MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2873854172 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2018-0118

Effects of forest management and harvesting intensity on the timber supply from Finnish forests in a changing climate

2018· article· en· W2873854172 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tero Heinonen, Timo Pukkala, Seppo Kellomäki, Harri Strandman, Antti Asikainen, Ari Venäläinen, Heli Peltola

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceClimate changeForest managementStock (firearms)PeatLoggingAgroforestryForest inventorySilvicultureRepresentative Concentration PathwaysTaigaSustainable forest managementWood productionForestryClimate modelGeographyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied the potential effects of management and harvesting intensity on the timber supply from Finnish forests in a changing climate and, consequently, the possibilities of meeting the increasing wood demand of the growing forest-based bioeconomy. The study employed data from the 11th National Forest Inventory of Finland. Plots located on forest land assigned to timber production were used to develop two even-flow harvesting scenarios with annual timber harvesting targets of 60 and 80 million m 3 . Calculations were done for a 90-year simulation period under the current and changing climates using recent-generation (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5) global climate model projections under three representative concentration pathways forcing scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, and RCP8.5). Intensified management used improved seed and seedling stock in artificial regeneration. It also used fertilization on subxeric pine-dominated and mesic spruce-dominated stands and ditch maintenance on 40% of drained peatlands, when the growing stock characteristics fulfilled a set of predetermined criteria. Our results showed that, with intensified management, it is possible to harvest 80 million m 3 ·year −1 of timber under mild (RCP2.6) and moderate (RCP4.5) climate change without decreasing the growing stock volume at the country level during the 90-year simulation period. This is not possible under severe climate change (RCP8.5) due to the rapid decline in forest growth, particularly in the south after about 30 years.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207