Multifunctional natural forest silviculture economics revised: Challenges in meeting landowners’ and society's wants. A review
Abstract
Aim of study: This paper objective focuses on the contribution of multifunctional natural forest silviculture, incorporating both private and public product managements, to forest and woodland economics.
Area of study: Spain and California (USA).
Material and methods: This conceptual article has developed a critical revision of the existing literature on the main economic issues for multifunctional natural forest silviculture in the last decades.
Main results: Multifunctional natural silviculture has secular roots as a local practice, but as a science of the natural environment applied to the economic management of forest lands it is still in the process of maturation. Timber silviculture remains the central concern of forest economics investment in scientific publications. By contrast, silvicultural modeling of the natural growth of firewood, browse and other non-timber forest products from trees and shrubs receives scant attention in scientific journals. Even rarer are publications on multifunctional natural silviculture for forest and woodland managements, including environmental services geared to people’s active and passive consumption. Under this umbrella, private environmental self-consumption is represented by the amenities enjoyed by private non-industrial landowners. As for environmental public products, the most relevant are carbon, water, mushrooms, recreation, landscape and threatened biodiversity.
Research highlights: This paper is a good example for the conceptual research on forestry techniques and economic concepts applied to multifunctional silviculture in Mediterranean areas of Spain and California. The combination of technical knowledge and private and public economic behaviors definitively contributes to the multifunctional management of natural forest systems.
Downloads
References
Aldea J, Martínez-Peña F, Diaz-Balteiro L, 2012. Integration of fungal production in forest management using a multi-criteria method. Eur J For Res 131: 1991-2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-012-0649-y
Allen-Diaz B, Standiford RB, Jackson RD, 2007. Oak woodlands and forests. In: Terrestrial vegetation of California; Barbour M, Keeler-Wolf T, Schoenherr A (eds), Chapter 12.UC Press, Berkeley, CA, USA. https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520249554.003.0012
Apollonio M, Andersen R, Putman R, 2010. European ungulates and their management in the 21st century. Cambridge Univ Press, UK. 603 pp.
Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Özdemiroglu E, et al., 2002. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. A manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. 480 pp. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781009727
Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM, Watson RT, Abson DJ, Andrews B, Binner A, Crowe A, Day BH, Dugdale S, et al., 2013. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 341 (6141): 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1234379
Beguería S, Campos P, Serrano R, Alvarez A, 2015. Producción, usos, renta y capital ambientales del agua en los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. In: Biodiversidad, usos del agua forestal y recolección de setas silvestres en los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 2; Campos P, Díaz M (eds). pp: 102-273. CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Bellman RE, 1957. Dynamic Programming. Princeton Univ Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Bravo F, Diaz-Balteiro L, 2004. Evaluation of new silvicultural alternatives for Scots pine stands in Northern Spain. Ann Forest Sci 61: 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2004008
Bravo F, Alvarez-Gonzalez JG, del Rio M, Barrio M, Bonet JA, Bravo-Oviedo A, Calama R, Castedo-Dorado F, Crecente-Campo F, Condes S, et al., 2011. Growth and yield models in Spain: Historical overview, contemporary examples and perspectives. Forest Syst 20 (2): 315-328. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2011202-11512
Calama R, Gordo FJ, Mutke S, Montero G, 2008. An empirical ecological-type model for predicting stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) cone production in the Northern Plateau (Spain). Forest Ecol Manage 255 (3-4): 660-673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.079
Calama R, Mutke S, Tomé J, Gordo J, Montero G, Tomé M, 2011. Modelling spatial and temporal variability in a zero-inflated variable: The case of stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) cone production. Ecol Model 222 (3): 606-618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.09.020
Campos P, 1999. Hacia la medición de la renta de bienestar del uso múltiple de un bosque. Invest Agrar: Sist Recur For 8 (2): 407-422.
Campos P, 2000. An agroforestry account system. In: Institutional aspects of managerial and accounting in forestry; Joebstl H, Merlo M, Venzi L (eds). pp: 9-19. IUFRO & University of Viterbo, Viterbo, Italy.
Campos P, 2015a. Cuentas agroforestales: Retos de la medición de la renta total social de los montes de Andalucía. In: Economía y selviculturas de los montes de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 1. Memoria 1.1; Campos P, Díaz-Balteiro L (eds). pp: 18-152. CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Campos P, 2015b. Renta ambiental del monte. Cuad Soc Esp Cienc For 39: 35-71.
Campos P, Mariscal P, 2003. Preferencias de los propietarios e intervención pública: El caso de las dehesas de la comarca de Monfragüe. Invest Agrar: Sist Recur For 12 (3): 87-102.
Campos P, Caparrós A, 2006. Social and private total Hicksian incomes of multiple use forests in Spain. Ecol Econ 57 (4): 545-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.05.005
Campos P, Caparrós A, Cerdá E, Huntsinger L, Standiford RB, 2007. Modeling multifunctional agroforestry systems with environmental values: dehesa in Spain and wood land ranches in California. In: Handbook of operations research in natural resources; Weintraub A, Romero C, Bjorndal T, Epstein R (eds), Chapter 3, pp: 33-52. Springer, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71815-6_3
Campos P, Daly H, Oviedo JL, Ovando P, Chebil A, 2008. Accounting for single and aggregated forest incomes: Application to public cork oak forests of Jerez in Spain and Iteimia in Tunisia. Ecol Econ 65: 76-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.001
Campos P, Oviedo J, Caparrós A, Huntsinger L, Coelho L, 2009. Contingent valuation of woodland owners private amenities in Spain, Portugal and California. Rangeland Ecol Manage 62 (3): 240-252. https://doi.org/10.2111/08-178R2.1
Campos P, Huntsinger L, Oviedo JL, Starrs PF, Díaz M, Standiford RB, Montero G, 2013. Mediterranean oak woodland working landscapes. Dehesas of Spain and Ranchlands of California. Landscape Series, Vol. 16. Springer, Dordrecht. 508 pp. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6707-2
Campos P, Álvarez A, Casta-o FM, Pulido F, 2015. Leñas de podas de encinas en la Dehesa de la Luz. In: La Dehesa de la Luz en la vida de los arroyanos; Campos P, Pulido F (eds). pp: 127-142. Editorial Luz y Progreso, Spain.
Caparrós A, Campos P, Montero G, 2003a. An operative framework for total Hicksian income measurement: Application to a multiple-use forest. Environ Resour Econ 26 (2): 173-198. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026306832349
Caparrós A, Campos P, Martín D, 2003b. Influence of carbon dioxide abatement and recreational services on optimal forest rotation. Int J Sust Dev 6 (3): 345-358. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2003.004228
Caparrós A, Cerdá E, Ovando P, Campos P, 2010. Carbon sequestration with reforestations and biodiversity-scenic values. Environ Resour Econ 45: 49-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9305-5
Caparrós A, Huntsinger L, Oviedo JL, Plieninger T, Campos P, 2013. Economics of ecosystem services. In: Mediterranean oak woodland working landscapes: Dehesas of Spain and ranchlands of California; Campos P et al. (eds), Chapter: 12. Landscape Series, Springer, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6707-2_12
Caparrós A, Campos P, Beguería S, Carranza J et al., 2016. Renta total social y capital georreferenciados de los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. In: Valoración de los servicios públicos y la renta total social de los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 5. Memoria 5.4; Campos P, Caparrós A (eds). pp: 426-604. CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Caparrós A, Oviedo J. L., Álvarez A., Campos P., 2017. Simulated Exchange Values and Ecosystem Accounting: Theory and Application to Recreation. Ecol. Econ. 139: 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.011
Carranza J, Torres-Porras J, Seoane JM, Fernández-Llario P, 2015. Gestión de las poblaciones cinegéticas de los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. In: Poblaciones, demanda y economía de las especies cinegéticas en los montes de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 3. Memoria 3.1; Campos P, Martínez-Jauregui M (eds). pp: 7-185. CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Cerdá E, Martín-Barroso D, 2013. Optimal control for forest management and conservation analysis in dehesa ecosystems. Eur J Oper Res 227: 515-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.12.010
Conrad JM, 2010. Resource economics, 2nd edition. Cambridge Univ Press, NY, USA. 300 pp. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781087
Diaz Balteiro L, Romero C, 2008. Making forestry decisions with multiple criteria: A review and an assessment. Forest Ecol Manag 255: 3222-3241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.038
Diaz-Balteiro L, González-Pachón J, Romero C, 2009. Forest management with multiple criteria and multiple stakeholders: An application to two public forests in Spain. Scand J Forest Res 24 (1): 87-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827580802687440
Diaz-Balteiro L, González-Pachón J, Romero R, 2013. About the use of goal programming in forest management: Customizing models for the decision maker's. Scand J Forest Res 28: 166-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2012.712154
Díaz-Balteiro L, Caparrós A, Campos P, Almazán E, Ovando P, Álvarez A, Voces R, Romero C, 2015. Economía privada de productos le-osos, frutos industriales, bellota, pastos y el servicio del carbono en los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. In: Economía y selviculturas de los montes de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 1. Memoria 1.3; Campos P, Díaz-Balteiro L (eds). pp: 397-722. CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Dieterich V, 1953. Forst-Wirtschaftspolitik - Eine Einführung. Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg & Berlin, Germany. 398 pp.
EC, 2000. Manual on the economic accounts for agriculture and forestry EEA/EAF 97 (Rev. 1.1). European Commission, EUROSTAT, Luxembourg.
EC, 2011. Communication from the Commission: Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Brussels, 3.5.2011, COM (2011) 244 final.
EC-IFM-OECD-UN-WB, 2009. System of national accounts 2008 (SNA 2008). NY, USA.
Edens B, Hein L, 2013. Towards a consistent approach for ecosystem accounting. Ecol Econ 90: 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.03.003
Giusti G, McCreary D, Standiford RB, 1992. Planner's guide to oak woodlands, 2nd ed. Univ of Calif Div of Agr & Nat Resour Publ, Oakland, CA, USA. 126 pp.
Gregory GR, 1955. An economic approach to multiple use. Forest Sci 1: 6-13.
Herruzo AC, Martínez-Jáuregui M, 2013. Trends in hunters, hunting grounds and big game harvest in Spain. Forest Syst 22 (1): 114-122. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2013221-03371
Herruzo AC, Martínez-Jauregui M, Carranza J, Campos P, 2016. Commercial income and capital of hunting: an application to forest estates in Andalucía. Forest Policy Econ 69: 53-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.05.004
Huntsinger L, Johnson M, Stafford M, Fried J, 2010. California hardwood rangeland landowners 1985 to 2004: Ecosystem services, production, and permanence. Rangeland Ecol Manage 63: 325-334. https://doi.org/10.2111/08-166.1
IECA, 2015. Contabilidad Regional Anual de Andalucía. Base 2010. Serie 1995-2014. Instituto de Estadística y Cartografía de Andalucía. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/institutodeestadisticaycartografia./craa/index.htm.
Jandl R, Vesterdal L, Olsson M, Bens O, Badeck F, Rock J, 2007. Carbon sequestration and forest management. CAB Rev: Perspect in Agr Vet Sci Nutr Nat Resour 2 (17): 16. https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20072017
Kaipainen T, Liski J, Pussinen A, Karjalainen T, 2004. Managing carbon sinks by changing rotation length in European forests. Environ Sci Policy 7(3): 205-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2004.03.001
Keenan RJ, 2015. Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management: A review. Ann Forest Sci 72 (2): 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-014-0446-5
Martínez-Jauregui M, Herruzo AC, Carranza J, Torres-Porras J, Campos P, 2016a. Environmental price of game animal stock. Human Dimension of Wildlife 21: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2016.1082682
Martínez-Jauregui M, Herruzo AC, Campos P, Soli-o M, 2016b. Shedding light on the self-consumption value of recreational hunting in European Mediterranean forests. Forest Policy Econ 63: 83-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.05.002
Merlo M, Stellin G, Harou P, Whitby M, 1987. Multipurpose agriculture and forestry. Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk Kiel, Kiel. 633 pp.
Milner JM, Bonefant C, Mysterud A, Gaillard JM, Csányi S, Stenseth NC, 2006. Temporal and spatial development of red deer harvesting in Europe: biological and cultural factors. J Appl Ecol 43: 721-734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01183.x
Montero G, 1987. Modelos para cuantificar la producción de corcho en alcornocales (Quercus suber L.) en función de la calidad de estación y los tratamientos selvícolas. Doctoral thesis. Universidad Politécnica, Madrid.
Montero G, Calama R, Ruiz Peinado R, 2008. Selvicultura de Pinus pinea L. In: Compendio de selvicultura de especies; Montero G, Serrada R, Reque J (eds). pp: 431-470. INIA-Fundación Conde del Valle de Salazar, Madrid, Spain.
Montero G, Pasalodos-Tato M, López-Senespleda E, Ruiz-Peinado R, Bravo-Oviedo A, Madrigal G, Onrubia R, 2015. Modelos de selvicultura y producción de madera, frutos y fijación de carbono de los sistemas forestales de Andalucía. In: Economía y selviculturas de los montes de Andalucía. Memorias científicas de RECAMAN, Vol 1. Memoria 1.2; Campos P, Díaz-Balteiro L (eds). pp. 153-396. CSIC, Spain.
Obst C, Hein L, Edens R, 2016. National accounting and the valuation of ecosystem assets and their services. Environ Resour Econ 64 (1): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-015-9921-1
Ovando P, Campos P, Calama R, Montero G, 2010. Landowner net benefit from stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) afforestation of dry-land cereal fields in Valladolid, Spain. J Forest Econ 16 (2): 83-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2009.07.001
Ovando P, Campos P, Oviedo JL, Caparrós A, 2016a. Ecosystem accounting for measuring total income in private and public agroforestry farms. Forest Policy Econ 71: 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.031
Ovando P, Oviedo JL, Campos P, 2016b. Measuring total social income of a stone pine afforestation project in Huelva (Spain). Land Use Policy 50: 479-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.10.015
Ovando P, Caparrós A, Diaz-Balteiro L, Pasalodos M, Beguería S, Oviedo JL, Montero G, Campos P, 2017. Spatial valuation of forests environmental assets: An application to Andalusian silvopastoral farms. Land Econ 93 (1): 87-108. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.93.1.87
Oviedo JL, Huntsinger L, Campos P, Caparrós A, 2012. The income value of private amenities in California oak woodlands. California Agric 66 (3): 91. https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v066n03p91
Oviedo JL, Ovando P, Forero L, Huntsinger L, Álvarez A, Mesa B, Campos P, 2013. The private economy of dehesas and ranches: case studies. In: Mediterranean oak woodland working landscapes: Dehesas of Spain and ranchlands of California; Campos P, et al. (eds). Chapter: 13. Landscape Series, Springer, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6707-2_13
Oviedo JL, Huntsinger L, Campos P, 2017. The Contribution of Amenities to Landowner Income: Cases in Spanish and Californian Hardwood Rangelands. Rangeland Ecol Manage 70 (2017) 518–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2017.02.002
Pasalodos-Tato M, Pukkala T, Calama R, Ca-ellas I, Sánchez-González M, 2016. Optimal management of Pinus pinea stands when cone and timber production are considered. Eur J For Res: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-016-0958-7
Pereira S, Prieto A, Calama R, Diaz-Balteiro L, 2015. Optimal management in Pinus pinea L. stands combining silvicultural schedules for timber and cone production. Silva Fenn 49 (3): 1226. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1226
Pontryagin LS, Botyanskii VG, Gamkrelidze RV, Mishenko EF, 1962. The mathematical theory of optimal processes. English translation. Interscience Publishers, NY, USA.
Pope CA, 1985. Agricultural productive and consumptive use components of rural land values in Texas. Am J Agr Econ 67: 81-86. https://doi.org/10.2307/1240826
Ramírez JA, Díaz M, 2008. The role of temporal shrub encroachment for the maintenance of Spanish holm oak Quercus ilex dehesas. Forest Ecol Manage 255: 1976-1983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.12.019
Ruiz-Peinado R, Montero G, 2009. Selvicultura del carbono. Jornada sobre Bosques, Sumideros de Carbono y Cambio Climático. Zaragoza (Spain), June 30.
Sánchez-González M, Ca-ellas I, Montero G, 2008. Base-age invariant cork growth model for Spanish cork oak (Quercus suber L.) forests. Eur J For Res 127 (3): 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0192-4
Schwenk WS, Donovan TM, Keeton WS, Nunery JS, 2012. Carbon storage, timber production, and biodiversity: comparing ecosystem services with multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecol Appl 22: 1612-1627. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-0864.1
Serrada R, Montero G, Reque JA, 2008. Compendio de selvicultura aplicada en Espa-a. INIA, Madrid, Spain. 1178 pp.
Sohngen B, Mendelsohn R, 2003. An optimal control model of forest carbon sequestration. Am J Agr Econ 85 (2): 448-457. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00133
Standiford RB, 1996. Guidelines for Managing California's Hardwood Rangelands. Univ of Calif Div Agric Nat Resour Publ 3368. Oakland, CA, USA. http://bofdata.fire.ca.gov/board_business/binder_materials/2014/april_2014/forest_practice_committee_/fpc_2.2_ihrmp_guidelines_for_hardwoods_1996__2_.pdf [2 December 1996] .
Standiford RB, Howitt RE, 1993. Solving empirical bioeconomic models: a rangeland management application. Am J Agr Econ 74: 421-433. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242496
Standiford RB, Howitt RE, 1993. Multiple use management of California’s hardwood rangelands. J Range Manage 46: 176-182. https://doi.org/10.2307/4002277
Standiford RB, Bartolome J, 1997. The integrated hardwood range management program: Education and research as a conservation strategy. Proc Symp Oak Woodlands: Ecology, Management, and Urban Interface Issues; March 19-22, 1996, San Luis Obispo, CA, USA; pp: 569-581.
Standiford RB, Scott TA, 2001. Value of oak woodlands and open space on private property values in southern California. Invest Agrar: Sist Recur For S1: 137-152.
Standiford RB, Ovando P, Campos P, Montero G, 2013. Models of oak woodland silvopastoral management. In: Mediterranean oak woodland working landscapes: Dehesas of Spain and ranchlands of California; Campos P, et al. (eds). Chapter 9. Landscape Series, Springer, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6707-2_9
Stone R, 1984. The accounts of society. Nobel Memorial Lecture. Econ Sci 1984: 115-139.
Torell LA, Rimbey NR, Ramírez OA, McCollum DW, 2005. Income earning potential versus consumptive amenities in determining ranchland values. J Agric Resour Econ 30: 537-560.
UN-EC-FAO-OECD-WB, 2014a. System of environmental economic accounting 2012. Experimental ecosystem accounting. United Nations, NY.
UN-EC-FAO-OECD-WB, 2014b. System of environmental economic accounting 2012. Central framework. United Nations, NY.
Valachovic Y, Quinn-Davidson L, Standiford Rb, 2015. Can the California forest practice rules adapt to address conifer encroachment? Proc 7th Calif Oak Symp: Managing Oak Woodlands in a Dynamic World, Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-251; pp: 515-520. USDA, Forest Service Pacific SW Res Stat, CA, USA.
Wasson JR, McLeod DM, Bastian CT, Rashford BS, 2013. The effects of environmental amenities on agricultural land values. Land Econ 89: 466-478. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.89.3.466
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
