1

Forest definitions and linkages to wood product information

Information paper for Session 7 Forest Accounts

19th meeting of London Group on Environmental Accounting
London, UK, 12-14 November 2013

Judith Ajani1 and Lisa Green2

1
Australian National University HC Coombs Policy Forum, Crawford School of Public Policy and the Fenner School of
Environment and Society (judith.ajani@anu.edu.au)
2
Australian Bureau of Statistics (lisa.green@abs.gov.au)
 2

Summary

Introduction

1. The demands on forest information systems continue to grow with users broadening their
information needs from the historical demand for timber industry statistics into the nature
of forests and their array of values.

2. In this paper we note the achievements in global forest information systems in meeting
changing information needs and examine how well the associated wood product
information systems are linked to forest information systems to provide meaningful
information for users. Questions for consideration conclude the paper.

Ecosystem definitions

3. We start by defining words linked to key ecosystem concepts of importance for forest and
associated information systems. The ecosystem definitions presented in the SEEA EEA
carbon stock account (SEEA EEA Annex A4.1) are the latest refinement in this evolving area.
The SEEA EEA (carbon) ecosystem definitions present a broad ecosystem classification that
focusses on the key mechanism of ‘management’ and captures the varying degrees of
human modification of the ecosystem. It presents four broad ecosystem groupings:

Natural ecosystems: which are largely the product of natural and ongoing evolutionary,
ecological and biological processes. The key mechanism of ‘management’ in natural
ecosystems is natural selection operating on populations of species which has the effect over
time of optimizing system level properties and the traits of component species. System-level
properties which are naturally optimized with respect to, among other things, environmental
conditions include canopy density, energy use, nutrient cycling, resilience, and adaptive
capacity. Natural processes dominate natural ecosystems within which human cultural and
traditional uses also occur. Natural ecosystems include terrestrial and marine ecosystems.

Semi natural ecosystems: which are human modified natural ecosystems. Natural processes,
including regenerative processes, are still in operation to varying degrees. However, the
system is often prevented from reaching ecological maturity or is maintained in a degraded
state due to human disturbance and land use. Thus, the vegetation structure may not reflect
natural optima, and the taxonomic composition may be depauperate.

Agricultural ecosystems: which are human designed, engineered and maintained systems on
agricultural lands that grow animals and crops mainly for food, wood and fibre and as
feedstocks for biofuels and other materials. Plantations of trees for timber or fruit
production (e.g. orchards) are included in the agricultural ecosystem.

Other ecosystems: including settlements and land with infrastructure.

4. In this paper, we use this ecosystem terminology and associated definitions.

 3

Natural forests are forests that meet the natural ecosystem definition irrespective of their
use. They may be in conservation or logged for wood production: the key point is that their
ecological structure and functions have not been degraded such that natural regenerative
processes can no longer operate to recover the canopy structure following disturbance.

Plantation forests are forests that meet the agricultural ecosystem definition. They are used
primarily for wood production.

Semi natural forests are the grey area and an acknowledgement that determining the
ecological effects of human use is complex and reporting quantified information can be
demanding.

Information needs

5. Historically, forest information systems have been shaped by the demand for wood supply
statistics. A structural, rather than an ecosystem, definition of forests was developed
because it captures the capacity of the vegetated area to supply wood and also for its
simplicity. Calls to distinguish between native forests and plantations have firmed from both
the forestry industry and environment sectors.

6. Because plantations are an agricultural crop, they deliver cost efficiencies in wood growing
and processing, particularly through scale economies (Sedjo 1990) and therefore drive
significant forestry industry structural change (Ajani 2008). Statistics that disaggregate
forestry information into natural forests and plantations – from the forest estate through to
the products made from the wood logged (e.g. sawn timber, wood panels, pulp, paper and
bioenergy) – is of great interest to forestry industry researchers, policy makers and the
public. This disaggregated information applies to the main economic variables including
investment, production, consumption, trade and employment.

7. Researchers, policy makers and the public are also interested in disaggregated forest and
forestry industry information from an ecological and climate change perspective. Most
forest ecologists are more interested in the extent and condition of natural forests and have
a lesser interest in plantation forests. Climate change research and policy has been a major
driver for forest information disaggregated by ecosystem type. The essence of this interest is
found in ecosystem science. The carbon stocks in natural forests with their biodiversity-
based resilience processes are more likely to persist (relative to plantation forests) and
hence accumulate relatively large carbon stocks in soils and plants, particularly large, old
trees (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2009, Ajani 2013). This is not an
argument against plantation forests: rather it is a reflection of the important attributes of
plantation forests for competitiveness in many wood products markets AND the importance
of natural forests for carbon storage. Forest information disaggregated into natural forests
and plantations is highly relevant for those considering policy options aimed at avoiding
carbon emissions caused by natural forest clearing or degradation; restoring carbon stocks in
natural forests after earlier logging; and establishing forest plantations. Such disaggregated
information is significantly more useful than information that reports deforestation or forest
degradation irrespective of ecosystem type. For example, the carbon stock losses from
 4

clearing or logging a hectare of native forests are likely to be larger than the losses from
clearing or logging the same area of plantations.

Forest classifications

8. Major institutions, including the IPCC and Eurostat have adopted the FAO ‘forest’ definition
as used in the FAO Forest Resource Assessment 2000 (FAO 2000) (since modified in FAO
2010). The FAO defined ‘forest’ as:

‘land with a tree canopy cover of more than 10 per cent and area of more than 0.5 ha.
Forests are determined both by the presence of trees and the absence of other
predominant land uses. The trees should be able to reach a minimum height of 5 m.
Young stands that have not yet but are expected to reach a crown density of 10 per cent
and tree height of 5 m are included under forest, as are temporarily unstocked areas.
The term includes forests used for purposes of production, protection, multiple-use or
conservation (i.e. forest in national parks, nature reserves and other protected areas), as
well as forest stands on agricultural lands (e.g. windbreaks and shelterbelts of trees with
a width of more than 20 m), and rubberwood plantations and cork oak stands. The term
specifically excludes stands of trees established primarily for agricultural production, for
example fruit tree plantations. It also excludes trees planted in agroforestry systems.’
(FAO 2000).

With this boundary definition, land with some tree cover but not meeting the forest criteria
is termed ‘other wooded land’.

9. These forest definitions have been adopted in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories for estimating greenhouse gas emissions and removals due to
changes in biomass, dead organic matter and soil organic carbon on Forest Land (IPCC 2006).

10. The FAO and IPCC further disaggregate forests according to different characteristics to meet
their information needs. For example, greenhouse gas emissions and removals per hectare
vary according to forest types and the IPCC Guidelines state that it is good practice to stratify
Forest Land into various sub categories to reduce variation in forest parameters and to
reduce uncertainty (FAO 2006).

11. Although ‘natural forests’ and ‘plantations’ are seen as having important differences and
these are agreed at a general level, definition differences between the various institutions
remain, as summarised in Table 1. Despite these variations, agreement exists that forests
have different characteristics and that these should be reflected in a classification system.
 5

Table 1 Natural forest and plantation terminology

Institution and reference Natural forest definition Plantation forest definition
FAO 2000 A forest composed of indigenous A forest established by planting or/and
trees and not classified as seeding in the process of afforestation
plantation forest. or reforestation. It consists of
introduced species or, in some cases,
indigenous species.
FAO 2010a and b The term ‘natural forest’ is referred Planted forests are composed of trees
to but is not defined outside of the established through planting and/or
context of primary forests. through deliberate seeding of native or
introduced species. Establishment is
[Primary forest: naturally either through afforestation on land
regenerated forest of native that until then was not classified as
species, where there are no clearly forest, or by reforestation of land
visible indications of human classified as forest, for instance after a
activities and the ecological fire or a storm or following clearfelling.
processes are not significantly
disturbed.] The concept of planted forests is
broader than the concept of forest
plantations used in previous global
assessments. This change was made to
capture all planted forests and is in line
with the recommendations of the
Global Planted Forests Thematic Study
2005 (FAO, 2006d) and recent efforts to
develop guidelines and best practices
for the establishment and management
of planted forests.
IPCC 2006 A forest composed of indigenous Forest stands established by planting
trees and not classified as a forest or/and seeding in the process of
plantation. afforestation or reforestation. They are
either of introduced species (all planted
stands), or intensively managed stands
of indigenous species, which
meet all the following criteria: one or
two species at planting, even age class,
and regular spacing.
SNA 2008 Forest terminology is not covered, Forest terminology is not covered,
however for the purposes of the however for the purposes of the capital
capital account, a distinction is account, a distinction is made between
made between ‘Cultivated ‘Cultivated biological resources’ and
biological resources’ and ‘Non- ‘Non-cultivated biological resources’:
cultivated biological resources’: the the former yield repeat products whose
latter includes plants (e.g. trees) natural growth and regeneration are
that yield both once-only and under the direct control, responsibility
repeat products over which and management of institutional units.
ownership rights are enforced but Coppiced trees used for wood
for which natural growth or production would be included as
regeneration is not under the cultivated biological resources.
direct control, responsibility and
management of institutional units.
Primary forests are classified as
non-cultivated biological resources.
SEEA Central Framework Refers to ‘natural forests’ and Refers to ‘natural forests’ and
2012 ‘plantation forests’ but does not ‘plantation forests’ but does not define
define them. them.
 6

SEEA EEA 2013 Refers to ‘natural forests’ and Refers to ‘natural forests’ and
‘plantation forests’ but does not ‘plantation forests’ but does not define
define them. Annex A4.1 them. Annex A4.1 (Additional detail
(Additional detail concerning concerning accounting for carbon)
accounting for carbon) presents presents and ecosystem classification
and ecosystem classification that that could accommodate these
could accommodate these different types of forests.
different types of forests.
Eurostat 2002 Classifies forests by naturalness: Classifies forests by naturalness:
‘Forest/other wooded land ‘Plantations’ are defined as forest
undisturbed by man’ is defined as stands established by planting or/and
forest/other wooded land which seeding in the process of afforestation
shows natural forest or reforestation. They are either of
dynamics, such as natural tree introduced species, or intensively
composition, occurrence of dead managed stands of indigenous
wood, natural age structure and species, which meet all following
natural regeneration processes, the criteria: one or two species at
area of which is large enough to plantation, even age class, regular
maintain its natural characteristics spacing. They exclude stands which
and where the last significant were established as plantations but
human intervention was long which have been without intensive
enough ago to have allowed the management for a significant period of
natural species composition and time. These should be considered semi-
processes to have become re- natural.
established.

[‘Semi-natural forest/other
wooded land’ is defined as
forest/other wooded land, which is
neither ‘forest/other wooded land
undisturbed by man’ nor
‘plantation’.

Linkages to wood product statistics

12. The wood product classifications (e.g. sawn timber, pulp, wood panels, bioenergy) do not
disaggregate wood product variables (e.g. production, imports, exports) by forest type. In
some cases a linkage is made through the product classification system to coniferous,
broadleaved, tropical or non-tropical forests/regions, but not to forests conceptualised as
ecosystems – i.e. natural forests, semi-natural forests and plantation forests. This includes
the UN Central Product Classification (CPC) Ver.2 and FAO FAOSTAT information. This
reflects a combination of historical realities, the evolving consensus about the need for an
ecological based forest classification which is not yet settled on terminology, and the
additional resources needed in statistical offices to collect/report wood product information
in a newly disaggregated form.

13. The growing interest in ecosystem accounting, driven partly by economic considerations,
opens the possibility for aligning wood product classifications with forest classifications. It
would seem sensible to consider product classifications in conjunction with the important
work on forest classifications.
 7

Questions

1. Are there existing examples of linking asset types and method of production to product
classifications, and if so could the (these) approaches be reasonably applied to forest types
and forest products?

2. What processes are available for considering the linking of forest type to wood product
information?

3. How can the physical information for spatial statistical units be linked to economic
information on production from economic units?

References

Ajani J., 2008, Australia’s transition from native forests to plantations: the implications for
woodchips, pulpmills, tax breaks and climate change, Agenda 15 (3) <http://epress.anu.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2011/06/15-3-AN-2.pdf>

Ajani J., Keith H., Blakers M., Mackey B. and King H.P. 2013, Comprehensive carbon stock and flow
accounting: A national framework to support climate change mitigation policy, Ecological Economics
89 (2013) 61–72.

Eurostat 2002, The European Framework for Integrated Environmental and Economic Account for
Forests <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-BE-02-003/EN/KS-BE-02-003-
EN.PDF>

FAO FAOSTAT, <http://faostat.fao.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=626&lang=en#ancor>

FAO 2000, Forest Resource Assessment 2000, Terms and Definitions <
http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/y1997e/y1997e1m.htm#bm58>

FAO 2010a, Global Forest Resources Assessment,

<http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1757e/i1757e.pdf>

FAO 2010b, Global Forest Resources Assessment, Terms and Definitions

<http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/am665e/am665e00.pdf>

IPCC 2006, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories,Chapter 4 Forest Land
<http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/4_Volume4/V4_04_Ch4_Forest_Land.pdf>

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2009. Connecting Biodiversity and Climate
Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Report of the Second Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on
Biodiversity and Climate Change: Montreal, Technical Series No. 41
http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-41-en.pdf

Sedjo R.A., 1990, The Comparative Economics of Plantation Forestry, Resources for the Future,
Washington, DC, USA.
 8

SEEA Central Framework 2013, System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Central Framework

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/White_cover.pdf

SEEA EEA 2013, SEEA Experimental Ecosystem Accounting <

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/eea_white_cover.pdf>

SNA 2008, System of National Accounts < http://unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/sna2008.asp>

UN Central Product Classification (ver. 2) <http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/cpc-2.asp>