Data from: Incorporating uncertainty into forest management planning: timber harvest, wildfire and climate change in the boreal forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to ensure the sustainability of their forests, boreal forest managers often use forest planning models to make future projections of timber supply and other key services, such as habitat for wildlife. Projecting the fate of these services has proven to be challenging, however, as major uncertainties exist regarding the principal drivers of boreal ecosystem dynamics, including the future spatial and temporal distribution of wildfire and timber harvesting. Existing forest planning models are not well suited to dealing with this uncertainty because they produce deterministic projections based on central tendencies of these drivers. Here we present a new approach for incorporating uncertainty into forest management planning, which we demonstrate using two landscapes in the Canadian boreal forest. Our approach takes the assumptions contained within the latest forest management plans for each of these landscapes, including parameterizations of their deterministic forest planning models, and converts these assumptions into equivalent parameterizations of a stochastic, spatially-explicit state-and-transition simulation model (STSM). We then use Monte Carlo simulations with the STSM to “stress-test” the forest management plan with respect to a range of possible future uncertainties, including uncertainties in future levels and patterns of wildfire and timber harvest, along with the possible changes in wildfire that might result from future climate change. Our analysis demonstrates the importance of incorporating stochastic variability into projections of future ecosystem condition. The STSM projections that acknowledged variability in wildfire and timber harvest differed from the deterministic forest planning model projections that were based solely on mean values. Our analysis also suggests that there is an increased risk of shortfalls in timber harvest, for both boreal landscapes, associated with future projections for changes in wildfire due to climate change, and that management strategies aimed at reducing the future level of timber harvest offer an opportunity to mitigate these risks. We believe our approach provides a new risk-based framework for incorporating uncertainty into forest management, including the effects of climate change.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".