Producing wood at least cost to biodiversity: integrating Triad and sharing-sparing approaches to inform forest landscape management
Producing wood at least cost to biodiversity: integrating Triad and sharing-sparing approaches to inform forest landscape management
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/brv.12703
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-04
影响因子：
10
通讯作者：
Balmford, Andrew
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Betts, Matthew G.;Phalan, Benjamin T.;Balmford, Andrew
森林的丧失和退化是对全世界生物多样性的最大威胁。全球木材需求的增加有可能进一步破坏剩余的原生森林。已经提出了一系列不同的解决方案，但其中哪一个最有希望仍然没有得到解决。扩大高产树木种植园可以腾出林地用于养护，但必须同时执行更有力的原生林养护政策。由于人工林和其他集中管理的森林所支持的生物多样性往往比原生森林少得多，第二种方法主张广泛采用粗放式管理或“生态林业”，这更好地模拟了自然森林结构和干扰机制-尽管木材产量受损，因此需要在更大的面积上采伐。第三，混合建议涉及“三位一体”分区，景观分为三种管理（保护区，生态/广泛的管理，集约种植园）。解决这些方法中哪一种最有希望的进展受到了阻碍，因为缺乏一个概念框架和足够的经验数据，无法正式确定最适当的森林规模比例的储备，广泛和集约的管理，以尽量减少生物多样性的影响，同时满足一定程度的木材需求。在这次审查中，我们认为，可持续林业的这一核心挑战是类似的粮食生产系统所面临的，土地共享节约框架设计，以建立农业的方法可以满足粮食需求，至少成本野生物种可以很容易地适应评估对比森林管理制度。我们从四个方面展开这一论点：（i）我们提出了林业共享-节约框架的相关性，并探讨了农业概念在多大程度上可以转化为森林管理背景;（ii）我们为可持续林业的实证研究提出了设计建议，以使共享-节约框架能够得到应用;（iii）我们提出了这些研究可以检验的总体假设;以及（iv）我们讨论了通过共享-节约透镜概念化景观管理的潜在陷阱和机会。我们提出的框架将使世界各地的森林管理人员能够直接评估养护和木材生产之间的权衡，并确定最能平衡这些（和其他）竞争目标的管理方法组合。研究结果将为生态上可持续的森林政策和管理提供信息，减少地方和全球森林砍伐的风险，并可能改善一个有价值的部门的社会经营许可证。
Forest loss and degradation are the greatest threats to biodiversity worldwide. Rising global wood demand threatens further damage to remaining native forests. Contrasting solutions across a continuum of options have been proposed, yet which of these offers most promise remains unresolved. Expansion of high-yielding tree plantations could free up forest land for conservation provided this is implemented in tandem with stronger policies for conserving native forests. Because plantations and other intensively managed forests often support far less biodiversity than native forests, a second approach argues for widespread adoption of extensive management, or 'ecological forestryl', which better simulates natural forest structure and disturbance regimes - albeit with compromised wood yields and hence a need to harvest over a larger area. A third, hybrid suggestion involves 'Triad' zoning where the landscape is divided into three sorts of management (reserve, ecological/extensive management, and intensive plantation). Progress towards resolving which of these approaches holds the most promise has been hampered by the absence of a conceptual framework and of sufficient empirical data formally to identify the most appropriate landscape-scale proportions of reserves, extensive, and intensive management to minimize biodiversity impacts while meeting a given level of demand for wood. In this review, we argue that this central challenge for sustainable forestry is analogous to that facing food-production systems, and that the land sharing-sparing framework devised to establish which approach to farming could meet food demand at least cost to wild species can be readily adapted to assess contrasting forest management regimes. We develop this argument in four ways: (i) we set out the relevance of the sharing-sparing framework for forestry and explore the degree to which concepts from agriculture can translate to a forest management context; (ii) we make design recommendations for empirical research on sustainable forestry to enable application of the sharing-sparing framework; (iii) we present overarching hypotheses which such studies could test; and (iv) we discuss potential pitfalls and opportunities in conceptualizing landscape management through a sharing-sparing lens. The framework we propose will enable forest managers worldwide to assess trade-offs directly between conservation and wood production and to determine the mix of management approaches that best balances these (and other) competing objectives. The results will inform ecologically sustainable forest policy and management, reduce risks of local and global extinctions from forestry, and potentially improve a valuable sector's social license to operate.