References of "Chirici, Gherardo"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNational Forest Inventory contributions to forest biodiversity monitoring
Chirici, Gherardo; McRoberts, Ronald E.; Winter, Susanne et al

in Forest Science (2012), 58(3), 257-268

Forests are the most biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems. National forest inventories (NFIs) are the main source of information on the status and trends of forests, but they have traditionally been designed ... [more ▼]

Forests are the most biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems. National forest inventories (NFIs) are the main source of information on the status and trends of forests, but they have traditionally been designed to assess land coverage and the production value of forests rather than forest biodiversity. The primary international processes dealing with biodiversity and sustainable forest management, the convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Forest Europe, Streamlining European Biodiversity Indicators 2010 of the European Environmental Agency, and the Montréal Process, all include indicators related to forest biodiversity. The scope of this article is to review and present possibilities offered by NFIs to harmonize estimation of indicators useful for international forest and present possibilities offered by NFIs to harmonize estimation of indicators useful for international forest biodiversity monitoring and reporting. We summarize key findings from Working Group 3 of Action E43 (« Harmonization of National Forest Inventories in Europe : Techniques for Common Reporting ») of the European program Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST). We discuss definitions and techniques for harmonizing estimates of possible biodiversity indicators based on data from NFIs in Europe and the United States. We compare these possible indicators with indicators selected by international processes. The results demonstrate that NFIs can report comparable or harmonized estimates of indicators for multiple biodiversity features (forest categories, deadwood, forest age, forest structure, and forest naturalness), but for others (ground vegetation and regeneration) NFIs should invest more in harmonization efforts. On the basis of these key findings, we recommend that NFIs should represent a main component of a future global biodiversity monitoring network as urgently requested by the CBD. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 9 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAssessing deadwood using harmonized National Forest Inventory data
Rondeux, Jacques ULg; Bertini, Roberta; Bastrup-Birk, Annemarie et al

in Forest Science (2012), 58(3), 269-283

Deadwood plays an important role in forest ecological processes and is fundamental for the maintenance of biological diversity. Further, it is a forest carbon pool whose assessment must be reported for ... [more ▼]

Deadwood plays an important role in forest ecological processes and is fundamental for the maintenance of biological diversity. Further, it is a forest carbon pool whose assessment must be reported for international agreements dealing with protection and forest management sustainability. Despite wide agreement on deadwood monitoring by national forest inventories (NFIs), much work is still necessary to clarify definitions so that estimates can be directly compared or aggregated for international reporting. There is an urgent need for an international consensus on definitions and agreement on harmonization methods. The study addresses two main objectives : to analyze the feasibility of harmonization procedures for deadwood estimates and to evaluate the impact of the harmonization process based on different definitions on final deadwood estimates. Results are reported for an experimental harmonization test using NFI deadwood data from 9,208 sample plots measured in nine European countries and the United States. Harmonization methods were investigated for volume by spatial position (lying or standing), decay classes, and woody species accompanied by accuracy assessments. Estimates of mean plot volume based on harmonized definitions with minimum length/height of 1 m and minimum diameter thresholds of 10, 12, and 20 cm were on average 3, 8, and 30% smaller, respectively, than estimates based on national definitions. Volumedifferences were less when estimated for various deadwood categories. An accuracy assessment demonstrated that, on average, the harmonization procedures did not substantially alter deadwood observations (root mean square error 23.17%). [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 39 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNational Forest Inventory contributions to forest biodiversity monitoring
Chirici, Gherardo; McRoberts, Ronald E.; Winter, Susanne et al

in Forest Science (2012), 58(3), 257-268

Forests are the most biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems. National forest inventories (NFIs) are the main source of information on the status and trends of forests, but they have traditionally been designed ... [more ▼]

Forests are the most biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems. National forest inventories (NFIs) are the main source of information on the status and trends of forests, but they have traditionally been designed to assess land coverage and the production value of forests rather than forest biodiversity. The primary international processes dealing with biodiversity and sustainable forest management, the convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Forest Europe, Streamlining European Biodiversity Indicators 2010 of the European Environmental Agency, and the Montréal Process, all include indicators related to forest biodiversity. The scope of this article is to review and present possibilities offered by NFIs to harmonize estimation of indicators useful for international forest and present possibilities offered by NFIs to harmonize estimation of indicators useful for international forest biodiversity monitoring and reporting. We summarize key findings from Working Group 3 of Action E43 (« Harmonization of National Forest Inventories in Europe : Techniques for Common Reporting ») of the European program Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST). We discuss definitions and techniques for harmonizing estimates of possible biodiversity indicators based on data from NFIs in Europe and the United States. We compare these possible indicators with indicators selected by international processes. The results demonstrate that NFIs can report comparable or harmonized estimates of indicators for multiple biodiversity features (forest categories, deadwood, forest age, forest structure, and forest naturalness), but for others (ground vegetation and regeneration) NFIs should invest more in harmonization efforts. On the basis of these key findings, we recommend that NFIs should represent a main component of a future global biodiversity monitoring network as urgently requested by the CBD. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 45 (9 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailBridging national and reference definitions for harmonizing forest statistics
Stahl, Göran; Cienciala, Emil; Chirici, Gherardo et al

in Forest Science (2012), 58(3), 214-223

Harmonization is the process of making information and estimates comparable across administrative borders. The degree to which harmonization succeeds depends on many factors, including the conciseness of ... [more ▼]

Harmonization is the process of making information and estimates comparable across administrative borders. The degree to which harmonization succeeds depends on many factors, including the conciseness of the definitions, the availability and quality of data, and the methods used toconvert an estimate according to a local definition to an estimate according to the reference definition. Harmonization requires the availability and use of common reference definitions and methods for converting from estimates based on national definitions to estimates based on reference definitions. This article focuses on conversion methods, which are characterized as « bridges » because they can be seen as a means of crossing from islands of local definitions to the mainland of a reference definition. A structured approach is proposed for constructing bridges of three kinds : reductive, neutral, and expansive bridges. A hierarchical decision tree is presented to guide users and to summarize the propositions and case examples with different types of bridges to illustrate the concepts. Although the article addresses harmonization of forest information, the results are relevant for harmonizing a broad variety of area statistics. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (7 ULg)
Full Text
See detailHarmonization tests
Chirici, Gherardo; McRoberts, Ronald E.; Winter, Susanne et al

in Chirici, Gherardo; Winter, Susanne; McRoberts, Ronald E. (Eds.) National Forest Inventories - contributions to Forest Biodiversity Assessments (2011)

Chapter 5 reports the results of testing the proposed prodedures for harmonizing estimates of indicators for six of the seven essential features of forest biodiversity. Twenty indicators were tested using ... [more ▼]

Chapter 5 reports the results of testing the proposed prodedures for harmonizing estimates of indicators for six of the seven essential features of forest biodiversity. Twenty indicators were tested using data from the common database. In general, positive results were obtained for forest categories, forest structure, forest age, deadwood, and naturalness; the results were less positive for ground vegetation because of the considerable differences in definitions and data acquisition methods. Of importance is, that the test focused on assessing harmonization procedures rather than on producing comprehensive estimates for particular countries or forest categories. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (10 ULg)
Full Text
See detailProspects for harmonized biodiversity assessments using national forest inventory data
McRoberts, Ronald E.; Chirici, Gherardo; Winter, Susanne et al

in Chirici, Gherardo; Winter, Susanne; McRoberts, Ronald E. (Eds.) National Forest Inventories - contributions to Forest Biodiversity Assessments (2011)

After selection of the 13 biodiversity variables (Sect. 2.3) based on their importance and feasibility for assessment by NFIs, responses were solicited from participating countries regarding the degree to ... [more ▼]

After selection of the 13 biodiversity variables (Sect. 2.3) based on their importance and feasibility for assessment by NFIs, responses were solicited from participating countries regarding the degree to which the variables are now assessed. Two conclusions were evident: (1) most countries currently assess most of the variables, but (2) consensus is lacking on assessment methods and necessary field crew expertise, suggesting that harmonization would require emphasis on field operations. For each of the seven essential features into which the 13 variables were grouped, more detailed assessments were conducted. For forest categories, the conclusion was that the only major difference in classification systems used by European NFIs was whether potential or actual vegetation was used to define classes. Thus, the prospects for harmonization of forest categories are considered excellent. For forest structure, the prospects depend on the variable. For tree species, the prospects are excellent because the variable is assessed in the same manner by all NFIs. For dbh and height, considerable variability in measurementthresholds were found, but otherwise the harmonization prospects are good. For social position, definitions of classes varied, but harmonized estimates of proportions for dominant, intermediate, and suppressed classes are considered possible. Prospects for harmonized estimates of layers are consideraly poorer because of different definitions, thresholds and the uncertainty associated with visual assessment methods. Harmonized estimation of forest age is impeded by the increasing proportion of uneven-aged stands for which age is often not assessed, different definitions, and different assessment methods. However, agreement on dominant age as a reference definition would greatly increase the prospects. Deadwood is becoming an increasingly popular indicator of sustainable forest management. Unfortunately, considerable variability was found in deadwood definitions, components (e.g., stumps, limbs), sampling methods, and measurement thresholds. Thus, harmonized deadwood estimation will require development of bridges. Harmonization of regeneration estimates faces challenges due to differences in assessment approaches such as presence/absence versus coverage and all species versus dominant species. Harmonized estimation may be restricte to change in regeneration success. Harmonized estimation for ground vegetation also faces serious challenges due to differences in the components assessed (e.g., small trees, shrubs, herbs, bryophytes, lichens), difference in height thresholds, and differences in categories for which ground vegetation is reported. Forest naturalness integrates many of the other essential feature. However, many countries do not assess naturalness, and among those that do, assessment variables, methods, and reporting classes vary considerably. For harmonized assessment using NFI variables, the hemeroby approach, which emphasizes indications of human influence, is extremely sensitive to plot size. Harmonization using the ecosystem processes approach requires a common dbh threshold and similar plot sizes. The overall conclusion is that harmonization will be considerably easier for some essential features than for others. The factors leading to difficulties often are related to different definitions, different reporting classes, different measurement thresholds, and different features of sampling protocols such as plot sizes and configurations. Nevertheless, construction of reference definitions and bridges greatly facilitate harmonization for all essential features as is illustrated in Chap. 5. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 86 (10 ULg)
Full Text
See detailThe need for harmonized estimates of forest biodiversity indicators
Winter, Susanne; McRoberts, Ronald E.; Chirici, Gherardo et al

in Chirici, Gherardo; Winter, Susanne; McRoberts, Ronald E. (Eds.) National Forest Inventories - contributions to Forest Biodiversity Assessments (2011)

The investigations of Working Group 3 of COST Action E43 focused on assessing the ability of NFI's to report harmonized estimates of forest biodiversity indicators using NFI data. Four related factors ... [more ▼]

The investigations of Working Group 3 of COST Action E43 focused on assessing the ability of NFI's to report harmonized estimates of forest biodiversity indicators using NFI data. Four related factors motivated the investigations. Firstly, the importance of forest biodiversity for the economic, environmental, and social well-being of earth's civilizations is gaining wide international acceptance. Secondly, this acceptance has led to numerous international forest sustainability and biodiversity agreements that require periodic reports of estimates of indicators. Thirdly, the ability to report comparable estimates is impeded by the variety of sampling designs, plot configurations, selected variables, and measurement protocols used by the NFIs of different countries. Fourthly, the features of individual NFIs have evolved in response to unique ecological, economic, topographic, and climatic characteristics, and desire of the individual countries to retain the features. The general conclusion of these motivating factors is that apart from substantial standardization of NFIs, the best method for facilitating comparable reporting is to develop harmonization methods. Working Group 3 undertook a four-phase approach to developing methods for harmonizing estimates of biodiversity indicators using NFI data. The first phase entailed evaluating the importance of biodiversity variables and the feasibility of assessing them using NFI data. The conclusion of this phase was the selection of 17 biodiversity variables that were both important and feasible, grouping of them into seven essential features, and construction of common reference definitions for the variables. The second phase entailed evaluation of the agreement among NFIs with respect to the common definitions and measurement practices. The third phase entailed development of bridges (Stahl et al submitted) for converting estimates of forest biodiversity indicators obtained using national definitions to estimates consistent with the reference definitions. The fourth phase entailed construction of a common database of NFI data contributed by NFIs participating in COST Action E43 and testing of reference definitions and bridges developed by Working Group 3. The following chapters provide details and specific results for the four phases. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 38 (7 ULg)