Transcript Quantitative Indicators - United Nations Economic Commission for

State of Europe’s Forests 2007
The MCPFE Report on Sustainable Forest
Management in Europe
Quantitative Indicators
Michael Köhl
Aljoscha Requardt
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Outline of the Report
C1:
Maintenance and Appropriate Enhancement of Forest Resources
and their Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles
C2:
Maintenance of Forest Ecosystem Health and Vitality
C3: Maintenance and Encouragement of Productive Functions
of Forests (Wood and Non-Wood)
C4: Maintenance, Conservation and Appropriate Enhancement of
Biological Diversity in Forest Ecosystems
C5: Maintenance and Appropriate Enhancement of Protective Functions
in Forest Management (notably soil and water)
C6: Maintenance of other Socio-Economic Functions and Conditions
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Outline of the Report
 Contents, List of Figures, List of Tables, Abbreviations
 List of Authors
 Preface (P. Borkowski, K. Prins)
 Executive Summary
 Introduction
 Overview Quantitative & Qualitative Indicators
 C1 to C6 (provided by CLAs)
 Conclusions
 Appendix
- List of MCPFE countries
- Country data/ tables ???
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Authors
Criterion 1: Forest resources …
CLA:
Zoltán Somogy, Hungarian Forest Research Institute, Budapest
Criterion 2: Forest ecosystem health and vitality
CLA:
Michael Köhl, University of Hamburg, Section World Forestry
LA:
Jesús San-Miguel-Ayanz, EC-Joint Research Centre, Ispra
Andrea Camina, EC-Joint Research Centre, Ispra
Martin Lorenz, ICP-Forests, Hamburg
Richard Fischer, ICP-Forests, Hamburg
Aljoscha Requardt, University of Hamburg, Section World Forestry
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Authors
Criterion 3: Productive functions of forests
CLA:
Marco Marchetti, Università degli Studi del Molise
LA:
Piermaria Corona, Università di Tuscia
CA:
Bruno Lasserre, Università degli Studi del Molise
Davide Pettenella, Università di Padova
Criterion 4: Biological diversity in forest ecosystems
CLA:
Jari Parviainen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Joensuu
LA:
Jesús San-Miguel-Ayanz, EC-Joint Research Centre, Ispra
CA:
Markus Lier, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Joensuu
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Authors
Criterion 5: Protective functions in forest management
CLA:
Pier Carlo Zingari, European Observatory of Mountain Forests
Criterion 6: Other socio-economic functions and conditions
CLA:
Arvydas Lebedys, FAO, Rome
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Data Situation – C1
Criterion 1
• reporting on changes on C1 has generally improved in the last few years
• still considerable gaps in available data, which does not yet fully enable the
indicator-based evaluation of sustainability
• changes of forest area, growing stocks and biomass carbon stocks are indicators
that constitute the most solid base of the evaluation.
• less data on carbon pools of deadwood
• much less data on the age structure and diameter distribution
• data on age structure are mainly available for East Europe, the Nordic/Baltic
countries, and Central Europe.
• only a few countries reported statistics on diameter distributions
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Data Situation – C2
Criterion 2
• data situation sufficient for those indicators and attributes provided by ICP-Forests
and EC
• data potential for biotic, abiotic and human induced damages – with the exception
of forest fires – is critical and allows only for a limited evaluation of SFM
• while the assessments on Level I plots allow for representative information, the
results obtained on Level II provide only limited information on spatial patterns.
• due to lacking data on forest fire – especially from Mediterranean countries – data
on forest fires in Europe were provided by EFFIS (EC- JRC)
• data on soil condition are costly to collect and can not yet be compiled during the
forest resource assessment process.
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Data Situation – C3
Criterion 3
• data potential on Non Wood Goods and Services are relatively poor (…explained
by the fact that collection of data is treated as a leisure and often underrepresented
in official national statistics).
• in general, applied methodologies of data assessment and reporting do not allow
any evident conclusions about the value of non-timber products
• …even countries with high forest coverage and/ or long traditions in using forest
products supplied no data or only limited data
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Data Situation – C4
Criterion 4
• MCPFE guidelines for the assessment of protected forest areas is workable,
available data provide a comprehensive overview of the European situation.
• data on deadwood were systematically collected first time (lacking data in
Souther European countries)
• the most complex and ambiguous indicator is threatened forest species…data
collection very demanding and time consuming…therefore heterogeneous data
• evaluations on trends are possible for naturalness, regeneration, tree species
composition, protected forest areas and introduced tree species.
• figures on forests undisturbed by man must be interpreted with care as the major
part of undisturbed forests is located in the Russian Federation where the change
rate between 2000 and 2005 was decreasing.
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Data Situation – C5
Criterion 5
•
data at national level are not always available, but often some relevant
information is provided by comments, e.g. describing relevance of protection
functions at regional levels
•
data situation in general confirms the importance of protective functions in SFM
•
shifts occur from one “protection” category to the another.
•
soil and water are priority issues in almost all regions, while protection of
infrastructures seems to be of relevance only in three regions (Central, East
and South-East Europe)
Criterion 6
…data evaluation and report writing still in progress…
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Problems
Indicator 2.4: Forest damage
Reported
forest area
[1000 ha]
Proportion of
reported forest
area within total
forest area
[%]
Forest area with
damages
[1000 ha]
Percent of forest
area with
damages
[%]
Central Europe
3212,0
14,5
611,1
19,0
East Europe
20781,1
2,5
739,0
3,6
Nordic/Baltic
57920,7
86,0
5792,6
10,0
North West
Europe
3603,8
11,5
148,5
4,1
South East
Europe
4433,4
13,5
210,1
4,7
South West
Europe
9979,0
31,5
2471,0
24,8
MCPFE
99930,0
9,8
9972,2
10,0
EU 27
78366,5
50,3
9164,7
11,7
Region/
Country group
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Problems
Data Submission

Number of entries per country: ~1100

Amount of data submitted < FRA 2005

No consistent data for forest type categories

Data on trends poor

How to interpret Russian data?
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007
Problems
 Which data should be used, if there are other sources
(e.g. FRA 2005) with better response rates?
 Is the minimum data requirement met for all indicators
to make a general statement about sustainability?
UNECE/ FAO Tos Meeting, Edinburgh 2007