FORESTS: MULTIFUNCTIONAL ECOSYSTEMS Core messages

Economic valuations of the ecosystem services provided by forests in Germany have shown their significant benefits both as a result of timber production and by providing public goods.

The total combined value assigned by the population at large to the forests’ recreational function, their role in biodiversity conservation and their carbon sequestration function exceeds that of the mon-etary value of timber production.

The multifunctional forest model, the value of which derives from the multitude of ecosystem services provided, is not only estab-lished in law and reflects the political will but is also backed up by economic analyses.

The issue

Approximately one third of Germany’s territory is covered by forests, with a slight upward trend (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2017). The vast majority of forests are used for silvicultural purposes. However, the German Federal Forest Act (BWaldG) in Paragraph 1(1) highlights the importance of forests with a view to the multitude of utility, protec-tive and recreational functions they provide. Forests are to be main-tained for their silvicultural uses as well as for their significance for maintaining the functional capacity of the natural environment, for landscape amenity, and for recreation.

SELECTED CASE STUDIES 53

The realisation of the multifunctional forest model necessitates that silvicultural management mitigates conflicts between different for-est functions and capitalises on potential synergies between differ-ent functions. Coniferous tree species such as spruce are important timber species but a monoculture spruce plantation, due to its higher rates of evapotranspiration, produces less groundwater recharge than a deciduous forest on a comparable site (Duncker et al., 2012).

Carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems plays an important role in climate change mitigation. In 2015, the living forest biomass and for-est soils in Germany sequfor-estered more than 57 million tonnes CO2

equivalents net (UBA, 2017). Targeted promotion of the forests« cli-mate change mitigation function would result in shorter production cycles and a focus on fast-growing tree species (Rock and Bolte, 2011);

this would however come at the cost of negative impacts on biodiver-sity. For example, forest trees only become important habitat el-ements for some species of conservation concern, e. g. various wood-pecker species, after they have exceeded the rotation age customary in commercial forestry.

Economic analysis

The fact that the value to society of forest ecosystems goes well be-yond timber production is also backed up by the findings of economic evaluations of selected additional functions, such as the forests« CO₂ sequestration function, the importance of natural and semi-natural forests for biodiversity, and the forests’ recreational function (see Fig-ure 19). The studies show that the public assigns significant value to these functions as well and that this value significantly exceeds that of the timber’s market value. This does not yet take account of other ecosystem services such as groundwater recharge, the provision of a buffer against pollutants, or slower water discharge during rainfall events. While the various direct and indirect methods used in these

FIGURE 18 The riparian forest close to the city of Leipzig is a major spot for local recreation.

(Photograph: Anne Wessner)

THE VALUE OF NATURE FOR ECONOMY AND SOCIETY 54

studies to determine the public’s »willingness to pay« are certainly not beyond reproach as to their theoretical foundations, they clearly allow for the conclusion that ecosystem services going beyond timber utilisation are important to the public and that our forests should be maintained in their multifunctional state.

Of all the forest ecosystem services, the markets at present essen-tially only remunerate timber production and hunting. All other ser-vices have a public goods character and are, such as in the case of well-maintained forest trails for recreational users, (seemingly) provided for free. While the associated societal benefits are not taken into ac-count in assessments of operating profitability, private forest owners must nonetheless bear the associated costs. There is therefore a risk that the forests« public services provision is not sufficiently taken into account in management decisions. The expansion of support programmes for the provision of non-marketable ecosystem services going beyond current forest management practices is therefore pru-dent from a societal point of view and can help safeguard the multi-functionality of German forests.

Conclusions

Forests produce raw materials, provide habitats for a range of flora, fauna and fungus species, and provide numerous other services to so-ciety. The manner in which forests are managed is important to main-taining biodiversity and to the provision of the variety of other benefi-cial services. A range of monetary valuation studies have shown that ecosystem services going beyond timber production are so highly FIGURE 19 Aggregated monetary

value of a variety of forest ecosystem services in Germany, using different valuation methods.

(Source: Naturkapital Deutschland – TEEB DE, 2014, p. 166)

SELECTED CASE STUDIES 55

important that they must not under any circumstances be neglected.

The monetary evaluation of these functions may contribute to strengthening the multifunctional forest model and to countering a dominance of focal bias, e. g. a focus on solely maximising carbon se-questration or timber production. Even though the current forms of forest management already ensure the provision of a range of ecosys-tem services, there is still room for improved reconciliation between commercial and public interests. Remuneration should be payable for special forestry services that go beyond current rules and regulations for sustainable forest management and good silvicultural practice.

2.8 LARGE-SCALE PROTECTED AREAS: PROTECTED