Loading...
Pubblicazioni Scientifiche
Filtri di ricerca 2 risultati
Pubblicazioni per anno
Indicators for the assessment and certification of cork oak management sustainability in Italy
Pollastrini
,
M.
,
Chiavetta
,
U.
,
Cutini
,
Andrea
,
Casula
,
Antonio
,
Maltoni
,
Sara
,
Dettori
,
Sandro
,
Corona
,
P.
italy
forest management planning
non-wood forest products
quercus suber
sardinia
sustainable forest management
Mostra abstract
Sustainable forest management (SFM) is crucial for forest ecosystem productivity and conservation, especially in systems such as cork oak (Quercus suber L.) threatened by human activities and biotic and abiotic factors. In this study SFM indicators with particular reference to cork oak forests in the region of Sardinia (Italy) are proposed and tested. Sustainable and responsible management options specifically aimed at cork oak forest management and chain of custody certification are also provided. A set of ten indicators was proposed and assessed by an expert panel in cork oak management. Five indicators were also tested against data on structure, origin, health condition and management in 285 forest compartments managed by FoReSTAS (Regional Forest Agency for Land and Environment of Sardinia, Italy), including 361 sampling plots and 5345 trees. In order to investigate the priorities and perceptions of SFM experts and stakeholders, a survey was also carried out by completion of a questionnaire on the technical issues of cork oak woodland management. The survey results highlighted a need to improve environmental and economic performance by means of SFM and certification. The indicators tested in Sardinian cork oak woodlands showed that about 80% of the stands fulfilled management sustainability requirements. The suggested SFM indicators can effectively support proactive management and conservation measures, representing a valuable tool in the current context of growing environmental and socioeconomic awareness. © SISEF.
One to rule them all? Assessing the performance of sustainable forest management indicators against multitaxonomic data for biodiversity conservation
Paillet
,
Yoan
,
Zapponi
,
Livia
,
Schall
,
Peter
,
Monnet
,
Jean Matthieu
,
Ammer
,
Christian
,
Balducci
,
Lorenzo
,
Boch
,
Steffen
,
Brazaitis
,
Gediminas
,
Campanaro
,
Alessandro
,
Chianucci
,
Francesco
,
Doerfler
,
Inken
,
Fischer
,
Markus
,
Gosselin
,
Marion
,
Goßner
,
Martin M.
,
Heilmann-Clausen
,
Jacob
,
Hofmeister
,
Jeňýk
,
Hošek
,
Jan
,
Jung
,
Kirsten G.
,
Kepfer-Rojas
,
Sebastian
,
Ódor
,
Péter
,
Tinya
,
Flóra
,
Trentanovi
,
Giovanni
,
Vacchiano
,
Giorgio
,
Vandekerkhove
,
Kris
,
Weisser
,
Wolfgang W.
,
Wohlwend
,
Michael Rudolf
,
Burrascano
,
Sabina
Mostra abstract
Several regional initiatives and reporting efforts assess the state of forest biodiversity through broad-scale indicators based on data from national forest inventories. Although valuable, these indicators are essentially indirect and evaluate habitat quantity and quality rather than biodiversity per se. Therefore, their link to biodiversity may be weak, which decreases their usefulness for decision-making. For several decades, Forest Europe indicators assessed the state of European forests, in particular their biodiversity. However, no extensive study has been conducted to date to assess their performance – i.e. the capacity of the indicators to reflect variations in biodiversity – against multitaxonomic data. We hypothesized that no single biodiversity indicator from Forest Europe can represent overall forest biodiversity, but that several indicators would reflect habitat quality for at least some taxa in a comprehensive way. We tested the set of Forest Europe's indicators against the species richness of six taxonomic and functional groups across several hundreds of sampling units over Europe. We showed that, while some indicators perform relatively well across groups (e.g. deadwood volume), no single indicator represented all biodiversity at once, and that a combination of several indicators performed better. Forest Europe indicators were chosen for their availability and ease of understanding for most people. However, we showed that gaps in the monitoring framework persist, and that surveying certain taxa along with stand structure is necessary to support policymaking and tackle forest biodiversity loss at the large scale. Adding context (e.g. forest type) may also contribute to increase the performance of biodiversity indicators. © 2024 Elsevier Ltd