Forest management optimization across spatial scales to reconcile economic and conservation objectives
Forest management optimization across spatial scales to reconcile economic and conservation objectives
复制标题
跨空间尺度的森林管理优化，以协调经济和保护目标
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0218213
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
M. Mönkkönen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tähti Pohjanmies;K. Eyvindson;M. Mönkkönen
生物多样性保护和资源生产之间的冲突可以通过多目标管理规划来缓解。在更大的土地面积上优化多目标管理可能需要权衡过程的实用性和解决方案的优点。因此，有必要确定需要多大的区域作为管理规划区域，以尽可能有效地协调相互冲突的目标。我们的目的是揭示林业规划区域的程度如何影响芬兰森林保护冲突的缓解潜力，表现为收获收入和枯木可用性之间的权衡。我们使用预测数据从森林模拟器，层次结构的林业规划区，和优化模型，探讨生产可能性之间的边界收获收入和枯木。我们比较了在不同规模的规划区域内优化管理时的总体结果，这两个目标，枯木的空间变化和管理制度的最佳组合。增加规划区域的规模确实使这两个目标的同时水平提高，但差异往往只有几个百分比。就枯枝可用性的空间变异和最佳管理组合而言，尺度之间的差异也很小。在大的空间尺度上比在小的森林所有权尺度上更容易缓解木材采伐和枯木供应之间的冲突。然而，无论规划的空间规模如何，如果没有积极的枯枝创造，可实现的解决方案可能不足以保护依赖枯枝的生物多样性。
Conflicts between biodiversity conservation and resource production can be mitigated by multi-objective management planning. Optimizing management for multiple objectives over larger land areas likely entails trading off the practicability of the process against the goodness of the solution. It is therefore worthwhile to resolve how large areas are required as management planning regions to reconcile conflicting objectives as effectively as possible. We aimed to reveal how the extent of forestry planning regions impacts the potential to mitigate a forestry-conservation conflict in Finland, represented as a trade-off between harvest income and deadwood availability. We used forecasted data from a forest simulator, a hierarchy of forestry planning regions, and an optimization model to explore the production possibility frontier between harvest income and deadwood. We compared the overall outcomes when management was optimized within the different-sized planning regions in terms of the two objectives, the spatial variation of deadwood, and the optimal combinations of management regimes. Increasing the size of the planning regions did produce higher simultaneous levels of the two objectives, but the differences were most often of the magnitude of only a few percentages. The differences among the scales were minor also in terms of the spatial variation in deadwood availability and in the optimal management combinations. The conflict between timber harvesting and deadwood availability is only marginally easier to mitigate at large spatial scales than at small forest ownership scales. However, regardless of the spatial scale of planning, the achievable solutions may not be good enough to safeguard deadwood-dependent biodiversity without active deadwood creation.