How to reconcile wood production and biodiversity conservation? The Pan-European boreal forest history gradient as an "experiment".

There are currently competing demands on Europe's forests and the finite resources and services that they can offer. Forestry intensification that aims at mitigating climate change and biodiversity conservation is one example. Whether or not these two objectives compete can be evaluated by comparative studies of forest landscapes with different histories. We test the hypothesis that indicators of wood production and biodiversity conservation are inversely related in a gradient of long to short forestry intensification histories. Forest management data containing stand age, volume and tree species were used to model the opportunity for wood production and biodiversity conservation in five north European forest regions representing a gradient in landscape history from very long in the West and short in the East. Wood production indicators captured the supply of coniferous wood and total biomass, as well as current accessibility by transport infrastructure. Biodiversity conservation indicators were based on modelling habitat network functionality for focal bird species dependent on different combinations of stand age and tree species composition representing naturally dynamic forests. In each region we randomly sampled 25 individual 100-km2 areas with contiguous forest cover. Regarding wood production, Sweden's Bergslagen region had the largest areas of coniferous wood, followed by Vitebsk in Belarus and Zemgale in Latvia. NW Russia's case study regions in Pskov and Komi had the lowest values, except for the biomass indicator. The addition of forest accessibility for transportation made the Belarusian and Swedish study region most suitable for wood and biomass production, followed by Latvia and two study regions in NW Russian. Regarding biodiversity conservation, the overall rank among regions was opposite. Mixed and deciduous habitats were functional in Russia, Belarus and Latvia. Old Scots pine and Norway spruce habitats were only functional in Komi. Thus, different regional forest histories provide different challenges in terms of satisfying both wood production and biodiversity conservation objectives in a forest management unit. These regional differences in northern Europe create opportunities for exchanging experiences among different regional contexts about how to achieve both objectives. We discuss this in the context of land-sharing versus land-sparing.

Green infrastructure development at European Union's eastern border: Effects of road infrastructure and forest habitat loss.

The functionality of forest patches and networks as green infrastructure may be affected negatively both by expanding road networks and forestry intensification. We assessed the effects of (1) the current and planned road infrastructure, and (2) forest loss and gain, on the remaining large forest landscape massifs as green infrastructure at the EU's eastern border region in post-socialistic transition. First, habitat patch and network functionality in 1996-98 was assessed using habitat suitability index modelling. Second, we made expert interviews about road development with planners in 10 administrative regions in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. Third, forest loss and gain inside the forest massifs, and gain outside them during the period 2001-14 were measured. This EU cross-border region hosts four remaining forest massifs as regional green infrastructure hotspots. While Poland's road network is developing fast in terms of new freeways, city bypasses and upgrades of road quality, in Belarus and Ukraine the focus is on maintenance of existing roads, and no new corridors. We conclude that economic support from the EU, and thus rapid development of roads in Poland, is likely to reduce the permeability for wildlife of the urban and agricultural matrix around existing forest massifs. However, the four identified forest massifs themselves, forming the forest landscape green infrastructure at the EU's east border, were little affected by road development plans. In contrast, forest loss inside massifs was high, especially in Ukraine. Only in Poland forest loss was balanced by gain. Forest gain outside forest massifs was low. To conclude, pro-active and collaborative spatial planning across different sectors and countries is needed to secure functional forest green infrastructure as base for biodiversity conservation and human well-being.

Frontiers of protected areas versus forest exploitation: Assessing habitat network functionality in 16 case study regions globally.

Exploitation of natural forests forms expanding frontiers. Simultaneously, protected area frontiers aim at maintaining functional habitat networks. To assess net effects of these frontiers, we examined 16 case study areas on five continents. We (1) mapped protected area instruments, (2) assessed their effectiveness, (3) mapped policy implementation tools, and (4) effects on protected areas originating from their surroundings. Results are given as follows: (1) conservation instruments covered 3-77%, (2) effectiveness of habitat networks depended on representativeness, habitat quality, functional connectivity, resource extraction in protected areas, time for landscape restoration, "paper parks", "fortress conservation", and data access, (3) regulatory policy instruments dominated over economic and informational, (4) negative matrix effects dominated over positive ones (protective forests, buffer zones, inaccessibility), which were restricted to former USSR and Costa Rica. Despite evidence-based knowledge about conservation targets, the importance of spatial segregation of conservation and use, and traditional knowledge, the trajectories for biodiversity conservation were generally negative.