Trading wood for water and carbon in peatland forests? Rewetting is worth more than wood production

While traditional forest management systems aim at maximizing timber production, sustainable forest management focuses on the multiple benefits of entire forest landscapes. The latter is now at the top of policy agendas. This calls for learning through evaluation to support the implementation of policies aiming towards multi-functional forest landscapes. The aim of this study is to quantify the economic trade-offs among natural, current, and re-wetted peatland forests using seven indicators, viz. drainage maintenance, rewetting, water retention, wood production, and three types of carbon sequestration as economic indicators. We discuss ways to adapt to and mitigate effect of forest draining on climate change toward securing multi-functional forest landscapes. The cost benefit analysis showed that in a potential natural state, Lithuania's peatland forests would deliver an economic benefit of -euro176.1 million annually. In contrast, compared to natural peatland forests, the drainage of peatland forests for wood production has caused a loss of -euro309 million annually. In comparison, peatland forest rewetting is estimated to increase the economic value by -euro170 million annually. This study shows that satisfying different ecosystem services is a balancing act, and that a focus on wood production has resulted in net losses when foregone values of water storage and carbon sequestration are considered. Valuation of different sets of ecosystems service benefits and disservices must be assessed, and can be used as a tool towards creating, implementing and monitoring consequences of policies on both sustainability and biodiversity

Trading wood for water and carbon in peatland forests? Rewetting is worth more than wood production

While traditional forest management systems aim at maximizing timber production, sustainable forest management focuses on the multiple benefits of entire forest landscapes. The latter is now at the top of policy agendas. This calls for learning through evaluation to support the implementation of policies aiming towards multi-functional forest landscapes. The aim of this study is to quantify the economic trade-offs among natural, current, and re-wetted peatland forests using seven indicators, viz. drainage maintenance, rewetting, water retention, wood production, and three types of carbon sequestration as economic indicators. We discuss ways to adapt to and mitigate effect of forest draining on climate change toward securing multi-functional forest landscapes. The cost benefit analysis showed that in a potential natural state, Lithuania’s peatland forests would deliver an economic benefit of ~€176.1 million annually. In contrast, compared to natural peatland forests, the drainage of peatland forests for wood production has caused a loss of ~€309 million annually. In comparison, peatland forest rewetting is estimated to increase the economic value by ~€170 million annually. This study shows that satisfying different ecosystem services is a balancing act, and that a focus on wood production has resulted in net losses when foregone values of water storage and carbon sequestration are considered. Valuation of different sets of ecosystems service benefits and disservices must be assessed, and can be used as a tool towards creating, implementing and monitoring consequences of policies on both sustainability and biodiversity.publishedVersio

FSC miškų vadybos sertifikavimo analizė Lietuvoje ir Rusijoje

First time name of certification were mentioned 1990s concerning a problems with bad forest practices, hard improvement of governmental regulations especial in tropics. Later this concern were growing to 1992 Rio de Janeiro conference. And so, need of strict forest system in 1993 established Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Main activities started later 1996 in Canada with small group of people which started developing countries regional standards (Claros, 2009). Now FSC program is one of the biggest forest certification and accreditation providing company providing wood and their products and certification service. This program supports LEED Lumber, IKEA, biggest companies buying wood in the world, non governamental organisations World wild Fund (WWF), Green peace (www.fsc.org). The curiosity of how FSC forest certification impact forest management in Lithuania and Russia and lack of FSC standard studies with national law encouraged to create such study. We want to analyze FSC certification annual public reports raised CAR’s (Corrective action request) from Forest Management Units (FMU) - enterprises, leaseholders in Lithuania and Russia. The first aim was to find, what main CAR’s in Lithuania, Russia and distribute CAR’s to environmental, economical, social type aspects. In later stages analyze Lithuanian and Russian FSC standards Smart Wood, SGS Qualifor and Russian national. In the last step to compare FSC standards with state law for each country. Analysis of Lithuanian and Russian FSC CAR indicators from Forest Management Units (FMU) showed, that biggest amount of violations from violation distribution in countries is environmental. Violation distribution by FSC principles in the countries proved that both countries had main ecological violations 6, 8 principle. Lithuanian Smart Wood and SGS Qualifor not differ much. Lithuanian with Russian standards was most similar by social context indicators. Study showed most important violated indicators in Lithuania from economical type are 8.3.3 problems with FSC logo use and certificate number on invoices; social: 8.5.1 summary of FMU (Forest management unit) management for public not sufficient; ecological: 6.3.8 problem leaving enough dead wood or trees for natural biodiversity. Analysis of most important indicators in Russia from economical part: 7.1.1 long term forest management goal creation; social: 4.2.11 FMU safety and protection problems; ecological: 6.1.1 environment impact assessment of FMU management activities. Comparison of Smart Wood, SGS Qualifor and Russian standards by both countries violated indicators showed that Lithuanian standards ware most similar, most detailed was Russian national. Lower requirements were mostly found in SGS Qualifor and Russian national. Most strict was Smart Wood and Russian national Analyzing standards and state law in both countries by each country standard violations was found that FSC standards were higher than state requirements.Pagal FSC standartus miškai pradėti sertifikuoti nuo 1993 metų. Patogi sertifikavimo sistema leido minėtam standartui išplisti visame pasaulyje. Bolivijoje, Brazilijoje, Indonezijoje FSC sertifikavimas vis dar plečiamas (Claros, 2009). Sertifikacijos dėka gerinama miškų valdymo kokybė, biologinės įvairovės apsauga, sprendžiamos darbuotojų saugos problemos. Šio standarto visapusišku naudingumu neabejoja daugelis FSC rėmėjų: LEED Lumber, IKEA, bei didžiausios miško produktus superkančios ar nevyriausybinės organizacijos, Pasaulio gamtos fondas (World wild Fund WWF), Green peace (www.fsc.org). Mokslinių darbų, nagrinėjančių miškų sertifikaciją objektyviai, yra nedaug ir miškų sertifikavimo tema nėra plačiai nagrinėjama palyginus su socialiniais, miško gyvosios ir negyvosios gamtos sąveikos tyrimais. Miškų sertifikavimo standartų palyginamųjų darbų taip pat yra negausu. Šio darbo sukūrimo pagrindas – galimybė išanalizuoti skirtumus tarp FSC sertifikuotų kaimyninių šalių (Lietuvos ir Rusijos) miškų tvarkymo vienetų ir naudojimo standartų (MTV – Lietuvoje valstybinių miškų įmonių urėdijų ir Rusijoje miškų ūkių ir miškų nuomotojų). Taip pat norima sužinoti, ar Lietuvoje ir Rusijoje susiduriama su skirtingais sertifikavimo pažeidimais. Šių pažeidimų koregavimo veiksmų reikalavimų (KVR) aspektų pagalba palyginti Lietuvos ir Rusijos FSC miškų valdymo sertifikacijos standartus bei su standartais susijusi šalių miškų teisė. Kita šio darbo dalis, skirta ištirti kokią įtaką ekonominės, ekologinės, socialinės gerovės puoselėjimui turi miškų sertifikacija, bei surasti standartų ir valstybės teisės aktų skirtumus, kurie turi įtakos vertinant Lietuvos ir Rusijos MTV standartų suvokimą. Darbe buvo analizuotos MTV kasmetinio audito 38 Lietuvos valstybinių miškų urėdijų ir 60 Rusijos valstybinių miškų urėdijų ir miškų nuomotojų ataskaitos. Taip pat nagrinėti Lietuvos laikinieji Smart Wood, SGS Qualifor ir Rusijos nacionalinis standartai ir su standartų kontekstu susijusi šalių teisė. Lietuvos ir Rusijos miškų valdymo tarybos (FSC) koregavimo veiksmų reikalavimų (KVR) miškų tvarkymo vienetams analizė parodė, kad didžiausias pažeidimų kiekis nustatytas ekologinio pobūdžio rodikliuose. Nagrinėjant KVR pažeidimų pasiskirstymą pagal FSC principus nustatyta, kad didžiausi pažeidimai buvo 6 („poveikis aplinkai“) ir 8 („stebėsena ir įvertinimas“) principo. Pažeidimų analizė atskleidė, kad Lietuvoje iš ekonominių rodiklių didžiausi pažeidimai nustatyti 8.3.3 rodikliui (miškų įmonių problemos su FSC logotipo naudojimu, pasenęs sertifikato naudojimas prekybai), socialinių – 8.5.1 rodikliui (nėra arba netinkamos apimties monitoringo valdymo plano santrauka), ekologinių – 6.3.8 (nepakankamas po kirtimų paliekamos negyvos medienos kiekis). Rusijoje iš ekonominių rodiklių nustatyti didžiausi pažeidimai buvo 7.1.1 rodikliui (miškų įmonių valdymo plano ilgalaikių tikslų planavimo problemos), socialinių – 4.2.11 (apsaugos ir saugos problemos miško įmonių valdymo procese), ekologinių – 6.1.1 (miško darbų poveikio aplinkai vertinimas įmonėse neatliktas, ar atliktas nepilnai). Miško įmonių pagrindinių pažeidimų pagalba palyginus Lietuvos ir Rusijos standartus nustatyta, kad Lietuvos Smart Wood ir SGS Qualifor laikinieji standartai buvo panašiausi. Taip pat nustatyta, kad Lietuvos standartai su Rusijos standartu turėjo nemažai panašumų. Įvertinta, kad detaliausias yra Rusijos nacionalinis standartas, o daugiausiai pagrindinių reikalavimų turi Smart Wood ir Rusijos nacionalinis. Vienodai griežti yra Smart Wood ir Rusijos nacionalinis standartas. Lietuvos teisės ir Lietuvos Smart Wood, SGS Qualifor standartų, bei Rusijos teisės ir Rusijos nacionalinio standarto analizė parodė, kad FSC standartų reikalavimai yra griežtesni nei šalių teisės aktai.Žemės ūkio akademijaVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

Assessment and Spatial Planning for Peatland Conservation and Restoration: Europe's Trans-Border Neman River Basin as a Case Study

Peatlands are the "kidneys" of river basins. However, intensification of agriculture and forestry in Europe has resulted in the degradation of peatlands and their biodiversity (i.e., species, habitats and processes in ecosystems), thus impairing water retention, nutrient filtration, and carbon capture. Restoration of peatlands requires assessment of patterns and processes, and spatial planning. To support strategic planning of protection, management, and restoration of peatlands, we assessed the conservation status of three peatland types within the trans-border Neman River basin. First, we compiled a spatial peatland database for the two EU and two non-EU countries involved. Second, we performed quantitative and qualitative gap analyses of fens, transitional mires, and raised bogs at national and sub-basin levels. Third, we identified priority areas for local peatland restoration using a local hotspot analysis. Nationally, the gap analysis showed that the protection of peatlands meets the Convention of Biological Diversity's quantitative target of 17%. However, qualitative targets like representation and peatland qualities were not met in some regional sub-basins. This stresses that restoration of peatlands, especially fens, is required. This study provides an assessment methodology to support sub-basin-level spatial conservation planning that considers both quantitative and qualitative peatland properties. Finally, we highlight the need for developing and validating evidence-based performance targets for peatland patterns and processes and call for peatland restoration guided by social-ecological research and inter-sectoral collaborative governance

Assessment and Spatial Planning for Peatland Conservation and Restoration: Europe’s Trans-Border Neman River Basin as a Case Study

Peatlands are the “kidneys” of river basins. However, intensification of agriculture and forestry in Europe has resulted in the degradation of peatlands and their biodiversity (i.e., species, habitats and processes in ecosystems), thus impairing water retention, nutrient filtration, and carbon capture. Restoration of peatlands requires assessment of patterns and processes, and spatial planning. To support strategic planning of protection, management, and restoration of peatlands, we assessed the conservation status of three peatland types within the trans-border Neman River basin. First, we compiled a spatial peatland database for the two EU and two non-EU countries involved. Second, we performed quantitative and qualitative gap analyses of fens, transitional mires, and raised bogs at national and sub-basin levels. Third, we identified priority areas for local peatland restoration using a local hotspot analysis. Nationally, the gap analysis showed that the protection of peatlands meets the Convention of Biological Diversity’s quantitative target of 17%. However, qualitative targets like representation and peatland qualities were not met in some regional sub-basins. This stresses that restoration of peatlands, especially fens, is required. This study provides an assessment methodology to support sub-basin-level spatial conservation planning that considers both quantitative and qualitative peatland properties. Finally, we highlight the need for developing and validating evidence-based performance targets for peatland patterns and processes and call for peatland restoration guided by social-ecological research and inter-sectoral collaborative governance