J. For. Sci., 2023, 69(10):438-450 | DOI: 10.17221/25/2023-JFS

Three scenarios for tree species composition and stand age in new and permanent forest areas: A case study of LatviaOriginal Paper

Zigmārs Rendenieks ORCID...1, Līga Liepa ORCID...2
1 Faculty of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
2 Latvian State Forest Research Institute Silava, Salaspils, Latvia

Land abandonment and the emergence of new forest areas create novel dynamics for forest ecosystems and landscapes. Modelling is often used to forecast tree species composition, age group distribution and spatial patterns in the future. The aim of this study was to develop three scenarios for changes in tree species composition, stand age distribution and spatial patterns of new forest areas and permanent forests using Latvia as a case study. We selected 19 study areas of the size 10 km × 10 km to sample the variety of forest cover patterns, tree species, and stand age. Using GIS tools, we developed three scenarios: baseline, commercial and conservation. Results showed that the conservation scenario resulted in the most even-aged group distribution. Scenarios predicted the increase of Picea abies area (reaching 29.3% in permanent forests and even 45.7% in new forests) and the reduction of Pinus sylvestris in most cases. Changes in the median patch area were the best indicator for evaluation of different scenarios with the largest patches of new forest areas for the conservation scenario (1.92 ± 1.23 ha). The existing structural and compositional integrity of sampled forest landscapes was best retained under the baseline and conservation scenarios, while the commercial scenario indicated more fragmented forest landscapes in the future.

Keywords: forest harvesting; forest management; geographic information systems; landscape metrics

Received: March 6, 2023; Revised: August 1, 2023; Accepted: August 1, 2023; Prepublished online: October 18, 2023; Published: October 30, 2023  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Rendenieks Z, Liepa L. Three scenarios for tree species composition and stand age in new and permanent forest areas: A case study of Latvia. J. For. Sci. 2023;69(10):438-450. doi: 10.17221/25/2023-JFS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Aggestam F., Wolfslehner B. (2018): Deconstructing a complex future: Scenario development and implications for the forest-based sector. Forest Policy and Economics, 94: 21-26. Go to original source...
    2. Alcantara C., Kuemmerle T., Baumann M., Bragina E.V., Griffiths P., Hostert P., Knorn J., Müller D., Prishchepov A.V., Schierhorn F., Sieber A., Radeloff V.C. (2013): Mapping the extent of abandoned farmland in Central and Eastern Europe using MODIS time series satellite data. Environmental Research Letters, 8: 035035. Go to original source...
    3. Alix-Garcia J., Kuemmerle T., Radeloff V.C. (2012): Prices, land tenure institutions, and geography: A matching analysis of farmland abandonment in post-socialist Eastern Europe. Land Economics, 88: 425-443. Go to original source...
    4. Beķeris P. (ed.) (2011): Me¾a nozare Latvijas 20 neatkarības gados. Rīga, Me¾a Attīstības Fonds: 46. (in Latvian)
    5. Bishop P., Hines A., Collins T. (2007): The current state of scenario development: An overview of techniques. Foresight, 9: 5-25. Go to original source...
    6. Boruks A. (2003): Zeme, zemnieks un zemkopība Latvijā: No senākiem laikiem līdz mūsdienām. Jelgava, Latvijas Lauksaimniecības Universitāte: 717. (in Latvian)
    7. Briede A. (2018): Latvijas klimats. In: Nikodemus O., Kļaviņ¹ M., Kri¹jāne Z., Zelès V. (eds): Latvija. Zeme, Daba, Tauta, Valsts. Riga, Latvijas Universitātes Akadēmiskais apgāds: 231-245. (in Latvian)
    8. Brukas V., Weber N. (2009): Forest management after the economic transition - At the crossroads between German and Scandinavian traditions. Forest Policy and Economics, 11: 586-592. Go to original source...
    9. Carlsson J., Eriksson L.O., Öhman K., Nordström E.M. (2015): Combining scientific and stakeholder knowledge in future scenario development - A forest landscape case study in northern Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics, 61: 122-134. Go to original source...
    10. Creutzburg M.K., Scheller R.M., Lucash M.S., LeDuc S.D., Johnson M.G. (2017): Forest management scenarios in a changing climate: Trade-offs between carbon, timber, and old forest. Ecological Applications, 27: 503-518. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Cushman S.A., McGarigal K., Neel M.C. (2008): Parsimony in landscape metrics: Strength, universality, and consistency. Ecological Indicators, 8: 691-703. Go to original source...
    12. Dabas Aizsardzības Pārvalde (2022): OZOLS Publiskās pieejas versija. Available at: https://ozols.gov.lv/pub (accessed Oct 10, 2022; in Latvian).
    13. Eggers J., Lämås T., Lind T., Öhman K. (2014): Factors influencing the choice of management strategy among small-scale private forest owners in Sweden. Forests, 5: 1695-1716. Go to original source...
    14. Eggertsson O., Nygaard P.H., Skovsgaard J.P. (2008): History of afforestation in the Nordic countries. In: Halldorsson G., Oddsdottir E.S., Sigurdsson B.D. (eds): AFFORNORD: Effects of Afforestation on Ecosystems, Landscape and Rural Development. Arhus, TemaNord: 29-36.
    15. Elmarsdottir A., Fjellberg A., Halldorsson G., Ingimarsdottir M., Nielsen O.K., Nygaard P., Oddsdottir E.S., Sigurdsson B.D. (2008): Effects of afforestation on biodiversity. In: Halldorsson G., Oddsdottir E.S., Sigurdsson B.D. (eds): AFFORNORD: Effects of Afforestation on Ecosystems, Landscape and Rural Development. Arhus, TemaNord: 37-47.
    16. ESRI (2020): ArcMap 10.8. What's new in ArcMap. Available at: https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/latest/get-started/introduction/whats-new-in-arcgis.htm
    17. Forman R.T., Godron M. (1981): Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. BioScience, 31: 733-740. Go to original source...
    18. Gärtner S., Reynolds K.M., Hessburg P.F., Hummel S., Twery M. (2008): Decision support for evaluating landscape departure and prioritizing forest management activities in a changing environment. Forest Ecology and Management, 256: 1666-1676. Go to original source...
    19. Gustafson E.J. (1998): Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: What is the state of the art? Ecosystems, 1: 143-156. Go to original source...
    20. Gustafson E.J., Roberts L.J., Leefers L.A. (2006): Linking linear programming and spatial simulation models to predict landscape effects of forest management alternatives. Journal of Environmental Management, 81: 339-350. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Haugen K., Karlsson S., Westin K. (2016): New forest owners: Change and continuity in the characteristics of Swedish non-industrial private forest owners (NIPF owners) 1990-2010. Small-Scale Forestry, 15: 533-550. Go to original source...
    22. Hazarika R., Bolte A., Bednarova D., Chakraborty D., Gaviria J., Kanzian M., Kowalczyk J., Lackner M., Lstibùrek M., Longauer R., Nagy L., Tomá¹ková I., Schueler S. (2021): Multi-actor perspectives on afforestation and reforestation strategies in Central Europe under climate change. Annals of Forest Science, 78: 1-31. Go to original source...
    23. He H.S. (2008): Forest landscape models: Definitions, characterization, and classification. Forest Ecology and Management, 254: 484-498. Go to original source...
    24. He H.S., Yang J., Shifley S.R., Thompson F.R. (2011): Challenges of forest landscape modelling - Simulating large landscapes and validating results. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100: 400-402. Go to original source...
    25. Heinonen T., PukkalaT., Mehtätalo L., Asikainen A., Kangas J., Peltola H. (2017): Scenario analyses for the effects of harvesting intensity on development of forest resources, timber supply, carbon balance and biodiversity of Finnish forestry. Forest Policy and Economics, 80: 80-98. Go to original source...
    26. Hesselbarth M.H., Sciaini M., With K.A., Wiegand K., Nowosad J. (2019): Landscapemetrics: An open-source R tool to calculate landscape metrics. Ecography, 42: 1648-1657. Go to original source...
    27. Hirsch F., Schmithüsen F.J. (2010): Private Forest Ownership in Europe. Zürich, ETH Zürich: 121.
    28. Hoogstra-Klein M.A., Hengeveld G.M. de Jong R. (2017): Analysing scenario approaches for forest management - One decade of experiences in Europe. Forest Policy and Economics, 85: 222-234. Go to original source...
    29. James P., Fortin M.J., Fall A., Kneeshaw D., Messier C. (2007): The effects of spatial legacies following shifting management practices and fire on boreal forest age structure. Ecosystems, 10: 1261-1277. Go to original source...
    30. Joná¹ová M., Prach K. (2004): Central-European mountain spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) forests: Regeneration of tree species after a bark beetle outbreak. Ecological Engineering, 23: 15-27. Go to original source...
    31. Kangas J., Leskinen P., Pukkala T. (2000): Integrating timber price scenario modeling with tactical management planning of private forestry at forest holding level. Silva Fennica 34: 399-409. Go to original source...
    32. Kuemmerle T., Olofsson P., Chaskovskyy O., Baumann M., Ostapowicz K., Woodcock C.E., Houghton R.A., Hostert P., Keeton W.S., Radeloff V.C. (2011): Post-Soviet farmland abandonment, forest recovery, and carbon sequestration in western Ukraine. Global Change Biology, 17: 1335-1349. Go to original source...
    33. Latvijas Valsts Me¾i (2021): LVM GEO: Atvērtie dati. Available at: https://www.lvmgeo.lv/dati (accessed Nov 10, 2022; in Latvian).
    34. Lausch A., Herzog F. (2002): Applicability of landscape metrics for the monitoring of landscape change: Issues of scale, resolution and interpretability. Ecological Indicators, 2: 3-15. Go to original source...
    35. Leitao A.B., Ahern J. (2002): Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59: 65-93. Go to original source...
    36. Liepa I. (1996): Pieauguma mācība. Jelgava, LLU: 123. (in Latvian)
    37. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005): Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Current State and Trends. Washington, D.C., Island Press: 137.
    38. Mladenoff D.J. (2004): LANDIS and forest landscape models. Ecological Modelling, 180: 7-19. Go to original source...
    39. Mohren G.M.J. (2003): Large-scale scenario analysis in forest ecology and forest management. Forest Policy and Economics, 5: 103-110. Go to original source...
    40. Naumov V., Manton M., Elbakidze M., Rendenieks Z., Priednieks J., Uhlianets S., Yamelynets T., Zhivotov A., Angelstam P. (2018): How to reconcile wood production and biodiversity conservation? The Pan-European boreal forest history gradient as an 'experiment'. Journal of Environmental Management, 218: 1-13. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    41. Quiroga S., Suarez C., Ficko A., Feliciano D., Bouriaud L., Brahic E., Deuffic P., Dobsinska Z., Jarsky V., Lawrence A., Nybakk E. (2019): What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies? Forest Policy and Economics, 99: 136-144. Go to original source...
    42. Rendenieks Z., Nita M.D., Nikodemus O., Radeloff V.C. (2020): Half a century of forest cover change along the Latvian-Russian border captured by object-based image analysis of Corona and Landsat TM/OLI data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 249: 112010. Go to original source...
    43. Rizzo M., Gasparini P., Tonolli S., Zoanetti R., Buffoni D., Dellagiacoma F. (2019): Characterizing small private forests and forest owners' motivations and attitudes in Trentino (Eastern Alps, Italy). Small-Scale Forestry, 18: 393-410. Go to original source...
    44. Rūsiņa S., Pri¾avoite D., Nikodemus O., Brūmelis G., Gustiņa L., Kasparinskis R. (2021): Land-use legacies affect Norway spruce Picea abies colonization on abandoned marginal agricultural land in Eastern Baltics. New Forests, 52: 559-583. Go to original source...
    45. Ruskule A., Nikodemus O., Kasparinska Z., Kasparinskis R., Brūmelis G. (2012): Patterns of afforestation on abandoned agriculture land in Latvia. Agroforestry Systems, 85: 215-231. Go to original source...
    46. Ruskule A., Nikodemus O., Kasparinskis R., Bell S., Urtane I. (2013): The perception of abandoned farmland by local people and experts: Landscape value and perspectives on future land use. Landscape and Urban Planning, 115: 49-61. Go to original source...
    47. Samariks V., Krisans O., Donis J., Silamikele I., Katrevics J., Jansons A. (2020): Cost-benefit analysis of measures to reduce windstorm impact in pure Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) stands in Latvia. Forests, 11: 576. Go to original source...
    48. Schaich H., Plieninger T. (2013): Land ownership drives stand structure and carbon storage of deciduous temperate forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 305: 146-157. Go to original source...
    49. Scheller R.M., Domingo J.B., Sturtevant B.R., Williams J.S., Rudy A., Gustafson E.J., Mladenoff D.J. (2007): Design, development, and application of LANDIS-II, a spatial landscape simulation model with flexible temporal and spatial resolution. Ecological Modelling, 201: 409-419. Go to original source...
    50. Schindler S., von Wehrden H., Poirazidis K., Wrbka T., Kati V. (2013): Multiscale performance of landscape metrics as indicators of species richness of plants, insects and vertebrates. Ecological Indicators, 31: 41-48. Go to original source...
    51. Shooshtari S.J., Gholamalifard M. (2015): Scenario-based land cover change modeling and its implications for landscape pattern analysis in the Neka Watershed, Iran. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 1: 1-19. Go to original source...
    52. Sitzia T., Semenzato P., Trentanovi G. (2010): Natural reforestation is changing spatial patterns of rural mountain and hill landscapes: A global overview. Forest Ecology and Management, 259: 1354-1362. Go to original source...
    53. Sjörs H. (1963): Amphi-Atlantic zonation, Nemoral to Arctic. In: Löve A., Löve D. (eds): North Atlantic Biota and Their History. Oxford, Pergamon Press: 109-125.
    54. Statistical Inventory of Forests (2018): Kopsavilkumi-2019-III-cikls. Latvian State Forest Research Institute Silava. Available at: https://www.silava.lv/images/Petijumi/Nacionalais-meza-monitorings/MRM-rezultati/Kopsavilkumi-2019-III-cikls.xlsx (accessed Oct 11, 2022; in Latvian).
    55. Tiebel M., Mölder A., Plieninger T. (2022): Conservation perspectives of small-scale private forest owners in Europe: A systematic review. Ambio, 51: 836-848. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    56. Turner M.G. (1989): Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 20: 171-197. Go to original source...
    57. Uuemaa E., Antrop M., Roosaare J., Marja R., Mander Ü. (2009): Landscape metrics and indices: An overview of their use in landscape research. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, 3: 1-28. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content