8 research outputs found
Pathways towards a sustainable future envisioned by early-career conservation researchers
Scientists have warned decision-makers about the severe consequences of the global environmental crisis since the 1970s. Yet ecological degradation continues and little has been done to address climate change. We investigated early-career conservation researchers' (ECR) perspectives on, and prioritization of, actions furthering sustainability. We conducted a survey (n = 67) and an interactive workshop (n = 35) for ECR attendees of the 5th European Congress of Conservation Biology (2018). Building on these data and discussions, we identified ongoing and forthcoming advances in conservation science. These include increased transdisciplinarity, science communication, advocacy in conservation, and adoption of a transformation-oriented social-ecological systems approach to research. The respondents and participants had diverse perspectives on how to achieve sustainability. Reformist actions were emphasized as paving the way for more radical changes in the economic system and societal values linked to the environment and inequality. Our findings suggest that achieving sustainability requires a strategy that (1) incorporates the multiplicity of people's views, (2) places a greater value on nature, and (3) encourages systemic transformation across political, social, educational, and economic realms on multiple levels. We introduce a framework for ECRs to inspire their research and practice within conservation science to achieve real change in protecting biological diversity
Site types revisited : comparison of traditional Russian and Finnish classification systems for European Boreal forests
doi: 10.1111/avsc.12525Questions Forest classifications are tools used in research, monitoring, and management. In Finland, the Cajanderian forest site type classification is based on the composition of understorey vegetation with the assumption that it reflects in a predictable way the site's productive value. In Russia, the Sukachevian forest classification is similarly based on understorey vegetation but also accounts for tree species, soil wetness, and paludification. Here we ask whether Cajander's and Sukachev's forest types are effectively the same in terms of species composition, site productivity, and biodiversity. Location Boreal forests on mineral soils in Finland and the Russian part of Fennoscandia. Methods We use vegetation and soil survey data to compare the Cajanderian and the Sukachevian systems in terms of the understorey community composition (that is supposed to define them), soil fertility and tree productivity (that they are expected to indicate), and biodiversity (that is of interest for conservation purposes). We create and employ class prediction models to divide Russian and Finnish sites into Cajander's and Sukachev's types, respectively, based on vegetation composition. We perform cross-comparisons between the two systems by non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination and statistical tests. Results Within both systems, the site types formed similar, meaningful gradients in terms of the studied variables. Certain site types from the two systems were largely overlapping in community composition and arranged similarly along the fertility gradient and may thus be considered comparable. Conclusions The Cajanderian and the Sukachevian systems were both developed in the European boreal zone but differ in terms of the exact rules by which site types are determined. Our results show that analogous types between the systems can be identified. These findings aid in endeavours of technology and information transfer between Finnish and Russian forests for the purposes of basic or applied ecological research and forest management.Peer reviewe
More is more? Forest management allocation at different spatial scales to mitigate conflicts between ecosystem services
Context: Multi-objective management can mitigate conflicts among land-use objectives. However, the effectiveness of a multi-objective solution depends on the spatial scale at which land-use is optimized. This is because the ecological variation within the planning region influences the potential for site-specific prioritization according to the different objectives. Objectives: We optimized the allocation of forest management strategies to maximize the joint production of two conflicting objectives, timber production and carbon storage, at increasing spatial scales. We examined the impacts of the extent of the planning region on the severity of the conflict, the potential for its mitigation, and the strategies that were identified as optimal. Methods: Using forecasted data from a forest simulator, we constructed Pareto frontiers optimizing the joint provision of the objectives in production forests in Finland. Optimization was conducted within increasing hierarchical spatial scales and outcomes were compared in terms of the severity of the conflict and the solution to mitigate it. Results: The trade-offs between timber production and carbon storage appeared less severe and could be mitigated more effectively the larger the planning regions were, but the improvements became minor beyond the scale of âlarge forest holdingâ. The results thus indicate that this scale, approximately 100 stands or 200 ha, is large enough to effectively mitigate the conflict between timber production and carbon storage. Conclusions: Management planning over relatively small forest areas (200 ha) can mitigate ecosystem service trade-offs effectively. Thus the effective use of multi-objective optimization tools may be feasible even in small-scale forestry.peerReviewe