Epiphytic lichens represent one of the most suitable indicators of forest continuity and management, especially in the context of ancient and old-growth forests. Nevertheless, they have not yet been included among Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) indicators to which Pan-European forest policy and governance refer. In addition, currently adopted SFM indicators are mainly designed for high forests rather than coppice forests, despite the fact that today this management system covers more than 10% of the total European forests. In this study we investigated these two issues by examining epiphytic lichen diversity in three coppice forest stands, located in the two Italian regions of Tuscany and Sardinia. In particular, we addressed: i) the role of lichen diversity as SFM indicator and ii) its relationship with consolidated and new SFM indicators dealing with structural, health, biodiversity, protective and socioeconomic functions. Multivariate Factor Analysis and Generalised Linear Models were adopted for data analysis. We found that lichen diversity and the frequency of single sensitive species were mainly related to the biodiversity of plants and fungi (Criterion 4), the health and vitality of the forests (Criterion 2) and their protective functions (Criterion 5). Furthermore, our results show that the lichen species highlighted by the models may represent suitable indicators in long-term studies, especially in relation to complex and interconnected aspects of sustainable forest management. Although our findings represent a first contribute to this issue, more in-depth researches will be needed to clarify further aspects of the complex interactions among SFM indicators in the context of coppice forests. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd

Although coppice forests represent a significant part of the European forest area, especially across southern Countries, they received little attention within the Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) processes and scenarios, whose guidelines have been mainly designed to high forests and national scale. In order to obtain “tailored” information on the degree of sustainability of coppices on the scale of the stand, we evaluated (i) whether the main coppice management options result in different responses of the SFM indicators, and (ii) the degree to which the considered SFM indicators were appropriate in their application at stand level. The study considered three different management options (Traditional Coppice TC, coppice under Natural Evolution NE, and coppice under Conversion to high forest by means of periodical thinning CO). In each of the 43 plots considered in the study, which covered three different European Forest Types, we applied a set of eighteen “consolidated” SFM indicators, covering all the six SFM Criteria (FOREST EUROPE, 2020) and, additionally, tested other sixteen novel indicators shaped for agamic forests and/or applicable at stand level. Results confirmed that several consolidated indicators related to resources status (Growing stock and Carbon stock), health (Defoliation and Forest damage), and socio-economic functions (Net revenue, Energy and Accessibility) were highly appropriate for evaluating the sustainability of coppice at stand level. In addition, some novel indicators related to resources status (Total above ground tree biomass), health (Stand growth) and protective functions (Overstorey cover and Understorey cover) proved to be highly appropriate and able to support the information obtained by the consolidated ones. As a consequence, a subset of consolidated SFM indicators, complemented with the most appropriate novel ones, may represent a valid option to support the evaluation of coppice sustainability at stand level. An integrated analysis of the SFM indicators showed that NE and CO display significant higher environmental performances as compared with TC. In addition, CO has positive effects also on socio-economic issues, while TC -which is an important cultural heritage and a silvicultural option that may help to keep local communities engaged in forestry – combines high wood harvesting rates with dense understory cover. Overall, each of the three management options showed specific sustainability values; as a consequence, their coexistence at a local scale and in accordance with the specific environmental conditions and the social-economic context, is greatly recommended since it may fulfill a wider array of sustainability issues. © 2021