Manuel Wolff , Benjamin Labohm , Dagmar Haase , Erik Andersson
{"title":"Mapping protection effects and gaps of forest dynamics in Europe 2012 to 2018","authors":"Manuel Wolff , Benjamin Labohm , Dagmar Haase , Erik Andersson","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Forest management and conservation can help forests adapt to and minimize the effects of natural and anthropogenic disturbance factors on forest mortality. However, little quantitative information is currently available on the impact of different management and conservation practices on forest dynamics in Europe focusing on forest extent and health simultaneously. Against this background, this paper aims to understand the effectiveness of management and protection practices on two key indicators of forest dynamics under different land use conditions. We analyzed changes in both indicators in Europe between 2012 and 2018, detected spatial explicit mean differences between forest dynamics of protected vis á vis unprotected areas, and examined protected areas of multiple management types.</div><div>The results show that European forest area increased by 1.2 percentage points pp while canopy density decreased by 2 pp. The average forest area in protected areas increased, but at a slower rate than in their unprotected surroundings indicating no protection effects., In contrast, potential protection gaps can be observed for canopy density changes as density dropped in protected areas by 0.5 pp while it remained stable in unprotected areas. Finally, significant differences between IUCN management and protection categories are quantified against three settlement types and discussed along characteristic examples. In doing so, this paper contributes to the EU Forest Strategy 2030 by providing a robust and spatially explicit monitoring of the effectiveness of managed and protected forests linking observed overall patterns of forest dynamics to conclusions on the role of different management and protection practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 112895"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24013529","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Forest management and conservation can help forests adapt to and minimize the effects of natural and anthropogenic disturbance factors on forest mortality. However, little quantitative information is currently available on the impact of different management and conservation practices on forest dynamics in Europe focusing on forest extent and health simultaneously. Against this background, this paper aims to understand the effectiveness of management and protection practices on two key indicators of forest dynamics under different land use conditions. We analyzed changes in both indicators in Europe between 2012 and 2018, detected spatial explicit mean differences between forest dynamics of protected vis á vis unprotected areas, and examined protected areas of multiple management types.
The results show that European forest area increased by 1.2 percentage points pp while canopy density decreased by 2 pp. The average forest area in protected areas increased, but at a slower rate than in their unprotected surroundings indicating no protection effects., In contrast, potential protection gaps can be observed for canopy density changes as density dropped in protected areas by 0.5 pp while it remained stable in unprotected areas. Finally, significant differences between IUCN management and protection categories are quantified against three settlement types and discussed along characteristic examples. In doing so, this paper contributes to the EU Forest Strategy 2030 by providing a robust and spatially explicit monitoring of the effectiveness of managed and protected forests linking observed overall patterns of forest dynamics to conclusions on the role of different management and protection practices.
期刊介绍:
The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published.
• All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices.
• New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use.
• Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources.
• Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators.
• Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs.
• How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes.
• Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators.
• Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.