Journal Home > Volume 2 , Issue 2
Forest Ecosystems 2015, 2(2): 8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-015-0031-x
Review | Open Access | Issue | Published: 09 April 2015

Silvicultural alternatives to conventional even-aged forest management - what limits global adoption?

Show Author's Information Klaus J Puettmann1( ),  Scott McG Wilson2,  Susan C Baker3,  Pablo J Donoso4,  Lars Drössler5,  Girma Amente6,  Brian D Harvey7,  Thomas Knoke8,  Yuanchang Lu9,  Susanna Nocentini10,  Francis E Putz11,  Toshiya Yoshida12,  Jürgen Bauhus13
Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330, USA
Consultant Forester and Forest Ecologist, 3Thorngrove Crescent, Aberdeen, Scotland AB15 7FH, UK
School ofBiological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia
Department of Forests and Society, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Natural Resources, Universidad Austral de Chile, Isla Teja s/n, Valdivia, Chile
Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish Agricultural University, PO Box 49, Alnarp SE-23053, Sweden
Haramaya University, P. Box 138, Diredawa, Ethiopia
Institut de recherche sur les forêts, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, 445, Boulevard de l'Université, Rouyn--Noranda, Québec J9X 5E4, Canada
Institute of Forest Management, TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, Freising 85354, Germany
Department of Forest Management and Statistics IFRIT, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Dongxiaofu 2, Xiangshan Road, Beijing, Haidian 100091, China
Departmentof Agricultural, Food and Forestry Systems, University of Florence, v. S.Bonaventura 13, Florence Ⅰ-50145, Italy
Department of Biology, Universityof Florida, P.O. Box 118526, Gainesville, FL 32611-8526, USA
UryuExperimental Forest, Field Science Center for Northern Biosphere, HokkaidoUniversity, Moshiri, Horokanai 074-0741, Japan
Chair of Silviculture, Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacherstr. 4, Freiburg 79085, Germany
Cite this article:
J Puettmann K, McG Wilson S, C Baker S, et al. Silvicultural alternatives to conventional even-aged forest management - what limits global adoption?. Forest Ecosystems, 2015, 2(2): 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-015-0031-x
Download citation
EndNote(RIS)
BibTeX

610

Views

17

Downloads

Citations

239

Crossref

N/A

WoS

240

Scopus

0

CSCD

Abstract Full text About this article
Background

The development of forestry as a scientific and management discipline over the last two centuries has mainly emphasized intensive management operations focused on increased commodity production, mostly wood. This "conventional" forest management approach has typically favored production of even-aged, single-species stands. While alternative management regimes have generally received less attention, this has been changing over the last three decades, especially in countries with developed economies. Reasons for this change include a combination of new information and concerns about the ecological consequences of intensive forestry practices and a willingness on the part of many forest owners and society to embrace a wider set of management objectives. Alternative silvicultural approaches are characterized by a set of fundamental principles, including avoidance of clearcutting, an emphasis on structural diversity and small-scale variability, deployment of mixed species with natural regeneration, and avoidance of intensive site-preparation methods.

 Methods

Our compilation of the authors' experiences and perspectives from various parts of the world aims to initiatea larger discussion concerning the constraints to and the potential of adopting alternative silvicultural practices.

 Results

The results suggest that a wider adoption of alternative silvicultural practices is currently hindered by a suite of ecological, economic, logistical, informational, cultural, and historical constraints. Individual contexts display their own unique combinations and relative significance of these constraints, and accordingly, targeted efforts, such as regulations and incentives, may help to overcome specific challenges.

 Conclusions

In a broader context, we propose that less emphases on strict applications of principles and on stand structures might provide additional flexibility and facilitate the adoption of alternative silvicultural regimes in a broader set of circumstances. At the same time, the acceptance of alternative silvicultural systems as the "preferred or default mode of management" will necessitate and benefit from the continued development of the scientific basis and valuation of a variety of ecosystem goods and services. This publication is aimed to further the discussion in this context.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Silvicultural alternatives to conventional even-aged forest management - what limits global adoption?

Show Author's information Klaus J Puettmann1( ), Scott McG Wilson2, Susan C Baker3, Pablo J Donoso4, Lars Drössler5, Girma Amente6, Brian D Harvey7, Thomas Knoke8, Yuanchang Lu9, Susanna Nocentini10, Francis E Putz11, Toshiya Yoshida12, Jürgen Bauhus13
Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330, USA
Consultant Forester and Forest Ecologist, 3Thorngrove Crescent, Aberdeen, Scotland AB15 7FH, UK
School ofBiological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia
Department of Forests and Society, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Natural Resources, Universidad Austral de Chile, Isla Teja s/n, Valdivia, Chile
Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish Agricultural University, PO Box 49, Alnarp SE-23053, Sweden
Haramaya University, P. Box 138, Diredawa, Ethiopia
Institut de recherche sur les forêts, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, 445, Boulevard de l'Université, Rouyn--Noranda, Québec J9X 5E4, Canada
Institute of Forest Management, TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, Freising 85354, Germany
Department of Forest Management and Statistics IFRIT, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Dongxiaofu 2, Xiangshan Road, Beijing, Haidian 100091, China
Departmentof Agricultural, Food and Forestry Systems, University of Florence, v. S.Bonaventura 13, Florence Ⅰ-50145, Italy
Department of Biology, Universityof Florida, P.O. Box 118526, Gainesville, FL 32611-8526, USA
UryuExperimental Forest, Field Science Center for Northern Biosphere, HokkaidoUniversity, Moshiri, Horokanai 074-0741, Japan
Chair of Silviculture, Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacherstr. 4, Freiburg 79085, Germany

Abstract

Background

The development of forestry as a scientific and management discipline over the last two centuries has mainly emphasized intensive management operations focused on increased commodity production, mostly wood. This "conventional" forest management approach has typically favored production of even-aged, single-species stands. While alternative management regimes have generally received less attention, this has been changing over the last three decades, especially in countries with developed economies. Reasons for this change include a combination of new information and concerns about the ecological consequences of intensive forestry practices and a willingness on the part of many forest owners and society to embrace a wider set of management objectives. Alternative silvicultural approaches are characterized by a set of fundamental principles, including avoidance of clearcutting, an emphasis on structural diversity and small-scale variability, deployment of mixed species with natural regeneration, and avoidance of intensive site-preparation methods.

 Methods

Our compilation of the authors' experiences and perspectives from various parts of the world aims to initiatea larger discussion concerning the constraints to and the potential of adopting alternative silvicultural practices.

 Results

The results suggest that a wider adoption of alternative silvicultural practices is currently hindered by a suite of ecological, economic, logistical, informational, cultural, and historical constraints. Individual contexts display their own unique combinations and relative significance of these constraints, and accordingly, targeted efforts, such as regulations and incentives, may help to overcome specific challenges.

 Conclusions

In a broader context, we propose that less emphases on strict applications of principles and on stand structures might provide additional flexibility and facilitate the adoption of alternative silvicultural regimes in a broader set of circumstances. At the same time, the acceptance of alternative silvicultural systems as the "preferred or default mode of management" will necessitate and benefit from the continued development of the scientific basis and valuation of a variety of ecosystem goods and services. This publication is aimed to further the discussion in this context.

References(165)

Amsalu DW, Jacobsen JB, Lundhede TH (2014) Economic assessment of use values of near-natural forestry compared with rotational forestry in Denmark. Eur J For Res 133(4):611-622
DOI Google Scholar

Arts B, Appelstrand M, Kleinschmit D, Pülzl H, Vissen-Hamakers I (2010) Discourses, actors and instruments in international forest governance. IUFRO World Ser 28:57-73
Google Scholar

Attiwill PM (1994) The disturbance of forest ecosystems - the ecological basis for conservative management. Forest Ecol Manag 63:247-300
DOI Google Scholar

Aubry KA, Halpern CB, Peterson CE (2009) Variable-retention harvests in the Pacific Northwest: a review of short-term findings from the DEMO study. Forest Ecol Manag 258:398-408
DOI Google Scholar

Axelsson EP, Lundmark T, Högberg P, Nordin A (2014) Belowground competition directs spatial patterns of seedling growth in boreal pine forests in Fennoscandia. Forests 5(9):2106-2121
DOI Google Scholar
Bacardit P (2014) Evaluación del daño provocado por cortas de selección sobre los árboles residuales en un bosque del Tipo Forestal Siempreverde en Llancahue, provincia de Valdivia. Undergraduate Thesis, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Natural Resources, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile
Baker SC (2011) Seeking a Balance Between Forestry and Biodiversity - The Role of Variable Retention Silviculture. Insights from Western USA and Canada. FWPA Project Report PG D167-0910. FWPA, Melbourne, p 60

Baker SC, Read SM (2011) Variable retention silviculture in Tasmania's wet forests: ecological rationale, adaptive management and synthesis of biodiversity benefits. Austral For 74:218-232
DOI Google Scholar

Barbeito I, Pardos M, Calama R, Cañellas I (2008) Effect of stand structure on Stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) regeneration dynamics. Forestry 81:617-629
DOI Google Scholar
Bauhus J, Schmerbeck J (2010) Silvicultural Options to Enhance and Use Forest Plantation Biodiversity. In: Bauhus J, van der Meer P, Kanninen M (eds) Ecosystem Goods and Services from Plantation Forests. Earthscan, London, pp 96-139https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849776417-13
DOI
Bauhus J, Puettmann KJ, Kühne C (2013) Close-to-nature forest management in Europe: does it support complexity and adaptability of forest ecosystems? In: Messier C, Puettmann KJ, Coates KD (eds) Managing forests as complex adaptive systems: building resilience to the challenge of global change. Routledge, New York, pp 187-213

Bebi P, Kulakowski D, Rixen C (2009) Snow avalanche disturbances in forest ecosystems—state of research and implications for management. Forest Ecol Manag 257(9):1883-1892
DOI Google Scholar

Benner M, Sandström U (2000) Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system. Res Policy 29:291-301
DOI Google Scholar

Bergeron Y, Leduc A, Harvey B, Gauthier S (2002) Natural fire regime: a guide for sustainable forest management of the Canadian boreal forest. Silva Fennica 36:81-95
DOI Google Scholar

Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10:1251-1262
DOI Google Scholar

Biolley H (1901) Le jardinage cultural. J Forestier Suisse 52:67-104
Google Scholar

Bladon KD, Silins U, Landhäusser SM, Lieffers VJ (2006) Differential transpiration by three boreal tree species in response to increased evaporative demand after variable retention harvesting. Ag For Meteorol 138:104-119
DOI Google Scholar

Bliss JC (2000) Public perceptions of clearcutting. J Forestry 98:4-9
Google Scholar

Bose AK, Harvey BD, Brais S, Beaudet M, Leduc A (2014) Constraints to partial cutting in the boreal forest of Canada in the context of natural disturbance-based management: a review. Forestry 87(1):11-28
DOI Google Scholar

Brang P, Spathelf P, Larsen JB, Bauhus J, Boncina A, Chauvin C, Drössler L, Garcia-Guemes C, Heiri C, Kerr G, Lexer MJ, Mason B, Mohren F, Mühlethaler U, Nocentini S, Svoboda M (2014) Suitability of close-to-nature silviculture for adapting temperate European forests to climate change. Forestry 87(4):492-503, doi:10.1093/forestry/cpu018
DOI Google Scholar

Brukas V, Weber N (2009) Forest management after the economic transition—at the crossroads between German and Scandinavian traditions. For Pol Econ 11:586-592
DOI Google Scholar

Brunson MW, Steel BS (1994) National public attitudes toward federal rangeland management. Rangelands 16:77-81
Google Scholar

Butler BJ, Leatherberry EC (2004) America's family forest owners. J Forestry 102:4-14
Google Scholar

Calama R, Barbeito I, Pardos M, del Rio M, Montero G (2008) Adapting a model for even-aged Pinus pinea L. stands to complex multi-aged structures. Forest Ecol Manag 256:1390-1399
DOI Google Scholar

Cameron A (2002) Importance of early selective thinning in the development of long‐term stand stability and improved log quality: a review. Forestry 75(1):25-35
DOI Google Scholar

Castagneyrol B, Jactel H, Vacher C, Brockerhoff EG, Koricheva J (2014) Effects of plant phylogenetic diversity on herbivory depend on herbivore specialization. J Appl Ecol 51(1):134-141
DOI Google Scholar

Chang SJ (1981) Determination of the optimal growing stock and cutting cycle for an uneven-aged stand. Forest Sci 27:739-744
Google Scholar

Ciancio O, Nocentini S (2011) Biodiversity conservation and systemic silviculture: concepts and applications. Plant Biosyst 145:411-418
DOI Google Scholar
Ciancio O, Cutini A, Mercurio R, Veracini A (1986) Sulla struttura della pineta di pino domestico di Alberese. Annali dell'Istituto Sperimentale della Selvicoltura, Arezzo, p 17

Ciancio O, Iovino F, Menguzzato G, Nicolaci A, Nocentini S (2006) Structure and growth of a small group selection forest of Calabrian pine in Southern Italy: a hypothesis for continuous cover forestry based on traditional silviculture. Forest Ecol Manag 224:229-234
DOI Google Scholar

Cock AR (2008) Tropical forests in the global states system. Int Aff 84(2):315-333
DOI Google Scholar

Cubbage F, MacDonagh P, Sawinski J Jr, Rubilar R, Donoso PJ, Ferreira A, Hoeflich V, Morales V, Ferreira G, Balmelli G, Jacek Siry M, Báez N, Alvarez J (2007) Timber investment returns for selected plantations and native forests in South America and the Southern United States. New For 33(3):237-255
DOI Google Scholar

Curtis RO (1998) "Selective cutting" in Douglas-fir - History revisited. J Forestry 96:40-46
Google Scholar

Daniel TC (2001) Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landsc Urban Planning 54:267-281
DOI Google Scholar

Dhakal AS, Sidle RC (2003) Long-term modelling of landslides for different forest management practices. Earth Surf Proc Land 28:853-868
DOI Google Scholar

Dodson EK, Burton JI, Puettmann KJ (2014) Multi-scale controls on natural regeneration dynamics after partial overstory removal in Douglas-fir forests in western Oregon, USA. Forest Sci 60(5):953-961
DOI Google Scholar

Donoso PJ, Nyland RD (2005) Seeding density according to structure, dominance and understory cover in old-growth forest stands of the evergreen forest type in the coastal range of Chile. 2005. Rev Chil Hist Nat 78(1):51-63
DOI Google Scholar
Donoso PJ, Promis A (2013) Silvicultura en Bosques Nativos. Avances en la investigación en Chile, Argentina y Nueva Zelandia. Estudios en Silvicultura de Bosques Nativos, Vol. 1. Ed. Marisa Cuneo, Valdivia, Chile. p 253. https://sites.google.com/site/alvaropromis/Home/libro-silvicultura-bosques-nativos.
Drever CR, Peterson G, Messier C, Bergeron Y, Flannigan M (2006) Can forest management based on natural disturbances maintain ecological resilience? Can J For Res 36: 2285-2299https://doi.org/10.1139/x06-132
DOI

Drössler L, Nilsson U, Lundqvist L (2013) Simulated transformation of even-aged Norway spruce stands to multi-layered forests: an experiment to explore the potential of tree size differentiation. Forestry 87(2):239-248, doi:10.1093/forestry/cpt037
DOI Google Scholar
Duncker PS, Barreiro SM, Hengeveld GM, Lind T, Mason WL, Ambrozy S, Spiecker H (2012) Classification of forest management approaches: a new conceptual framework and its applicability to European forestry. Ecol Soc 17(4): 51, http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05262-170451https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05262-170451
DOI

Dvorák L, Bachmann P, Mandallaz D (2001) Sturmschäden in ungleichförmigen Beständen. Schweiz Zeitschr Forstw 152:445-452
DOI Google Scholar
Evans Z (2006) What is ecological forestry?.http://www.forestguild.org/ecological_forestry/Ecological_Forestry_evans_06.pdf. Accessed 10 November 2014
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

Fedrowitz K, Koricheva J, Baker DC, Lindenmayer DB, Palik B, Rosenvald R, Beese W, Franklin JF, Kouki J, Macdonald E (2014) Can retention forestry help conserve biodiversity? A meta‐analysis. J Appl Ecol 51(6):1669-1679, doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12289
DOI Google Scholar
Filotas E, Parrott L, Burton PJ, Chazdon RL, Coates KD, Coll L, Haeussler S, Martin K, Nocentini S, Puettmann KJ, Putz FE, Simard SW, Messier C (2014) Viewing forests through the lens of complex systems science. Ecosphere 5: 1, http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES13-00182.1https://doi.org/10.1890/ES13-00182.1
DOI
Fitzgerald SA, Oester PT, Parker R (2013) Individual tree selection (ITS) in a northeast Oregon mixed conifer forest. Extension Service, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
Florence RG (1996) Ecology and silviculture of eucalypt forests. CSIRO, Melbourne, p 400

Franklin JF, Forman TT (1987) Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecol 1:5-18
DOI Google Scholar

Franklin JF, Johnson KN (2012) A restoration framework for federal forests in the Pacific Northwest. J Forestry 110:429-439
DOI Google Scholar
Franklin JF, Mitchell RJ, Palik BJ (2007) Natural disturbance and stand development principles for ecological forestry, General Technical Report NRS-19. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PAhttps://doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-19
DOI

Gayer K (1886) Der gemischte Wald, seine Begrűndung und Pflege, insbesondere durch Horst-und Gruppenwirtschaft. Parey Verlag, Berlin
DOI

Griess VC, Knoke T (2011) Can native tree species plantations in Panama compete with Teak plantations? An economic estimation. New For 41:13-39
DOI Google Scholar

Griess VC, Acevedo R, Härtl F, Staupendahl K, Knoke T (2012) Does mixing tree species enhance stand resistance against natural hazards? A case study for spruce. Forest Ecol Manag 267:284-296
DOI Google Scholar

Gurnaud A (1882) Le controle et le regime forestier. Rev Eaux For 21:1-23
Google Scholar

Gustafsson L, Kouki J, Sverdrup-Thygeson A (2010) Tree retention as a conservation measure in clear-cut forests of northern Europe: a review of ecological consequences. Scand J For Res 25:295-308
DOI Google Scholar

Gustafsson L, Baker SC, Bauhus J, Beese WJ, Brodie A, Kouki J, Lindenmayer DB, Lõhmus A, Martínez Pastur G, Messier C, Neyland M, Palik B, Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Volney WJA, Wayne A, Franklin JF (2012) Retention forestry to maintain multifunctional forests: a world perspective. Bioscience 62:633-645
DOI Google Scholar

Haight R (1987) Evaluating the efficiency of even-aged and uneven-aged stand management. Forest Sci 33:116-134
Google Scholar

Haight RG, Monserud RA (1990) Optimizing any-aged management of mixed-species stands: Ⅱ. Effects of decision criteria. Forest Sci 36:125-144
Google Scholar

Hanewinkel M (2002) Comparative economic investigations of uneven-aged and uneven-aged silvicultural systems: a critical analysis of different methods. Forestry 75:473-481
DOI Google Scholar

Hanewinkel M, Kuhn T, Bugmann H, Lanz A, Brang P (2014) Vulnerability of uneven-aged forests to storm damage. Forestry 87:525-534, doi:10.1093/forestry/cpu008
DOI Google Scholar
Harlow RF, Downing R, Van Lear D (1997) Responses of wildlife to clearcutting and associated treatments in the Eastern United States, Technical Paper no. 19. Department of Forest Resources Clemson University, Clemson, SC

Hein L, van Koppen K, De Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57(2):209-228
DOI Google Scholar

Hibbs DE, Bower AL (2001) Riparian forests in the Oregon Coast Range. Forest Ecol Manag 154:201-213
DOI Google Scholar

Higgs E, Falk DA, Guerrini A, Hall M, Harris J, Hobbs RJ, Jackson ST, Rhemtulla JM, Throop W (2014) The changing role of history in restoration ecology. Front Ecol Environ 12:499-506
DOI Google Scholar

Hugosson M, Ingemarson F (2004) Objectives and motivations of small-scale forest owners; theoretical modelling and qualitative assessment. Silva Fennica 38:217-231
DOI Google Scholar

Hyvaerinen E, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2006) Fire and green‐tree retention in conservation of red‐listed and rare deadwood‐dependent beetles in Finnish boreal forests. Conserv Biol 20:1710-1719
DOI Google Scholar

Hyytiäinen K, Haight RG (2010) Evaluation of forest management systems under risk of wildfire. European J Forest Res 129:909-919
DOI Google Scholar

Jacobsen MK (2001) History and principles of close to nature forest management: a central European perspective. Naconex 3:56-58
Google Scholar

Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ (2003) A Danish example of optimal thinning strategies in mixed-species forest under changing growth conditions caused by climate change. Forest Ecol Manag 180(1):375-388
DOI Google Scholar

Jones TA, Thomas SC (2004) The time course of diameter increment responses to selection harvests in Acer saccharum. Can J For Res 34:1525-1533
DOI Google Scholar
Kimmins H (1992) Balancing act: environmental issues in forestry. UBC Press, Vancouver, BC

Kneeshaw D, Williams H, Nikinmaa E, Messier C (2002) Patterns of above- and below-ground responses of understory conifer release 6 years after partial cutting. Can J For Res 32:255-265
DOI Google Scholar
Knoke T (2012) The economics of continuous cover forestry. In: Pukkala T, Gadow Kv (eds) Continuous cover forestry. Managing forest ecosystems Vol. 23, pp 167-193. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-2202-6_5https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2202-6_5
DOI
Knoke T, Huth A (2011) Modelling forest growth and finance: Often disregarded tools in tropical land management. In: Günter S, Weber M, Stimm B, Mosandl R (eds) Silviculture in the tropics Tropical Forestry 8, part 3, pp 129-142. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-19986-8_11.SpringerVerlag,Heidelberg.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19986-8_11
DOI
Knoke T, Wurm J (2006) Mixed forests and a flexible harvest policy: a problem for conventional risk analysis? Eur J For Res 125(3): 303-315https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-006-0119-5
DOI

Knoke T, Moog M, Plusczyk N (2001) On the effect of volatile stumpage prices on the economic attractiveness of a silvicultural transformation strategy. Forest Pol Econ 2(3):229-240
DOI Google Scholar

Kohm KA, Franklin JF (1997) Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. Island Press, Washington, DC

Kouki J, Hyvarinen E, Lappalainen H, Martikainen P, Simila M (2012) Landscape context affects the success of habitat restoration: large-scale colonization patterns of saproxylic and fire-associated species in boreal forests. Divers Distrib 18:348-355
DOI Google Scholar

Kuuluvainen T (2009) Forest management and biodiversity conservation based on natural ecosystem dynamics in northern Europe: the complexity challenge. AMBIO 38:309-315
DOI Google Scholar

Lang C, Pye O (2001) Blinded by science: the invention of scientific forestry and its influence in the Mekong Region. Watershed 6:25-34
Google Scholar

Larsen JB, Nielsen AB (2007) Nature-based forest management—where are we going?: laborating forest development types in and with practice. Forest Ecol Manag 238:107-117
DOI Google Scholar

Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF, Lõhmus A, Baker SC, Bauhus J, Beese W, Brodie A, Kiehl B, Kouki J, Pastur GM, Messier C, Neyland M, Palik B, Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Volney J, Wayne A, Gustafsson L (2012) A major shift to the retention approach for forestry can help resolve some global forest sustainability issues. Conserv Lett 5:421-431
DOI Google Scholar

Little C, Lara A, McPhee J, Urrutia R (2009) Revealing the impact of forest exotic plantations on water yield in large scale watersheds in South-Central Chile. J Hydrol 374:162-170
DOI Google Scholar

Long JN (2009) Emulating natural disturbance regimes as a basis for forest management: a North American view. Forest Ecol Manag 257:1868-1873
DOI Google Scholar
Lowood HE (1990) The calculating forester: quantification, cameral science, and the emergence of scientific forestry management in Germany. In: Frängsmyr T, Heilbron JL, Rider RE (eds) The quantifying spirit in the eighteenth century. University of California Press, Berkeley, http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ ft6d5nb455/
Lu Y, Liu X, Lei X, Wang H, Hong L, Guo H (2013) Development of silvicultural models for multi-functional forest management: the systematic consideration and application in experiment center of tropical forestry, Southwestern China. In: Fehrmann L, Kleinn C (eds) Forests in climate change research and police: the role of forest management and conservation in a complex international setting. Proceedings of the 3rd International DAAD workshop. Cuvillier Verlag Goettingen, Germany.

Lüpke B, Hauskeller-Bullerjahn M (1999) Kahlschlagfreier Waldbau: wird die Eiche an den Rand gedrängt? Forst und Holz 54:363-368
Google Scholar

Lutz JA, Halpern CB (2006) Tree mortality during early forest development: a long-term study of rates, causes, and consequences. Ecol Monogr 76:257-275
DOI Google Scholar

Macdonald E, Gardiner B, Mason W (2010) The effects of transformation of even-aged stands to continuous cover forestry on conifer log quality and wood properties in the UK. Forestry 83:1-16
DOI Google Scholar

Manolis JC, Andersen DE, Cuthbert FJ (2000) Patterns in clearcut edge and fragmentation effect studies in northern hardwood-conifer landscapes: retrospective power analysis and Minnesota results. Wildlife Soc B 28:1088-1101
Google Scholar

Marten GG (2005) Environmental tipping points: a new paradigm for restoring ecological security. J Policy Studies 20:75-87
Google Scholar

Mason B, Kerr G, Pommerening A, Edwards C, Hale S, Ireland D, Moore R (2003) Continuous cover forestry in British conifer forests. Forest Res Annu Rep Acc 2004:38-53
Google Scholar

Matlack GR, Gleeson SK, Good RE (1993) Treefall in a mixed oak-pine coastal plain forest: immediate and historical causation. Ecology 82:1559-1566
DOI Google Scholar
Menzies NK (2007) Our forests, your ecosystem, their timber. Communities, conservation and the state in community-based forest management. Columbia University Press, New Yorkhttps://doi.org/10.7312/menz13692
DOI
Merriam-Webster (2014) Merriam Webster Dictionary.http://www.merriam-webster.com/. Accessed 1 May 2014
Messier C, Puettmann KJ, Coates D (2013) Managing forests as complex adaptive systems: building resilience to the challenge of global change. Routledge, New Yorkhttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203122808
DOI

Miller Klubock T (2014) La Frontera: forests and ecological conflicts in Chile's frontier territory. Duke University Press, Durham, NC
DOI

Möller A (1923) Der Dauerwaldgedanke. Erich Degreif Verlag, Oberteuringen
Moorman M, Nelson S, Moore S, Donoso P (2013) Stakeholder perspectives on adaptive co-management as a Chilean conservation management strategy. Soc Natur Resour 26: 1022-1036https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2012.739676
DOI

Nahuelhual L, Donoso PJ, Lara A, Núñez D, Oyarzún C, Neira E (2007) Valuing ecosystem services of Chilean temperate rainforests. Environ Dev Sustainabil 9:481-499
DOI Google Scholar

Nasi R, Putz FE, Pacheco P, Wunder S, Anta S (2011) Sustainable forest management and carbon in tropical Latin America: the case for REDD+. Forests 2:200-217
DOI Google Scholar

Neumann FG, Minko G (1981) The sirex wood wasp in Australian radiata pine plantations. Aust For 44:46-63
DOI Google Scholar

Neuner S, Albrecht A, Cullmann D, Engels F, Griess VC, Hahn A, Hanewinkel M, Härtl F, Kölling C, Staupendahl K, Knoke T (2015) Survival of Norway spruce remains higher in mixed stands under a dryer and warmer climate. Global Change Biol 21:935-946
DOI Google Scholar

Newton M, Cole EC (2006) Harvesting impacts on understory regeneration in two-storied Douglas-fir stands. West J Appl For 21:14-18
DOI Google Scholar

Neyland M, Hickey J, Read SM (2012) A synthesis of outcomes from the Warra Silvicultural Systems Trial, Tasmania, Australia: safety, timber production, economics, biodiversity, silviculture and social acceptability. Aust For 75:147-162
DOI Google Scholar

Niklitschek ME (2007) Trade liberalization and land use changes: explaining the expansion of afforested land in Chile. Forest Sci 53(3):385-394
Google Scholar

Nill M, Kohnle U, Sauter U (2011) Rindenschäden mit mutmaßlichem Bezug zur Holzernte im Spiegel der Betriebsinventuren in Baden-Württemberg. Forstarchiv 9(6):216-224
Google Scholar

Nilsson M-C, Wardle DA (2005) Understory vegetation as a forest ecosystem driver: evidence from the northern Swedish boreal forest. Front Ecol Environ 3:421-428
DOI Google Scholar

Ninemets Ü, Valladares F (2006) Tolerance to shade, drought, and waterlogging of temperate Northern Hemisphere trees and shrubs. Ecol Monogr 76:521-547
DOI Google Scholar

Nocentini S (2009) Structure and management of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forests in Italy. iForest 2:105-113 http://www.sisef.it/iforest/show.php?id=499
DOI Google Scholar

Noguchi M, Yoshida T (2004) Tree regeneration in partially cut conifer-hardwood mixed forests in northern Japan: roles of establishment substrate and dwarf bamboo. Forest Ecol Manag 190:335-344
DOI Google Scholar

Noguchi M, Okuda S, Miyamoto K, Itou T, Inagaki Y (2011) Composition, size structure and local variation of naturally regenerated broadleaved tree species in Hinoki cypress plantations: a case study in Shikoku, south-western Japan. Forestry 84:493-504
DOI Google Scholar

O'Hara KL, Ramage BS (2013) Silviculture in an uncertain world: utilizing multi-aged management systems to integrate disturbance. Forestry 86:401-410
DOI Google Scholar
Oosthoek J (2007) The colonial origins of scientific forestry in Britain. Essay in: Environmental History Resources.http://www.eh-resources.org/colonial_ forestry.html.Accessed 22 February 2015.
Oregon Department of Forestry (2014) Oregon forest practices act.http://www.oregon.gov/ODF/privateforests/pages/fpareforestation.aspx. Accessed 1 May 2014
Paquet J, Bélanger L (1997) Public acceptability thresholds of clearcutting to maintain visual quality of boreal balsam fir landscapes. Forest Sci 43: 46-55

Paquette A, Messier C (2009) The role of plantations in managing the world's forests in the Anthropocene. Front Ecol Environ 8:27-34
DOI Google Scholar
Pausch R (2005) Ein System-Ansatz zur Darstellung des Zusammenhangs zwischen Waldstruktur, Arbeitsvolumen und Kosten in naturnahen Wäldern Bayerns. Forstliche Forschungsberichte München 199
Piispanen R, Heinonen J, Valkonen S, Mäkinen H, Lundqvist S-O, Saranpää P (2014) Wood density of Norway spruce in uneven-aged stands. Can J For Res 44(2): 136-144https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2013-0201
DOI

Pommerening A, Murphy S (2004) A review of the history, definitions and methods of continuous cover forestry with special attention to afforestation and restocking. Forestry 77:27-44
DOI Google Scholar
ProSilva Europe (2014) ProSilva Europe: integrated forest management for resilience and sustainability across 25 countries. http://prosilvaeurope. wordpress.com. Accessed 13 August 2014
Puettmann KJ (2011) Silvicultural challenges and options in the context of global change: simple fixes and opportunities for new management approaches. J Forestry 109: 321-331

Puettmann KJ, Ammer C (2006) Trends in North American and European regeneration research under the ecosystem management paradigm. Eur J For Res 126:1-9
DOI Google Scholar

Puettmann KJ, Ek AR (1999) Status and trends of silvicultural practices in Minnesota. North J Appl For 16:203-210
DOI Google Scholar

Puettmann KJ, Coates KD, Messier C (2009) A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity. Island Press, Washington, DC

Pukkala T, Lähde E, Laiho S (2010) Optimizing the structure and management of une-ven-sized stands of Finland. Forestry 83:129-142
DOI Google Scholar

Putz F, Sist P, Fredericksen T, Dykstra D (2008) Reduced-impact logging: challenges and opportunities. Forest Ecol Manag 256:1427-1433
DOI Google Scholar

Reich RM, Mielke PW Jr, Hawksworth FG (1991) Spatial analysis of ponderosa pine trees infected with dwarf mistletoe. Can J For Res 21:1808-1815
DOI Google Scholar

Ribe RG (1989) The aesthetics of forestry: what has empirical preference research taught us? Environ Manage 13:55-74
DOI Google Scholar

Ribe RG (1999) Regeneration harvests versus clearcuts: public views of the acceptability and aesthetics of Northwest Forest Plan harvests. Northw Sci 73:102-117
Google Scholar

Ribe RG (2005) Aesthetic perceptions of green-tree retention harvests in vista views: the interaction of cut level, retention pattern and harvest shape. Landscape Urban Plan 73:277-293
DOI Google Scholar

Rice B, Weiskittel A, Wagner R (2014) Efficiency of alternative forest inventory methods in partially harvested stands. Eur J For Res 133:261-272
DOI Google Scholar

Roessiger J, Griess VC, Härtl F, Clasen C, Knoke T (2013) How economic performance of a stand increases due to decreased failure risk associated with the admixing of species. Ecol Model 255:58-69
DOI Google Scholar

Rosenvald R, Lohmus A (2008) For what, when, and where is green-tree retention better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. Forest Ecol Manag 255:1-15
DOI Google Scholar

Rydberg D, Falck J (2000) Urban forestry in Sweden from a silvicultural perspective: a review. Landscape Urban Plan 47:1-18
DOI Google Scholar

Schaetzl RJ, Johnson DL, Burns SF, Small TW (1989) Tree uprooting: review of terminology, process, and environmental implications. Can J For Res 19:1-11
DOI Google Scholar

Schelhaas M, Nabuurs GJ, Schuck A (2003) Natural disturbances in the European forests in the 19th and 20th centuries. Glob Change Biol 9:1620-1633
DOI Google Scholar

Schoennagel T, Veblen TT, Romme WH (2004) The interaction of fire, fuels, and climate across Rocky Mountain forests. BioScience 54:661-676
DOI Google Scholar

Schütz J-P (1999a) Naturnaher Waldbau: gestern, heute, morgen. Schw Z Forstwes 150:1-12
DOI Google Scholar
Schütz J-P (1999b) Principles of functioning of mixtures in forests stands; experience of temperate central European forest conditions. In: Olsthoorn AFM, Bartelink HH, Gardiner JJ, Pretzsch H, Hekhuis HJ, Franc A (eds) Management of mixed-species forest; silviculture and economics, IBN Scientific Contribution 15. Inst. For Forestry and Nature Research, Wageningen, pp 219-234
Schütz J-P (2002) Silvicultural tools to develop irregular and diverse forest structures. Forestry 75: 329-337https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/75.4.329
DOI
Schütz J-P, Pukkala T, Donoso PJ, von Gadow K (2012) Historical emergence and current application of CCF. In: Pukkala T, von Gadow K (eds) Continuous cover forestry. Springer Verlag, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, p 6https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2202-6
DOI
Sears RR, Pinedo‐Vasquez M (2011) Forest policy reform and the organization of logging in Peruvian Amazonia. Dev Change 42: 609-631https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2011.01697.x
DOI
Seymour RS, Hunter ML (1999) Principles of ecological forestry. In: Hunter ML (ed) Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 499-524https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613029.004
DOI
Shaw DC, Chen J, Freeman EA, Braun DM (2005) Spatial and population characteristics of dwarf mistletoe infected trees in an old-growth Douglas-fir - western hemlock forest. Can J For Res 35: 990-1001https://doi.org/10.1139/x05-022
DOI

Shorohova E, Kuuluvainen T, Kangur A, Jogiste K (2009) Natural stand structures, disturbance regimes and successional dynamics in the Eurasian boreal forests: a review with special reference to Russian studies. Ann For Sci 66:201
DOI Google Scholar
Siiskonen H (2007) The conflict between traditional and scientific forest management in 20th century Finland. Forest Ecol Manag 249: 125-133, doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.018https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.018
DOI

Steventon JD, MacKenzie KL, Mahon TE (1998) Response of small mammals and birds to partial cutting and clearcutting in northwest British Columbia. Forest Chron 74(5):703-713
DOI Google Scholar

Swank W, Vose J, Elliott K (2001) Long-term hydrologic and water quality responses following commercial clearcutting of mixed hardwoods on a southern Appalachian catchment. Forest Ecol Manag 143:163-178
DOI Google Scholar

Swanson ME, Franklin JF, Beschta RL, Crisafulli CM, DellaSala DA, Hutto RL, Lindenmayer DB, Swanson FJ (2011) The forgotten stage of forest succession: early-successional ecosystems on forest sites. Front Ecol Environ 9:117-125
DOI Google Scholar

Tahvonen O, Pukkala T, Laiho O, Lähde E, Niinimäki S (2010) Optimal management of uneven-aged Norway spruce stands. Forest Ecol Manag 260:106-115
DOI Google Scholar

Thorpe HC, Astrup R, Trowbridge A, Coates KD (2010) Competition and tree crowns: a neighborhood analysis of three boreal tree species. Forest Ecol Manag 259:1586-1596
DOI Google Scholar

Tönnes S, Karjalainen E, Löfström I, Neuvonen M (2004) Scenic impacts of retention trees in clear-cutting areas. Scand J For Res 19:348-357
DOI Google Scholar
Tropical Forest Foundation (2008) Sustaining tropical forests with reduced impact logging.http://www.tff-indonesia.org/index.php/en/r-i-l/ril-criteria-andindicators.Accessed 14 April 2015
Urquhart J, Courtney P (2011) Seeing the owner behind the trees: a typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England. Forest Policy Econ 13: 535-544https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.05.010
DOI

Veblen TT (1985) Forest development in tree-fall gaps in the temperate rain forests of Chile. Natl Geogr Res 1:162-183
Google Scholar

Veblen TT, Donoso ZC, Schlegel FM, Escobar RB (1981) Forest dynamics in south-central Chile. J Biogeogr 8:211-247
DOI Google Scholar

von Thünen JH (1842) Der isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirtschaft und Nationalökonomie, 2nd edn. Leopold, Rostock, Germany
Wagner S, Nocentini S, Huth F, Hoogstra-Klein M (2014) Forest management approaches for coping with the uncertainty of climate change: trade-offs in service provisioning and adaptability. Ecol Soc 19(1): 32https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06213-190132
DOI
West PW (2014) Growing plantation forests. Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New Yorkhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01827-0
DOI
Wilson SMG (2013) Adoption of alternative silvicultural systems in Great Britain: a review. Q J Forest 100: 279-293

Wunder S (2006) Are direct payments for environmental services spelling doom for sustainable forest management in the tropics. Ecol Soc 11:23
DOI Google Scholar

Yasuda A, Yoshida T, Miya H, Harvey BD (2013) An alternative management regime of selection cutting for sustaining stand structure of mixed forests of northern Japan: a simulation study. J For Res 18:398-406
DOI Google Scholar

Yoshida T, Noguchi M, Akibayashi Y, Noda M, Kadomatsu M, Sasa K (2006) Twenty years of community dynamics in a mixed conifer broad-leaved forest under a selection system in northern Japan. Can J For Res 36:1363-1375
DOI Google Scholar
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 18 December 2014
Accepted: 18 March 2015
Published: 09 April 2015
Issue date: June 2015

Copyright

© 2015 Puettmann et al.; licensee Springer.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, McIntireStennis Funds under ID number OREZ-FES-850-P to the lead author and by the Edmund Hayes Professorship. PJ Donoso acknowledges the support from FONDECYT Grant No 1110744. Jürgen Bauhus received funding for this work from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no. 265171. The authors would like to acknowledge many colleagues, practitioners, and students for their contributions.

Rights and permissions

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

Return