Date:
2018/06/14
Time:
16:45
Room:
A2 Wivi
Occurrence of fire among boreal forest site types and climates can guide natural disturbance emulation for biodiversity conservation: a case study of uptake of evidence-based knowledge
(Oral)
SEE PEER REVIEW
Since 1993 Swedish forest policy states that production and environmental objectives are equally important. This triggered knowledge production about how to diversify forest management systems. For the dominating boreal forests evidence show that knowledge about the relative incidence of forest fire can be used to estimate the relative amount of different forest disturbance regimes that ought to be emulated in a particular landscape. Those regimes range from gap-phase dynamic on wet rich sites and humid climates where fire is absent or occurs seldom, via succession after infrequent stand-replacing fires to multiple cohorts of Scots pine where fire occurs often. The conceptual ASIO-model, after the words Absent, Seldom, Infrequent and Often, indicating different forest fire return intervals was developed in 1993 to introduce the natural disturbance regime paradigm into forest planning and management (1, 2). Combining this with evidence-based knowledge about how much habitat can be lost without losing species allows formulation of area targets for conservation, management and restoration of different forest habitats (3).
I report on the uptake of evidence-based knowledge about the role of fire and forest disturbance regimes for biodiversity conservation, and how this was used in forest planning and management. Retired and active forest managers in private forest industrial companies and forest planners procuring wood from non-industrial private forest owners were interviewed, and popular, grey and peer-review papers was reviewed.
The ASIO-model was introduced into forest management planning systems of several large Swedish forest enterprises, and was also used as an educational tool. The model was also used to formulate strategic long-term area targets for protected areas among Swedish regions. The most enduring management action was prescribed burning. However, in spite rapid accumulation of evidence stressing the need for diversification of forest management systems, actual emulation of the three main forest disturbance regions is rare. Instead, under the auspices of bio-economy and climate change mitigation, forestry intensification, including lowered final felling ages, is encouraged. Biodiversity conservation remains a wicked problem for actors aiming at implementation of sustainable forest management policy.
1. Angelstam, P., Rosenberg, P. och Rülcker, C. 1993. Aldrig, sällan, ibland, ofta. [Absent, seldom, infrequent, often] Skog och Forskning 93(1): 34-41. (In Swedish)
2. Angelstam, P. 1998. Maintaining and restoring biodiversity by developing natural disturbance regimes in European boreal forest. Journal of Vegetation Science 9(4): 593-602.
3. Angelstam, P., Andersson, K., Axelsson, R., Elbakidze, M., Jonsson, B.-G., Roberge, J.-M. 2011. Protecting forest areas for biodiversity in Sweden 1991-2010: policy implementation process and outcomes on the ground. Silva Fennica 45(5): 1111–1133.