IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v171y2025ics1389934124002648.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Minimising the relative regret of future forest landscape compositions: The role of close-to-nature stand types

Author

Listed:
  • Knoke, Thomas
  • Biber, Peter
  • Schula, Tobias
  • Fibich, Jonathan
  • Gang, Benjamin

Abstract

Increasingly uncertain decision outcomes prevail in forest management and hamper choosing a single optimal management alternative. Confronting all management alternatives with multiple future scenarios and selecting an alternative minimising the regret under the worst scenario may provide suitable guidance under such uncertainty. Here, we search for future forested landscape compositions using regret minimisation for different objectives. We consider even-aged and uneven-aged stand types (called close-to-nature stand types) as management alternatives. Close-to-nature forest stand types supported the minimisation of regret for all objectives (represented by financial return, volume increment, C-storage, and two biodiversity indicators). However, close-to-nature stand types covered 18 % to 43 % of the future forest landscape in our study, which shows that even-aged stands are also necessary. For example, supporting biodiversity or multiple objectives simultaneously required large proportions of light-demanding and climate-change-tolerant Oak stands (even aged). Such Oak stands are difficult to achieve under shady conditions with limited canopy openings, which is typical for uneven-aged systems. Building on robust Pareto frontiers, we show a substantial trade-off between supporting biodiversity and maximising financial return but only a moderate trade-off between supporting biodiversity and maximising the C storage in a forest landscape. We suggest that such landscape-level trade-offs be quantified and discussed more intensively.

Suggested Citation

  • Knoke, Thomas & Biber, Peter & Schula, Tobias & Fibich, Jonathan & Gang, Benjamin, 2025. "Minimising the relative regret of future forest landscape compositions: The role of close-to-nature stand types," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s1389934124002648
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124002648
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103410?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hof, Andries F. & van Vuuren, Detlef P. & den Elzen, Michel G.J., 2010. "A quantitative minimax regret approach to climate change: Does discounting still matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 43-51, November.
    2. Knoke, Thomas & Kindu, Mengistie & Jarisch, Isabelle & Gosling, Elizabeth & Friedrich, Stefan & Bödeker, Kai & Paul, Carola, 2020. "How considering multiple criteria, uncertainty scenarios and biological interactions may influence the optimal silvicultural strategy for a mixed forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Andrew J Mason, 2012. "OpenSolver - An Open Source Add-in to Solve Linear and Integer Progammes in Excel," Operations Research Proceedings, in: Diethard Klatte & Hans-Jakob Lüthi & Karl Schmedders (ed.), Operations Research Proceedings 2011, edition 127, pages 401-406, Springer.
    4. Knoke, Thomas & Paul, Carola & Härtl, Fabian, 2017. "A critical view on benefit-cost analyses of silvicultural management options with declining discount rates," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 58-69.
    5. Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul & Patrick Hildebrandt & Baltazar Calvas & Luz Maria Castro & Fabian Härtl & Martin Döllerer & Ute Hamer & David Windhorst & Yolanda F. Wiersma & Giulia F. Curatola Fernández, 2016. "Compositional diversity of rehabilitated tropical lands supports multiple ecosystem services and buffers uncertainties," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, September.
    6. Thomas Knoke & Nick Hanley & Rosa Maria Roman-Cuesta & Ben Groom & Frank Venmans & Carola Paul, 2023. "Trends in tropical forest loss and the social value of emission reductions," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(11), pages 1373-1384, November.
    7. Eyvindson, Kyle & Duflot, Rémi & Triviño, María & Blattert, Clemens & Potterf, Mária & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2021. "High boreal forest multifunctionality requires continuous cover forestry as a dominant management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    8. Rupert Seidl & Günther Klonner & Werner Rammer & Franz Essl & Adam Moreno & Mathias Neumann & Stefan Dullinger, 2018. "Invasive alien pests threaten the carbon stored in Europe’s forests," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Roessiger, Joerg & Griess, Verena C. & Härtl, Fabian & Clasen, Christian & Knoke, Thomas, 2013. "How economic performance of a stand increases due to decreased failure risk associated with the admixing of species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 58-69.
    10. Joachim Maes & Adrián G. Bruzón & José I. Barredo & Sara Vallecillo & Peter Vogt & Inés Marí Rivero & Fernando Santos-Martín, 2023. "Accounting for forest condition in Europe based on an international statistical standard," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Groetzner, Patrick & Werner, Ralf, 2022. "Multiobjective optimization under uncertainty: A multiobjective robust (relative) regret approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(1), pages 101-115.
    12. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    13. Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul & Elizabeth Gosling & Isabelle Jarisch & Johannes Mohr & Rupert Seidl, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Resilience of Different Management Systems to Severe Forest Disturbance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(2), pages 343-381, February.
    14. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Manski, Charles F. & Sanstad, Alan H., 2022. "Minimax-regret climate policy with deep uncertainty in climate modeling and intergenerational discounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    15. Aino Assmuth & Janne Rämö & Olli Tahvonen, 2021. "Optimal Carbon Storage in Mixed-Species Size-Structured Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(2), pages 249-275, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jarisch, Isabelle & Bödeker, Kai & Bingham, Logan Robert & Friedrich, Stefan & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2022. "The influence of discounting ecosystem services in robust multi-objective optimization – An application to a forestry-avocado land-use portfolio," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Zamora-Pereira, Juan Carlos & Hanewinkel, Marc & Yousefpour, Rasoul, 2023. "Robust management strategies promoting ecological resilience and economic efficiency of a mixed conifer-broadleaf forest in Southwest Germany under the risk of severe drought," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    3. Knoke, Thomas & Kindu, Mengistie & Jarisch, Isabelle & Gosling, Elizabeth & Friedrich, Stefan & Bödeker, Kai & Paul, Carola, 2020. "How considering multiple criteria, uncertainty scenarios and biological interactions may influence the optimal silvicultural strategy for a mixed forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Blattert, Clemens & Eyvindson, Kyle & Hartikainen, Markus & Burgas, Daniel & Potterf, Maria & Lukkarinen, Jani & Snäll, Tord & Toraño-Caicoya, Astor & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2022. "Sectoral policies cause incoherence in forest management and ecosystem service provisioning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    5. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    6. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    7. Labarre, Clémence & Domec, Jean-Christophe & Andrés-Domenech, Pablo & Bödeker, Kai & Bingham, Logan & Loustau, Denis, 2025. "Improving forest decision-making through complex system representation: A viability theory perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    8. Mengistie Kindu & Logan Robert Bingham & José G. Borges & Susete Marques & Olha Nahorna & Jeannette Eggers & Thomas Knoke, 2022. "Opportunity Costs of In Situ Carbon Storage Derived by Multiple-Objective Stand-Level Optimization—Results from Case Studies in Portugal and Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-12, November.
    9. Bastit, Félix & Brunette, Marielle & Montagné-Huck, Claire, 2023. "Pests, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    10. Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul & Elizabeth Gosling & Isabelle Jarisch & Johannes Mohr & Rupert Seidl, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Resilience of Different Management Systems to Severe Forest Disturbance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(2), pages 343-381, February.
    11. Rössert, Sebastian & Gosling, Elizabeth & Gandorfer, Markus & Knoke, Thomas, 2022. "Woodchips or potato chips? How enhancing soil carbon and reducing chemical inputs influence the allocation of cropland," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Félix Bastit & Marielle Brunette & Claire Montagne-Huck, 2021. "Earth, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Working Papers of BETA 2021-25, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    13. Yoichiro Fujii & Yusuke Osaki, 2018. "Regret-sensitive treatment decisions," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.
    14. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    15. Ünal, Berat Berkan & Onaygil, Sermin & Acuner, Ebru & Cin, Rabia, 2022. "Application of energy efficiency obligation scheme for electricity distribution companies in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    16. Amos Schurr & Yaakov Kareev & Judith Avrahami & Ilana Ritov, 2012. "Taking the Broad Perspective: Risky Choices in Repeated Proficiency Tasks," Discussion Paper Series dp621, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    17. Jinyi Hu, 2023. "Linguistic Multiple-Attribute Decision Making Based on Regret Theory and Minimax-DEA," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-14, October.
    18. Martín Egozcue & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2015. "Optimal output for the regret-averse competitive firm under price uncertainty," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 279-295, December.
    19. Jhunjhunwala, Tanushree, 2021. "Searching to avoid regret: An experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 298-319.
    20. van Dijk, Wilco W. & van der Pligt, Joop, 1997. "The Impact of Probability and Magnitude of Outcome on Disappointment and Elation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 277-284, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s1389934124002648. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.