Low-level retention forestry, certification, and biodiversity: case Finland

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Kuuluvainen, Timo
dc.contributor.author Lindberg, Henrik
dc.contributor.author Vanha-Majamaa, Ilkka
dc.contributor.author Keto-Tokoi, Petri
dc.contributor.author Punttila, Pekka
dc.date.accessioned 2019-12-08T04:13:30Z
dc.date.available 2019-12-08T04:13:30Z
dc.date.issued 2019-12-02
dc.identifier.citation Ecological Processes. 2019 Dec 02;8(1):47
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10138/307972
dc.description.abstract Abstract In managed forests, leaving retention trees during final harvesting has globally become a common approach to reconciling the often conflicting goals of timber production and safeguarding biodiversity and delivery of several ecosystem services. In Finland, the dominant certification scheme requires leaving low levels of retention that can benefit some specific species. However, species responses are dependent on the level of retention and the current low amounts of retention clearly do not provide the habitat quality and continuity needed for declining and red-listed forest species which are dependent on old living trees and coarse woody debris. Several factors contribute to this situation. First, the ecological benefits of the current low retention levels are further diminished by monotonous standwise use of retention, resulting in low variability of retention habitat at the landscape scale. Second, the prevailing timber-oriented management thinking may regard retention trees as an external cost to be minimized, rather than as part of an integrated approach to managing the ecosystem for specific goals. Third, the main obstacles of development may still be institutional and policy-related. The development of retention practices in Finland indicates that the aim has not been to use ecological understanding to attain specific ecological sustainability goals, but rather to define the lowest level of retention that still allows access to the market. We conclude that prevailing retention practices in Finland currently lack ecological credibility in safeguarding biodiversity and they should urgently be developed based on current scientific knowledge to meet ecological sustainability goals.
dc.publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
dc.subject Boreal forest
dc.subject Ecological sustainability
dc.subject Legacy structure
dc.subject Forest dynamics
dc.subject Forest certification
dc.subject Forest structure
dc.subject PEFC certification
dc.title Low-level retention forestry, certification, and biodiversity: case Finland
dc.date.updated 2019-12-08T04:13:30Z
dc.language.rfc3066 en
dc.rights.holder The Author(s).
dc.type.uri http://purl.org/eprint/entityType/ScholarlyWork
dc.type.uri http://purl.org/eprint/entityType/Expression
dc.type.uri http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle

Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
13717_2019_Article_198.pdf 1.316Mb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record