With this article we try to give an extensive overview of the development of the Faustmann model (cf. Figure 1). Goal of the article is to outline and discuss the basic assumptions behind the Faustmann formula and describe the developments of the Faustmann model with regard to main trends and changes in forestry throughout history. The basic idea of the Faustmann theory was outlined in Great Britain by HOUGHTON ([1683] 1727-1728), HOUGHTON ([1701] 1727-1728), RICHARDS ([1730] 1971) and, finally, by WATSON (1794) and MARSHALL (1808) explaining that the interest rate of a forest stand is closely linked to its tree growth. In Germany, KÖNIG (1835) gave recommendations for forest evaluation and methodological insights regarding the determination of the optimal rotation period. However, only with the article of FAUSTMANN (1849) and his introduction of the land expectation value, forest evaluation gained interest and relevance in forest economics. With the discussion about the land rent theory at the end of the 19th century, the model moved into focus (PRESSLER, 1860b). We point out that with OHLIN (1921), besides questions of forest evaluation, the issue of determining the optimal rotation period became more important. OHLIN (1921) formulated the first order condition for an interior solution of the rotation period problem. Although Ohlin, Pressler and Faustmann discussed the Faustmann model throughout the late 19th and early 20th century, only after the Second World War, the Faustmann model increasingly gained in importance in forest economics. In the context of the general investment theory, the Faustmann model is based on the idea of dynamic investment calculation and is a special case of the net present value reflecting not only the limitation of capital but also the limitation of the forest land (MÖHRING, 2009). Various research was published discussing the question about determining the optimal rotation period, first under simple but later also under more complex silvicultural scenarios (PEARSE, 1967; WORRELL, 1953). In this context, the thinning problem as a problem of the control theory which can be solved with dynamic optimization was introduced by SCHREUDER (1971) and further developed throughout the last decades (BORCHERT, 2002). Moreover, with its increasing relevance through the second half of the 20th century, methodological discussions about the Faustmann formula and its assumptions arose. SAMUELSON (1976) presented one of the most important critical reviews about the Faustmann model not criticizing the model itself but its application in research and practice. He stated that the basic assumptions made within the Faustmann theory are the premise for the development of simple solutions for complex problems. These assumptions needed to be clarified and discussed as part of the scientific research (SAMUELSON, 1976). We outline the basic assumptions of the Faustmann theory in this paper and how various research tried to overcome selected basic assumptions to generate additional insights in forest management behavior. Examples are the assumption of stable conditions of costs and prices, or the validity of the Faustmann model on business instead of stand level. CHANG (1998) generalized the Faustmann theory to meet the demand of a volatile economic environment in forest economics. This generalization enables the application of the Faustmann model in an environment of changing costs, prices and discount rates (CHANG, 1998). Whereas CHANG (1998) discussed the effect of changing costs and prices on a theoretical basis, MÜLLER und HANEWINKEL (2018) took up the discussion and set it into the context of historical cost and price changes. They concluded with respect to historical developments that already within one rotation period parameter changes can have a significant effect on the land expectation value (cf. Figures 2 and 3). Another example is the extension of the Faustmann model from stand level to the forest level (REED und ERRICO, 1986) which is also based on a control theory approach and was intensively discussed through the end of the last century (YIN und NEWMAN, 1997; TAHVONEN und VIITALA, 2006). Besides methodological discussions in the 1970s and influenced by the environmental movement, the Faustmann model was set in the context of ecosystem services beyond timber production for the first time. HARTMAN (1976) discussed how the optimal rotation period changes once the recreational value is incorporated as part of the land expectation value. In this paper we outline the challenges coming with the evaluation of eco - system services such as biodiversity protection (CHRISTIE et al., 2006; YOUSEFPOUR und HANEWINKEL, 2009; AMACHER et al., 2014), recreational value generation (OESTEN, 1994; ELSASSER und WELLER, 2013; EDWARDS et al., 2011) and carbon sequestration (KÖTHKE und DIETER, 2010). Until today, the valuation of such ecosystem services is an important research topic in forest economics (YOUSEFPOUR et al., 2010). Under the impression of the forest dieback discussion in the 1980s, the winter storms of the 1990s and the recent climate change discussions, the role of risk and uncertainty gained high relevance as additional factor within the Faustmann model. REED (1984) incorporated risks from natural hazards within the Faustmann model and outlined that it can be seen as premium to the discount rate. LOISEL (2011) described the effect of storm risk on the LEV, the optimal rotation period and other forest management decisions. With respect to the uncertainties from climate change, HANEWINKEL et al. (2013) demonstrated that, depending on the applied climate scenarios, the loss of the current land expectation value within European forests amounts to 14-50% due to climate change. Finally, this article discusses the importance of the Faustmann model in forestry showing that today the Faustmann model is of more relevance for forestry practice outside Germany - especially in Scandinavia and North America. Furthermore, it is discussed that the Faustmann model nowadays is only one of many elements in forest valuation due to the fact that profit maximization as limiting principle of the Faustmann theory is of decreasing relevance for forest economics. Finally, this article highlights the diversity of applications of the Faustmann model which evolved throughout 170 years of forest history. Whereas the Faustmann model was originally developed to determine the value of forest land (FAUSTMANN, 1849), with PRESSLER (1860b) and OHLIN (1921) the Faustmann theory became the most important instrument of the forest investment theory. However, the value of the Faustmann model for forest investment decisions is limited especially for forestry regions with long rotation periods due to high uncertainties resulting from production times (COORDES, 2014). However, even under long rotation periods, the Faustmann theory is a useful framework to facilitate and structure investment decision-making in forestry. Furthermore, throughout the last 170 years, the Faustmann model developed towards a main analysis instrument of forest economics. In this article, we show that within a predefined theoretical framework countless analyses were conducted to describe forest management decisionmaking on the one hand and to evaluate the effect of changing environmental conditions on the other hand. Finally, the variety of the Faustmann model in science is the basis on which future research can be build on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]