multifunctional comparison of even-aged and uneven-aged forest management in a boreal region

• Published in: Canadian journal of forest research Vol. 41; no. 4; pp. 851 - 862
• Main Authors: Pukkala, Timo, Lähde, Erkki, Laiho, Olavi, Salo, Kauko, Hotanen, Juha-Pekka
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ottawa, ON NRC Research Press, National Research Council Canada 01.04.2011; NRC Research Press; National Research Council of Canada; Canadian Science Publishing NRC Research Press
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; carbon; Carbon sequestration; Clearcutting; Comparative analysis; Environmental aspects; even-aged management; Forest management; Forest management. Stand types and stand dynamics. Silvicultural treatments. Tending of stands. Natural regeneration; Forestry; Forests; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; harvesting; management systems; Picea; profitability; Studies; Taigas; uneven-aged management; Finland; Forest management; Uneven aged forest stand; Multifunctionality; Boreal zone; Forestry; Even aged forest stand
• ISSN: 0045-5067; 1208-6037
• DOI: 10.1139/x11-009

The choice between even- and uneven-aged forest management is a topical issue as the negative impacts of clear-felling are being increasingly criticized and the profitability of even-aged management has been questioned. This study compared these management systems in spruce and pine stands in terms of timber, carbon, and bilberry benefits, all of which can be predicted with reasonable accuracy and quantified in terms of money. Management was optimized by maximizing the total net present value (NPV) of the three benefits in a steady-state situation. The currently recommended type of even-aged management was also included in the comparisons. Uneven-aged management was the best in terms of the total NPV and with respect to bilberry benefits (NPV of bilberry harvesting). It was also better than even-aged management in terms of timber benefits when the discount rate was more than 1%. The ranking was less clear in terms of carbon sequestration and discounted carbon benefits.