Whole-tree harvesting with stump removal versus stem-only harvesting in peatlands when water quality, biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation matter

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 47, Issue , 2014, Pages 25-35

  Miettinen, Jenni ^a   Ollikainen, Markku ^a   Nieminen, Tiina M ^b   Ukonmaanaho, Liisa ^b   Laurén, Ari ^b   Hynynen, Jari ^b   Lehtonen, Mika ^b   Valsta, Lauri ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Biodiversity conservation; Climate policy; Mercury load; Nutrient load; Stem only harvesting; Whole tree harvesting

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIOMASS; CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATE MODELS; CONSERVATION; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ECOSYSTEMS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOSSIL FUELS; GLOBAL WARMING; HARVESTING; NUTRIENTS; QUALITY CONTROL; WATER QUALITY; WETLANDS;

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; CLIMATE POLICY; MERCURY LOADS; NUTRIENT LOADS; WHOLE TREE HARVESTING;

FORESTRY;

EID: 84907711884     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Ahtiainen M., Huttunen P. Long-term effects of forestry managements on water quality and loading in brooks. Boreal Environ. Res. 1999, 4:101-114.
2. Ahtikoski, et al. Turvemaiden metsien käsittely- ja hoito. Taustaraportti 2007, (In Finnish).
3. Alavalapati J., Lal P. Economics of wood-based biofuels. Handbook of Forest Resource Economics 2013, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group., (in press). S. Kant, J. Alavalapati (Eds.).
4. Amacher G.S., Ollikainen M., Koskela E. Economics of Forest Resources 2009, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Bengtsson J., Wikström F. Effects of whole-tree harvesting on the amount of soil carbon: model results. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 1993, 23:380-389.
6. Bouget C., Lassauce A., Jonsell M. Effects of fuelwood harvesting on biodiversity - a review focused on the situation in Europe. Can. J. For. Res. 2012, 42:1421-1432.
7. Boyland M. The economics of using forests to increase carbon storage. Can. J. For. Res. 2006, 36:2223-2234.
8. Clinnick P.F. Buffer strip management in forest operations: a review. Aust. For. 1985, 48(1):34-45.
9. Creedy J., Wurzbacher A.D. The economic value of a forested catchment with timber, water and carbon sequestration benefits. Ecol. Econ. 2001, 38:71-83.
10. Egnell G., Valinger E. Survival, growth, and growth allocation of planted Scots pine trees after different levels of biomass removal in clear-felling. For. Ecol. Manag. 2003, 177:65-74.
11. Eriksson L.O., Löfgren S., Öhman K. Implications for forest management of the EU Water Framework Directive's stream water quality requirements - a modeling approach. For. Policy Econ. 2011, 13:284-291.
12. Faustmann M. Calculation of the value which forest land and immature stands possesses. J. For. Econ. 1849, 1995(1):89-114. Reprinted in.
13. Finér L., Mattsson T., Joensuu S., Koivusalo H., Laurén A., Makkonen T., Nieminen M., Tattari S., Ahti E., Kortelainen P., Koskiaho J., Leinonen A., Nevalainen R., Piirainen S., Saarelainen J., Sarkkola S., Vuollekoski M. Metsäisten valuma-alueiden vesistökuormituksen laskenta. [A method for calculating nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment load from forest catchments]. Suomen Ympäristö 2010, 10. (In Finnish).
14. Finnish Forest Research Institute (FFRI) Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2010, Vammalan kirjapaino Oy, Sastamala.
15. Fisher B., Turner R.K., Morling P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:643-653.
16. 2 emission reductions and taxes. Biomass Bioenergy 2006, 30:296-303.
17. Gan J., Smith C.T. Co-benefits of utilizing logging residues for bioenergy production: the case for East Texas, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31:623-630.
18. Gren I.-M. International versus national actions against nitrogen pollution of the Baltic Sea. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2001, 20(1):41-59.
19. Grip H. Water chemistry and runoff in forest streams in Kloten. UNGI Report 58 1982, Division of Hydrology, Department of Physical Geography, Uppsala University.
20. Hartman R. The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value. Econ. Inq. 1976, 14:52-55.
21. Heinonen J. Koealojen puu- ja puustotunnusten laskentaohjelma KPL. Käyttöohje. [KPL - a computer programme package for computing stand and single tree characteristics from sample plot measurements]. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 1994, 504. (In Finnish).
22. Huttunen J. Metsänhoitoyhdistys Sotkamo. Personal communication on 9 April 2012 2012.
23. Hylander L.D., Goodsite M.E. Environmental costs of mercury pollution. Sci. Total. Environ. 2006, 368:352-370.
24. Hyytiäinen K., Ollikainen M. Taloudellinen näkökulma Itämeren suojeluun. Ympäristöministeriön raportteja 22/2012 (last accessed on 1 May 2013. In Finnish). http://www.ymparisto.fi/download.asp?contentid=139647&lan=fi.
25. Jacobson S., Kukkola M., Mälkönen E., Tveite B. Impact of whole-tree harvesting and compensatory fertilization on growth of coniferous thinning stands. For. Ecol. Manag. 2000, 129:41-51.
26. Jonsell M. Effects on biodiversity of forest fuel extraction, governed by processes working on a large scale. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31:726-732.
27. Jonsell M., Hansson J. Logs and stumps in clearcuts support similar saproxylic beetle diversity: implications for bioenergy harvest. Silva Fennica 2011, 45(5):1053-1064.
28. Kaltschmitt M., Reinhardt G.A., Stelzer T. Life cycle analysis of biofuels under different environmental aspects. Biomass Bioenergy 1997, 12(2):121-134.
29. Koivusalo H., Ahti E., Laurén A., Kokkonen T., Karvonen T., Nevalainen R., Finér L. Impacts of ditch cleaning on hydrological processes in a drained peatland forest. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2008, 12(5):1211-1227.
30. Koskela E., Ollikainen M., Pukkala T. Biodiversity conservation in commercial boreal forestry: the optimal rotation age and retention tree volume. For. Sci. 2007, 53(3):443-452.
31. Laine J., Vasander H. Suotyypit ja niiden tunnistaminen 2005, Metsäkustannus Oy, Hämeenlinna, (In Finnish).
32. Lattimore B., Smith C.T., Titus B.D., Stupak I., Egnell G. Environmental factors in woodfuel production: opportunities, risks, and criteria and indicators for sustainable practices. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33:1321-1342.
33. Laurén A., Finér L., Koivusalo H., Kokkonen T., Karvonen T., Kellomäki S., Mannerkoski H., Ahtiainen M. Water and nitrogen processes along a typical water flowpath and streamwater exports from a forested catchment and changes after clear-cutting: a modelling study. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2005, 9(6):657-674.
34. Laurén A., Koivusalo H., Ahtikoski A., Kokkonen T., Finér L. Water protection and buffer zones: how much does it cost to reduce nitrogen load in a forest cutting?. Scand. J. For. Res. 2007, 22:537-544.
35. Lehtonen A., Mäkipää R., Heikkinen J., Sievänen R., Liski J. Biomass expansion factors (BEFs) for Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch according to stand age for boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 188:211-224.
36. Mälkki H., Virtanen Y. Selected emissions and efficiencies of energy systems based on logging and sawmill residues. Biomass Bioenergy 2003, 24:321-327.
37. Mann L.K., Johnson D.W., West D.C., Cole D.W., Hornbeck J.W., Martin C.W., Riekerk H., Smith C.T., Swank W.T., Tritton L.M., van Lear D.H. Effects of whole-tree and stem-only clearcutting on postharvest hydrologic losses, nutrient capital, and regrowth. For. Sci. 1988, 34(2):412-428.
38. Matero J. Costs of water pollution abatement in forestry. J. For. Econ. 1996, 2:67-90.
39. Matero J. Economic analyses of diffuse load abatement in Finnish forestry. Research Notes 138 2002, D.Sc. thesis summary, University of Joensuu, Faculty of Forestry.
40. Matero J. Cost-effective measures for diffuse load abatement in forestry. Silva Fennica 2004, 38(3):333-345.
41. Matero J., Saastamoinen O. Monetary assessment of the impacts of forestry on water-based benefits in Finland. Boreal Environ. Res. 1998, 3:87-96.
42. Matta J.R., Alavalapati J.R.R., Stainback G.A. Effect of conserving habitat for biodiversity on optimal management of non-industrial private forests in Florida. J. For. Econ. 2009, 15:223-235.
43. Melin Y., Petersson H., Egnell G. Assessing carbon balance trade-offs between bioenergy and carbon sequestration of stumps at varying time scales and harvest intensities. For. Ecol. Manag. 2010, 260:536-542.
44. Merino A., Balboa M.A., Soalleiro R.R., Conzalez J.G.A. Nutrient exports under different harvesting regimes in fast-growing forest plantations in southern Europe. For. Ecol. Manag. 2005, 207:325-339.
45. Miettinen J., Ollikainen M., Finér L., Koivusalo H., Laurén A., Valsta L. Diffuse load abatement with biodiversity co-benefits: the optimal rotation age and buffer zone size. For. Sci. 2012, 58(4):342-352.
46. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
47. Miller W.L., Everett H.W. The economic impact of controlling nonpoint pollution in hardwood forestland. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1975, 57:576-583.
48. Miranda M.L., Hale B. Protecting the forest from the trees: the social costs of energy production in Sweden. Energy 2001, 26:869-889.
49. Munthe J., Hultberg H. Mercury and methylmercury in runoff from a forested catchment - concentrations, fluxes and their response to manipulations. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2004, 4:607-618.
50. Neal C. Assessing environmental impacts on stream water quality: the use of cumulative flux and cumulative flux difference approaches to deforestation of the Hafren Forest, mid-Wales. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2002, 6(3):421-431.
51. Nieminen M. Export of dissolved organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus following clear-cutting of three Norway spruce forests growing on drained peatlands. Silva Fennica 2004, 38(2):123-132.
52. Ollikainen M., Lankoski J. Multifunctionality: environment versus rural viability in social optima. J. Rural. Dev. 2009, 32(2):31-57.
53. Olsson B.A., Bengtsson J., Lundkvist H. Effects of different forest harvest intensities on the pools of exchangeable cations in coniferous forest soils. For. Ecol. Manag. 1996, 84:134-147.
54. Olschewski R., Benítez P. Optimizing joint production of timber and carbon sequestration of afforestation projects. J. For. Econ. 2010, 16:1-10.
55. Paananen R. Summa-arvomenetelmän aputaulukot. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapio 2007, (In Finnish).
56. Palosuo T., Wihersaari M., Liski J. Net greenhouse gas emissions due to energy use of forest residues - impact of soil carbon balance. Wood Biomass as an Energy Source - Challenges in Europe 2001, 115-122. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, (EFI Proceedings no 39). P. Pelkonen, P. Hakkila, T. Karjalainen, B. Schlamadinger (Eds.).
57. Pingoud K., Perälä A.-L. Arvioita puurakentamisen kasvihuonevaikutuksesta. VTT julkaisuja 2000, 840. (In Finnish).
58. Porvari P., Verta M., Munthe J., Haapanen M. Forestry practices increase mercury and methyl mercury output from boreal forest catchments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37:2389-2393.
59. Repo A., Tuomi M., Liski J. Indirect carbon dioxide emissions from producing bioenergy from forest harvest residues. Glob. Chang. Biol. Bioenergy 2011, 3:107-115.
60. Repo A., Känkänen R., Tuovinen J.-P., Antikainen R., Tuomi M., Vanhala P., Liski J. Bioenergy climate mitigation from forestry can be improved by allocating forest residue removal. Glob. Chang. Biol. Bioenergy 2012, 4:202-212.
61. Repola J. Biomass equations for Scots pine and Norway spruce in Finland. Silva Fennica 2009, 43(4):625-647.
62. Repola J., Ojansuu R., Kukkola M. Biomass functions for Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch in Finland. Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 2007 2007, 53.
63. Richards K., Stokes C. A review of forest carbon sequestration cost studies: a dozen years of research. Clim. Chang. 2004, 63:1-48.
64. Salminen H., Lehtonen M., Hynynen J. Reusing legacy Fortran in the MOTTI growth and yield simulator. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2005, 49:103-113.
65. Schlamadinger B., Spitzer J., Kohlmaier G.H., Lüdeke M. Carbon balance of bioenergy from logging residues. Biomass Bioenergy 1995, 8:221-234.
66. Scott D. Managing riparian zone vegetation to sustain streamflow: results of paired catchment experiment in South Africa. Can. J. For. Res. 1999, 29:1149-1157.
67. Searchinger T.D., Hamburg S.P., Melillo J., Chameides W., Havlik P., Kammen D.M., Likens G.E., Lubowski R.N., Obersteiner M., Oppenheimer M., Robertson G.P., Schlesinger W.H., Tilman G.D. Fixing a critical climate accounting error. Science 2009, 326:527-528.
68. Sedjo R.A., Wisniewski J., Sample A.V., Kinsman J.D. The economics of managing carbon via forestry: assessment of existing studies. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1995, 6:139-165.
69. Sillanpää P., Bilaletdin Ä., Kaipainen H., Frisk T., Sallantaus T. Metsätalouden aiheuttaman kuormituksen laskentamenetelmä. The Finnish Environment 2006, 817.
70. Sørensen R., Meili M., Lambertsson L., von Brömssen C., Bishop K. The effects of forest harvest operations on mercury and methylmercury in two boreal streams: relatively small changes in the first two years prior to site preparation. Ambio 2009, 38(7):364-372.
71. Statistics Finland Fuel classification and emission coefficients 2011 (last accessed on 10 March 2012). http://tilastokeskus.fi/tup/khkinv/khkaasut_polttoaineluokitus.html.
72. Stupak I., Asikainen A., Jonsell M., Karltun E., Lunnan A., Mizaraite D., Pasanen K., Pärn H., Raulund-Rasmussen K., Röser D., Schroeder M., Varnagiryte I., Vilkriste L., Callesen I., Clarke N., Gaitnieks T., Ingerslev M., Mandre M., Ozolincius R., Saarsalmi A., Armolaitis K., Helmisaari H.-S., Indriksons A., Kairiukstis L., Katzensteiner K., Kukkola M., Ots K., Ravn H.P., Tamminen P. Sustainable utilisation of forest biomass for energy - possibilities and problems: policy, legislation, certification, and recommendations and guidelines in the Nordic, Baltic, and other European countries. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31:666-684.
73. Sun C. Welfare effects of forestry best management practices in the United States. Can. J. For. Res. 2006, 36:1674-1683.
74. Tol R. The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties. Energy policy 2005, 33:2064-2074.
75. Tol R. The social cost of carbon. Ann. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2011, 3:419-443.
76. Valente C., Spinelli R., Hillring B.G. LCA of environmental and socio-economic impacts related to wood energy production in alpine conditions: Valle di Fiemme (Italy). J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19:1931-1938.
77. van Kooten G.C., Binkley C.S., Delcourt G. Effect of carbon taxes and subsidies on optimal forest rotation age and supply of carbon services. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1995, 77:365-374.
78. van Kooten G.C., Eagle A.J., Manley J., Smolak T. How costly are carbon offsets? A meta-analysis of carbon forest sinks. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2004, 7:239-251.
79. Walmsley J.D., Godbold D.L. Stump harvesting for bioenergy - a review of the environmental impacts. Forestry 2010, 83(1):17-38.
80. Walmsley J.D., Jones D.L., Reynolds B., Price M.H., Healey J.R. Whole tree harvesting can reduce second rotation forest productivity. For. Ecol. Manag. 2009, 257:1104-1111.
81. Watson F., Vertessy R., McMahon T., Rhodes B., Watson I. Improved methods to assess water yield changes from paired-catchment studies: application to the Maroondah catchments. For. Ecol. Manag. 2001, 143:189-204.
82. Wihersaari M. Greenhouse gas emissions from final harvest fuel chip production in Finland. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 28:435-443.