Search

Canada is recognized as a global leader in sustainable forest management. Canadian forests and the forest sector remain vital pillars of the Canadian economy and home to many rural and remote communities. However, climate change is an existential threat to the sustainability of forests and forest-dependent communities. While both direct and indirect threats posed by climate change to Canada's forest sector are now well understood, our understanding of specific forest practices that have emerged from the body of science to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts is not well documented. Through a review of the scientific and grey literature, this study expands our knowledge and operational gaps associated with implementing climate change adaptation and mitigation practices in Canadian forests. The study found a dearth of literature specifically dedicated to reporting on the type of forest practices currently in use across Canada to address mitigation and adaptation. Most reports or studies were published in 2019 or later, with federal and provincial governments being the dominant actors in reporting and monitoring, research, and funding. Across the 15 terrestrial ecozones in Canada, forest practices linked to climate change were reported in 12 ecozones, with most practices reported in the Montane Cordillera located in western Canada. Common forest practices reported include fuel management, assisted migration, enhanced silvicultural activities, and carbon offset projects. We conclude that climate change adaptation/mitigation practices in Canada are in their early stages of implementation. Many practices remain in experimental stages (e.g., genetic trials) or are implemented at a relatively small scale in Canada (e.g., climate-based seed transfer and carbon reserves). The literature suggests that the most mainstream practices associated with climate change mitigation in Canada include tree planting for carbon sequestration and the designation of protected areas to enhance ecosystem resilience. We conclude that despite increasing reports linking climate change benefits with reported forest practices, the reporting in the scientific literature is scarce, poorly reported, and often not grounded in credible evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With its northern location, the exposure and vulnerability of Canada's forest ecosystems to climate change impacts are all too glaring. While there is now an extensive body of literature describing expected climate change impacts and potential responses, studies characterizing the implementation of adaptation and mitigation practices in forest management remain rare in the Canadian forest sector. Using a systematic literature review, we examined reports on forest management practices implemented in response to climate change, specifically focusing on governance and institutional arrangements that either support or limit climate change adaptation and mitigation responses. Our literature sample size of 24 documents suggests that the body of literature reporting on adaptation and mitigation practices in forest management is scarce. Governments remain the dominant actors providing funding and leading the implementation and reporting of climate change adaptation practices, primarily in response to national or international climate change commitments. Forest practices such as enhanced silviculture, assisted migration, and nature-based solutions were the most frequently reported. However, given the scarcity of literature, it is difficult to conclude the scope of climate change adaptation practice uptake in Canada. Barriers such as lack of information/data, inter-jurisdictional knowledge transfer, policy conflicts, forest tenure models, technical capacity gaps, and economic barriers to adaptation need to be overcome to strengthen climate change response in forest management. Better coordination of reporting at the provincial and national levels and improved information flows between private sector organizations and governments are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Substitution factors for forest products for the Canadian context were developed. • Substitution factors ranging from 0.51 to 0.91 tC/tC were found. • They will lead to more accurate assessments of the forest GHG mitigation potential. • These factors will help governments to manage forest and fight climate change. Evaluating the climate change mitigation potential of the forest sector requires a holistic approach based on forest carbon (C) sequestration, C storage in harvested wood products (HWP) and substitution on markets. High uncertainty is associated with substitution factors, that express avoided fossil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the use of forest-based products in replacement of GHG-intensive materials and fossil fuels. Few studies have focused on the development of substitution factors in Canada, resulting in the use of unrepresentative generic data. Here, we provide a framework to reduce uncertainties related to substitution factors for primary wood products in a Canadian context. A life cycle assessment framework is used to quantify fossil GHG emissions for a baseline and a wood-intensive scenario. For solid product substitution, we focused on the construction sector and analyzed a range of innovative wood buildings with steel and reinforced concrete as alternative materials. We found non-weighted averages of 0.80 tC/tC for sawnwood and 0.81 tC/tC for panels. For energy substitution, we analyzed cases with different specifications on biomass product, facility type and alternative fossil fuel source in non-residential heat production and biofuel transportation sectors. We found a non-weighted average of 0.80 tC/tC for non-residential heat production and 0.51 tC/tC for biofuel transportation, that can be interpreted as 0.91 tC/tC for heavy fuel oil, 0.69 tC/tC for light fuel oil and 0.68 tC/tC for natural gas substitution. These results provide a benchmark for substitution factors in Canada, to help guide forest management strategies for climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Forestry Chronicle is the property of Canadian Institute of Forestry and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The demand for wood-based energy is foreseen to grow as energy and climate policies around the world promote the use of bioenergy for climate change mitigation. However, the carbon impacts of forest bioenergy range widely in the literature. The value-choices made on the response of forest management to bioenergy demand have a major influence on the results obtained from modeling exercises and may actually change the contribution of forest bioenergy from climate worsening to climate change mitigation. Despite their relevance, there is very little information, or transparency, as to the empirical basis by which these assumptions are chosen and evaluated against. This study aims to fill in this crucial knowledge gap through a mix of critical review, analysis of historical statistical data, and expert judgement. Several prominent studies reporting climate change mitigation from forest bioenergy in three countries are reviewed: Canada, Sweden, and Southeast USA. This analysis shows that the studies rely on assumptions that bioenergy demand will spur supply responses aimed at more efficient forest management and/or relative increases in forest area. Confronting literature assumptions with trends in historical data, we present the most extensive reality-check of bioenergy literature assumptions to date. We find that studies projecting a large role of forest bioenergy in climate change mitigation rely on assumptions that are too optimistic, at times outright unrealistic. We believe scientists could avoid the misinterpretation of their results and improve the policy relevance of their work by more transparent reporting of: i) value-laden assumptions, ii) their influence on the results, iii) the process and rationale behind such assumptions, especially distinguishing between assumptions that reflect incremental changes in management from assumptions requiring transformational change in several industrial sectors. • Accounted carbon benefits of forest bioenergy depend on underlying assumptions. • Forest bioenergy mitigates climate change only when additional biomass is produced. • Forest management responses assumed in the literature are overly optimistic. • Post Normal Science tools can help scientists avoid misinterpretation of results. • Scientists should better convey that model results are contingent on value-choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]