2011 .

[17]  J. Dhote.  Implication of Forest Diversity in Resistance to Strong Winds , 2005 .

[18]  Marc Hanewinkel,et al.  Assessing natural hazards in forestry for risk management: a review , 2011, European Journal of Forest Research.

[19]  D. Herms,et al.  The Dilemma of Plants: To Grow or Defend , 1992, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[20]  Bertrand Mareschal,et al.  Prométhée: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis , 1984 .

[21]  A. Huth,et al.  Using multicriteria decision analysis and a forest growth model to assess impacts of tree harvesting in Dipterocarp lowland rain forests , 2005 .

[22]  P. J. Albersen,et al.  Water erosion assessment based on expert knowledge and limited information using an ordered logit model , 1999 .

[23]  Jean Pierre Brans,et al.  A PREFERENCE RANKING ORGANIZATION METHOD , 1985 .

[24]  Jayanath Ananda,et al.  Incorporating stakeholder values into regional forest planning: a value function approach , 2003 .

[25]  Reza Baradaran Kazemzadeh,et al.  PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[26]  Manfred J. Lexer,et al.  Modelling bark beetle disturbances in a large scale forest scenario model to assess climate change impacts and evaluate adaptive management strategies , 2009 .

[27]  Sonja Vospernik,et al.  Modelling changes in roe deer habitat in response to forest management , 2008 .

[28]  P. S. Duncker,et al.  Classification of forest management approaches: a new conceptual framework and its applicability to European forestry , 2012 .

[29]  Francisco Moreira,et al.  The influences of forest stand management on biotic and abiotic risks of damage , 2009, Annals of Forest Science.

[30]  Taraneh Sowlati,et al.  A multicriteria approach to evaluate district heating system options , 2010 .

[31]  Marco Bindi,et al.  Assessing risk and adaptation options to fires and windstorms in European forestry , 2010 .

[32]  Thomas Michael Plattner,et al.  Risikoaversion als relevanter Faktor der Risikobewertung von Naturgefahren , 2006 .

[33]  Å. Berggren,et al.  The distribution and abundance of animal populations in a climate of uncertainty , 2009 .

[34]  Andrea Battisti,et al.  EXPANSION OF GEOGRAPHIC RANGE IN THE PINE PROCESSIONARY MOTH CAUSED BY INCREASED WINTER TEMPERATURES , 2005 .

[35]  J. Negrón,et al.  The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for prevention and control of bark beetle infestations in coniferous forests of the western and southern United States , 2007 .

[36]  A. Kirilenko,et al.  Climate change impacts on forestry , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  Der Sturm,et al.  The Storm "Gudrun" and the Spruce Bark Beetle in Sweden , 2008 .

[38]  S. Kaplan,et al.  On The Quantitative Definition of Risk , 1981 .

[39]  R. Blong,et al.  Defining area at risk and its effect in catastrophe loss estimation: a dasymetric mapping approach , 2004 .

[40]  M. Schelhaas.  The wind stability of different silvicultural systems for Douglas-fir in the Netherlands: a model-based approach , 2008 .

[41]  W. Nicholson.  Microeconomic theory: basic principles and extensions , 1972 .

[42]  L. Nageleisen,et al.  Effects of drought and heat on forest insect populations in relation to the 2003 drought in Western Europe , 2006 .

[43]  R. Waring,et al.  Resistance of conifers to bark beetle attack: Searching for general relationships , 1987 .

[44]  Omar D. Cardona,et al.  The Need for Rethinking the Concepts of Vulnerability and Risk from a Holistic Perspective: A Necessary Review and Criticism for Effective Risk Management , 2013 .

[45]  Manfred J. Lexer,et al.  Multi-criteria evaluation of multi-purpose stand treatment programmes for Finnish boreal forests under changing climate , 2008 .

[46]  P. Price.  The Plant Vigor Hypothesis and Herbivore Attack , 1991 .

[47]  H. Jactel,et al.  Tree diversity reduces herbivory by forest insects. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[48]  A. Salski,et al.  A fuzzy knowledge-based model of population dynamics of the Yellow-necked mouse (Apodemus flavicollis) in a beech forest , 1998 .

[49]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Integrating biodiversity into forest management planning and decision-making , 1993 .

[50]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[51]  Jon Erickson,et al.  Collaborative environmental planning in river management: an application of multicriteria decision analysis in the White River Watershed in Vermont. , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[52]  B. Gardiner,et al.  Management of forests to reduce the risk of abiotic damage — a review with particular reference to the effects of strong winds , 2000 .

[53]  R. Gill.  A Review of Damage by Mammals in North Temperate Forests: 3. Impact on Trees and Forests , 1992 .

[54]  M. Hanewinkel,et al.  A forest management risk insurance model and its application to coniferous stands in southwest Germany , 2006 .

[55]  Annika Kangas,et al.  Outranking methods as tools in strategic natural resources planning , 2001 .

[56]  S. Kellomäki,et al.  Climate Change and Range Shifts in Two Insect Defoliators: Gypsy Moth and Nun Moth - a Model Study , 2007 .