2016
DOI: 10.1007/s13280-015-0756-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of carbon balances between continuous-cover and clear-cut forestry in Sweden

Abstract: Continuous-cover forestry (CCF) has been recognized for the production of multiple ecosystem services, and is seen as an alternative to clear-cut forestry (CF). Despite the increasing interest, it is still not well described how CCF would affect the carbon balance and the resulting climate benefit from the forest in relation to CF. This study compares carbon balances of CF and CCF, applied as two alternative land-use strategies for a heterogeneous Norway spruce (Picea abies) stand. We use a set of models to an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
28
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
4
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In CCF, changes in soil carbon stock are smaller after harvests than in RMF because the litter input from harvest residues is smaller. The carbon balance of forests critically depends on the final use of timber biomass after it is removed from the forest ecosystem (Lundmark et al, 2016; Pukkala, 2016b) but we did not take into account the carbon storage in wood products or emissions from the procurement chain. However, as the proportion of sawlogs compared with pulpwood is higher in CCF than in RFM, the carbon retention time would be longer for timber produced in CCF (Pukkala, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In CCF, changes in soil carbon stock are smaller after harvests than in RMF because the litter input from harvest residues is smaller. The carbon balance of forests critically depends on the final use of timber biomass after it is removed from the forest ecosystem (Lundmark et al, 2016; Pukkala, 2016b) but we did not take into account the carbon storage in wood products or emissions from the procurement chain. However, as the proportion of sawlogs compared with pulpwood is higher in CCF than in RFM, the carbon retention time would be longer for timber produced in CCF (Pukkala, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, CCF may be economically more profitable than rotation forest management for forest owners (Pukkala, 2016a;Tahvonen, 2016;Tahvonen et al, 2010;Tahvonen and Rämö, 2016). However, there are also contradictory results, regarding the economic profitability (Andreassen and Øyen, 2002) as well as the effects on climate regulation (Lundmark et al 2016) and resistance against disturbances (Hanewinkel et al, 2014). Consequently, the debate on the usefulness of CCF is still ongoing (Diaci et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternative FMMs for carbon sequestration could be used to analyze effects of, e.g., plantation/clearfell versus continuous cover forestry (Lundmark et al 2016), rotation age and thinning intensity (Chikumbo and Starka 2012), low impact management versus extensive management (Vanderberg et al 2011), fate of harvested wood products and product substitution (Lundmark et al 2016;Moore et al 2012).…”
Section: Carbon Sequestrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Boreal forests are one of the biggest terrestrial carbon pools on Earth [2,3], storing carbon in the tree biomass and releasing it through decomposition, therefore playing a significant role in global climate change mitigation [4,5]. With increasing interest to promote carbon sequestration in forests, various new forest management practices are employed in managed even-aged stands [6][7][8][9] to meet the climate change targets and to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions in land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) sector [1,10]. However, there is still a lack of reference studies of unmanaged over-mature forests [2].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these conditions, species and age composition as well as the occurrence of natural disturbances play a key role in the formation of carbon stock and carbon fluxes [12][13][14]. Thus, only very limited review studies in old forests with a mixed-species, multi-cohort structure under various past-management practices are available to understand the carbon stock changes [7,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%