Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/91555
Type of publication: research article
Type of publication (PDB): Straipsnis Clarivate Analytics Web of Science / Article in Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (S1)
Field of Science: Miškotyra / Forestry (A004)
Author(s): Angelstam, Per;Naumov, Vladimir;Elbakidze, Marine;Manton, Michael;Priednieks, Janis;Rendenieks, Zigmars
Title: Wood production and biodiversity conservation are rival forestry objectives in Europe's Baltic Sea Region
Is part of: Ecosphere. Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwell, 2018, Vol. 9 iss. 3
Extent: p. 1-26
Date: 2018
Keywords: biodiversity;collaborative learning;ecosystem services;governance;green infrastructure;land-sharing;land-sparing;spatial planning;sustained yield forestry
Abstract: The policy term green infrastructure highlights the need to maintain functional ecosystems as a foundation for sustainable societies. Because forests are the main natural ecosystems in Europe, it is crucial to understand the extent to which forest landscape management delivers functional green infrastructures. We used the steep west–east gradient in forest landscape history, land ownership, and political culture within northern Europe's Baltic Sea Region to assess regional profiles of benefits delivered by forest landscapes. The aim was to support policy-makers and planners with evidence-based knowledge about the current conditions for effective wood production and biodiversity conservation. We developed and modeled four regional-level indicators for sustained yield wood production and four for biodiversity conservation using public spatial data. The western case study regions in Sweden and Latvia had high forest management intensity with balanced forest losses and gains which was spatially correlated, thus indicating an even stand age class distribution at the local scale and therefore long-term sustained yields. In contrast, the eastern case study regions in Belarus and Russia showed spatial segregation of areas with forest losses and gains. Regarding biodiversity conservation indicators, the west–east gradient was reversed. In the Russian, Belarusian, and Latvian case study regions, tree species composition was more natural than in Sweden, and the size of contiguous areas without forest loss was larger. In all four case study regions, 54–85% of the total land base consisted of forest cover, which is above critical fragmentation thresholds for forest landscape fragmentation
Internet: https://www.vdu.lt/cris/bitstream/20.500.12259/91555/2/ISSN2150-8925_2018_V_9_3.PG_1-26.pdf
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/91555
https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2119
Affiliation(s): Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Žemės ūkio akademija
Appears in Collections:1. Straipsniai / Articles
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml12.14 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats


CORE Recommender

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations 1

25
checked on Jun 6, 2021

Page view(s)

90
checked on Jun 6, 2021

Download(s)

24
checked on Jun 6, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.