Ecosystem services of forests under different ownership structures
BackgroundIn central European cultural landscapes, forests subsist in a complex functional context and provide many valuable ecosystem services such as timber production, soil protection and erosion control. They function as a water reservoir and provider of drinking water, or as recreation areas and natural habitats. Currently, the use of timber, as a production service, is undergoing a change in relevance in the light of climate protection initiatives because forest ecosystems constitute the largest carbon storage in the terrestrial biosphere. Forests production services, in the form of timber production, could become more prominent through measures to increase carbon sequestration in the forests in combination with measures to increase the use of forest biomass. This could lead to a shift in the functional structures of all ecosystem services. The trade-offs and decisions concerning the question which ecosystem services should be enhanced or prioritized, or the question which incentives will be accepted, depend largely on the forest owner, his goals, and the general set up of his production (size of the forest, site conditions, location).
The project analyzes the influence of different types of ownership and management practices on the structure and biodiversity of forests. It generates steering tools specifically for different types of forest ownership, how to facilitate the potentials of carbon sequestration, the use of biomass, the provision of biodiversity, and of other ecosystem services. The project ist part of the The following central hypothesis is the focus of the planned research: “Different forest ownership structures and different forms of forest management generated a forest mosaic providing most varied ecosystem services, but not always tapping the respective forest sites to their full potential. Steering by market based incentives may foster climate protection and nature conservation potentials in line with the different types of forest ownership. On the one hand, synergies may be enhanced between timber production or carbon management and forest nature conservation. On the other hand, priorities may be set to promote specific ecosystem services.”
Research Questions
Design and methodology The project is based on a landscape-historical study of the forests in the research areas. The study examines and compiles the details of the history of ownership and management during the last approximately 150 years on different spatial scale levels, and on clearly defined areas, as accurately as possible. On a large scale, parameters of biodiversity and carbon sequestration are being collected in appropriate sections of the forest landscape to identify patterns in relation to forest ownership and management. For this purpose, we consult Arial photos, meta data from forest management planning, forest function mapping, and forest biotope mapping, as well as forest stand and site maps, and the land survey register. A comparison between forests with comparable site factors is drawn on the level of forest stands or forest lots. Here, we conduct vegetations surveys, forest structure surveys, and soil analysis. In addition, existing types and profiles of forest owners characterizing their attitudes and objectives shall be compared with the tangible assets of their forests. The forest owners’ acceptance of market based incentives will be examined with the help of interviews.
|
|
Up to now, forest owners have little or no incentives to enhance ecosystem services other than timber production, as timber sales traditionally generate the income. In addition, positive effects of alternative management concepts are generated often only in spatial distance of, or with a time lag from today’s management decisions. A forest mosaic has evolved from various forest ownership structures and different types of forest management. Nonetheless this mosaic generates the most varied ecosystem services. Still, the respective forest sites are not always tapped to their full potential.
