Search

• The nexus between forest-based climate mitigation and health is poorly researched. • This scoping review identified exposure pathways and health co-benefits from forests. • There is potential for synergies between forest management and health benefits. • Interdisciplinary efforts are required for advancement of research and understanding. Climate change is a pressing global challenge with profound implications for human health. Forest-based climate change mitigation strategies, such as afforestation, reforestation, and sustainable forest management, offer promising solutions to mitigate climate change and simultaneously yield substantial co-benefits for human health. The objective of this scoping review was to examine research trends related to the interdisciplinary nexus between forests as carbon sinks and human health co-benefits. We developed a conceptual framework model, supporting the inclusion of exposure pathways, such as recreational opportunities or aesthetic experiences, in the co-benefit context. We used a scoping review methodology to identify the proportion of European research on forest-based mitigation strategies that acknowledge the interconnection between mitigation strategies and human impacts. We also aimed to assess whether synergies and trade-offs between forest-based carbon sink capacity and human co-benefits has been analysed and quantified. From the initial 4,062 records retrieved, 349 reports analysed European forest management principles and factors related to climate change mitigation capacity. Of those, 97 studies acknowledged human co-benefits and 13 studies quantified the impacts on exposure pathways or health co-benefits and were included for full review. Our analysis demonstrates that there is potential for synergies related to optimising carbon sink capacity together with human co-benefits, but there is currently a lack of holistic research approaches assessing these interrelationships. We suggest enhanced interdisciplinary efforts, using for example multideterminant modelling approaches, to advance evidence and understanding of the forest and health nexus in the context of climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal forest management strategies for mitigating climate change are hotly debated during political negotiations, because afforestation and forest management can increase atmospheric CO 2 removal, and the wood produced can provide a substitute for fossil fuel. Studies quantifying the carbon balance of the forest sector apply a wide variety of management and wood-use scenarios. Some model studies include future climate change effects on forest growth, but others ignore them. Here, a conceptual empirical model of sequestration efficiency, the fraction of net primary production stored in the biosphere and anthroposhere, simulates European forest carbon pools and fluxes. The sensitivity of the sequestration efficiency of European forests was quantified by varying model parameters along the forest growth and wood transformation chain: environment and climate change, harvest intensity, rotation length, fraction of harvest residues left on site and substitution efficiency. Irrespective of the evolution of the sink, the forest sector as a whole remains a net carbon absorber in 99% of the simulations at a time horizon of 100 years, even if in 25% of the simulations the forests themselves become sources. However, if the goal is to enhance the current sequestration efficiency to mitigate emissions, only in 25% of the simulations the sink efficiency was found to be enhanced. If the current sink were to reverse to a source, no management action or change in wood use would result in an increase in the current forest sequestration efficiency. In all other cases, increasing harvest levels would lead to an increase in forest sector carbon emissions, highlighting the pivotal role of the baseline used to set the emission reduction targets. Our results show that the uncertainty on the response of European forest to climate change undermines the quest for a carbon-optimal management strategy. The uncertainty in whether climate change will maintain the current forest sink or turn it into a carbon source is largely overlooked in the debate over the best forest management strategy to reduce the growth of atmospheric CO 2 concentration, yet it is large enough to change the merit order of different alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• carbon uptake by above-ground biomass is higher in unmanaged beech stands. • thinning does not alter growth-climate sensitivity. • resistance to extreme weather events decreases with increasing tree productivity. • close-to-nature forestry may be preferable at sites with higher incidence of heat and drought events. European beech plays a prominent role in the adaptation of European forests to and mitigation of climate change. Forest management may increase the mitigation potential of beech forests by accelerating carbon accumulation in tree biomass, but little is known about the interaction between the rate of biomass expansion in beech and its sensitivity to climate variation or its resistance to extreme drought episodes. A 60-year thinning experiment in beech forests in Central Europe was used to generate tree-ring width series describing past radial growth of dominant, co-dominant and sub-dominant beech trees. Randomisation applied to daily climate data was used to find the period of the year during which climate best explains beech growth. Results show that carbon uptake by above-ground biomass is higher in unmanaged stands and that thinning does not affect beech growth sensitivity to climate. Further, this study shows that average daily temperature amplitude and precipitation in March-July are the best predictors of radial growth in beech at lower-elevation sites. In a key finding, this research shows that site quality and thinning intensity increase tree size, which in turn lowers their resistance to drought. Using forest management to increase the productivity of European beech may thus increase its vulnerability to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Decision-making survey on motivations, challenges and targets in forest management. • Respondents focus on climate change, biodiversity loss and forest regeneration. • Managers need to consider role of herbaceous understory to address these issues. • Requirement for a decision support tool that accounts for understory dynamics. Numerous decision-makers have an interest in how forest biodiversity and functioning will alter under environmental change. These decision-makers may have varied motivations underlying their management response to environmental change by focusing on contrasting management challenges and targets. Decision-makers may use different tools to aid their decision-making when facing uncertainty. We specifically investigate whether decision-makers in forest management across Europe consider the understory (i.e. herbaceous layer) in decision making, as this component constitutes the vast majority of floral biodiversity in temperate forests, and has an important functional role. To address this question, we distributed an online questionnaire to more than 800 forest management decision-makers across Europe, and received 100 completed responses. We assess what objectives drive management decisions, and whether these are consistent depending on respondents' occupations. Interestingly, regardless of respondent profile, biodiversity loss and climate change are expected to permeate management decisions in the coming decades, motivated primarily by a sense of environmental protection. Priority management targets did not vary across respondent profiles (i.e. occupation) either, and focused on biodiversity values, adaptation and mitigation to climate change, and forest regeneration. The majority of respondents identified the understory as an "Important" target for forest management decisions. Respondents used a mix of personal experience and literature sources to base management decisions on, while infrequently using recognised decision support systems (DSS). No utilised system considered the understory at the moment. Indeed, our review of available forest management DSS, conducted in parallel to the questionnaire, shows that an understory DSS tool, especially one that can consider changing socio-environmental conditions, is lacking for decision-makers. Based on (1) forest management decision-makers' wide concern around biodiversity loss, climate change and forest regeneration, (2) the known functional role of temperate forest understories, and (3) an apparent lack of existing DSS with an understory component, we identify the requirement for an agile tool that accounts for understory dynamics. Such a tool, especially when integrated into existing DSS, will strongly support decision-makers in their quest to attain more biodiverse, functional and resilient forests for the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]