Examining the vulnerability of localized reforestation strategies to climate change at a macroscale.

Climate change is altering the nature and condition of vast areas in the boreal forest of Canada. There are great uncertainties concerning impacts on the forest, along with how policy and economic responses will translate effectively between local and macroscales. In particular, planting tree seedlings with improved characteristics following harvesting is one localized response strategy considered essential by policymakers. However, planting costs limit the macroscale adoption of this strategy which may result in trade-offs between profitability and reducing vulnerability. In this study, we developed a decision support tool (called Q3) that links stand-level decision making to the macroscale and applied this model to investigate the financial attractiveness of planting improved stocks under one climate change threat, drought-induced seedling mortality. Using several scenarios describing planting effort, improved yields and risk to drought-induced seedling mortality, we showed that adopting improved planting stock strategies across a macroscale (i.e., the western Boreal forest of Canada) can be financially attractive when considering stand-establishment constraints and drought risk. In particular, a proactive approach can be less costly than a reactive approach to drought-induced seedling mortality. To maximize profits, the forestry industry would need to prioritize younger stands closer to processing mills that had a smaller percentage of conifer growing stocks prior to harvest. This research improves the linkages between macroscale policies and forest management activities critical for recommending future development paths that the forestry industry could follow to decrease climate change vulnerabilities. • New analysis framework linked local forest decisions to macroscale vulnerabilities. • About 12% of future reforestation sites are expected to be vulnerable to drought. • A proactive approach to reforestation was less costly than a reactive approach. • Assessing macroscale planting strategies requires linking local forest decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]