• Energy Research

Finnish forests are used extensively for timber production but are also providers of other ecosystem services and harbor unique biodiversity. The ecosystem services approach has so far been used marginally in the context of Finnish forestry; however, due to the multiple values associated with Finnish forests and the impacts forestry operations have on forest ecosystems, it is clearly applicable in this context. In this thesis, I studied the occurrence and severity of trade-offs among ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation in Finnish forests. I used forest inventory data, forest growth simulations, and multi-objective optimization to reveal how the severity of the trade-offs varies among combinations of ecosystem services, across spatial scales, and across time, and how the trade-offs could be mitigated by forest management planning. Overall, the results showed that there are clear and challenging conflicts between intensive forestry and ecosystem services in Finland. Ecosystem services provided by forests were found to diminish when the forests were used intensively as a source of timber, whereas reducing or refraining from harvests maintained comparatively high levels of multiple non- timber services and biodiversity. Non-timber services and biodiversity were also shown to recover from intensive forestry the slower the longer intensive forestry was continued, suggesting that forestry’s negative impacts may be long-lasting. The use of optimization tools can help planners to identify management strategies that balance conflicting objectives as well as possible, especially if the analyses are conducted at large enough scales. However, the fact that there are trade-offs means that losses in some objectives are inevitable. It is left to forest managers and other stakeholders to consider which of these losses they are willing to accept. ei tietoa saavutettavuudesta unknown accessibility

Forests are widely recognized as major providers of ecosystem services, including timber, other forest products, recreation, regulation of water, soil and air quality, and climate change mitigation. Extensive tracts of boreal forests are actively managed for timber production, but actions aimed at increasing timber yields also affect other forest functions and services. Here, we present an overview of the environmental impacts of forest management from the perspective of ecosystem services. We show how prevailing forestry practices may have substantial but diverse effects on the various ecosystem services provided by boreal forests. Several aspects of these processes remain poorly known and warrant a greater role in future studies, including the role of community structure. Conflicts among different interests related to boreal forests are most likely to occur, but the concept of ecosystem services may provide a useful framework for identifying and resolving these conflicts.

AbstractForests provide a wide variety of ecosystem services (ES) to society. The boreal biome is experiencing the highest rates of warming on the planet and increasing demand for forest products. To foresee how to maximize the adaptation of boreal forests to future warmer conditions and growing demands of forest products, we need a better understanding of the relative importance of forest management and climate change on the supply of ecosystem services. Here, using Finland as a boreal forest case study, we assessed the potential supply of a wide range of ES (timber, bilberry, cowberry, mushrooms, carbon storage, scenic beauty, species habitat availability and deadwood) given seven management regimes and four climate change scenarios. We used the forest simulator SIMO to project forest dynamics for 100 years into the future (2016–2116) and estimate the potential supply of each service using published models. Then, we tested the relative importance of management and climate change as drivers of the future supply of these services using generalized linear mixed models. Our results show that the effects of management on the future supply of these ES were, on average, 11 times higher than the effects of climate change across all services, but greatly differed among them (from 0.53 to 24 times higher for timber and cowberry, respectively). Notably, the importance of these drivers substantially differed among biogeographical zones within the boreal biome. The effects of climate change were 1.6 times higher in northern Finland than in southern Finland, whereas the effects of management were the opposite—they were three times higher in the south compared to the north. We conclude that new guidelines for adapting forests to global change should account for regional differences and the variation in the effects of climate change and management on different forest ES.