Advertisement

Inference on forest attributes and ecological diversity of trees outside forest by a two-phase inventory

  • Marco Marchetti
  • Vittorio Garfì
  • Caterina Pisani
  • Sara Franceschi
  • Marzia Marcheselli
  • Piermaria Corona
  • Nicola Puletti
  • Matteo Vizzarri
  • Marco di Cristofaro
  • Marco Ottaviano
  • Lorenzo Fattorini
Original Paper

Abstract

Key message

Trees outside forests (TOF) have crucial ecological and social-economic roles in rural and urban contexts around the world. We demonstrate that a large-scale estimation strategy, based on a two-phase inventory approach, effectively supports the assessment of TOF’s diversity and related climate change mitigation potential.

Context

Although trees outside forest (TOF) affect the ecological quality and contribute to increase the social and economic developments at various scales, lack of data and difficulties to harmonize the known information currently limit their integration into national and global forest inventories.

Aims

This study aims to develop and test a large-scale estimation framework to assess ecological diversity and above-ground carbon stock of TOF.

Methods

This study adopts a two-phase inventory approach.

Results

In the surveyed territory (Molise region, Central Italy), all the attributes considered (tree abundance, basal area, wood volume, above-ground carbon stock) are concentrated in a few dominant species. Furthermore, carbon stock in TOF above-ground biomass is non-negligible (on average: 28.6 t ha−1). Compared with the low field sampling effort (0.08% out of 52,796 TOF elements), resulting uncertainty of the estimators are more than satisfactory, especially those regarding the diversity index estimators (relative standard errors < 10%).

Conclusion

The proposed approach can be suitably applied on vast territories to support landscape planning and maximize ecosystem services balance from TOF.

Keywords

Diversity estimation Tree inventory Sampling Field survey Carbon stock Molise region (Italy) 

Notes

Funding

This work was carried out under the departmental research project of Molise University: “Inner areas. Contribution to rural development of sustainable forest management in mountain environment” (grant number: H32F16000080005).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Ahmed P (2008) Trees outside forests (TOF): a case study of wood production and consumption in Haryana. Int For Rev 10:165–172Google Scholar
  2. Baffetta F, Fattorini L, Corona P (2011) Estimation of small woodlot and tree row attributes in large-scale forest inventories. Environ Ecol Stat 18:147–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barabesi L, Franceschi S (2011) Sampling properties of spatial total estimators under tessellation stratified designs. Environmetrics 22:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barabesi L, Franceschi S, Marcheselli M (2012) Properties of design-based estimation under stratified spatial sampling. Ann Appl Stat 6:210–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellefontaine R, Petit S, Pain-Orcet M, Deleporte P, Bertault J G (2002) Trees outside forests: toward a better awareness. FAO Conservation Guide. RomeGoogle Scholar
  6. Bélouard T, Coulon F (2002) Trees outside forests: France. In: Bellefontaine R, Petit S, Deleporte P, Bertault JG (eds) Trees outside forests. Towards better awareness. FAO conservation guide. FAO, Rome, pp 149–156Google Scholar
  7. Bottalico F, Travaglini D, Chirici G, Garfì V, Giannetti F, de Marco A, Fares S, Marchetti M, Nocentini S, Paoletti E, Salbitano F, Sanesi G (2017) A spatially-explicit method to assess the dry deposition of air pollution by urban forests in the city of Florence, Italy. Urban For Urban Green 27:221–234.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.08.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calfapietra C, Barbati A, Perugini L, Ferrari B, Guidolotti G, Quatrini A, Corona P (2015) Carbon mitigation potential of different forest ecosystems under climate change and various managements in Italy. Ecosyst Health Sustain 1:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corona P (2016) Consolidating new paradigms in large-scale monitoring and assessment of forest ecosystems. Environ Res 144:8–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Corona P, Fattorini L (2006) The assessment of tree row attributes by stratified two-stage sampling. Eur J For Res 125:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corona P, Chirici G, Marchetti M (2002) Forest ecosystem inventory and monitoring as a framework for terrestrial natural renewable resource survey programmes. Plant Biosyst 136:69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corona P, Chiriacò MV, Salvati R, Marchetti M, Lasserre B, Ferrari B (2009) Proposta metodologica per l’inventario su vasta scala degli alberi fuori foresta. Ital For Mont 64:367–380 (in Italian)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corona P, Chirici G, McRoberts RE, Winter S, Barbati A (2011a) Contribution of large-scale forest inventories to biodiversity assessment and monitoring. For Ecol Manag 262:2061–2069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corona P, Fattorini L, Fehrmann L, Gobakken T, Gregoire TG, Kleinn C, McRoberts RE, Naesset E, Nelson R, Stahl G, Stehman S, Tomppo E (2011b) Expert meeting on assessment of forest inventory approaches for REDD+. UN-REDD Programme, MRV working paper 8. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  15. Damgaard C, Weiner J (2000) Describing inequality in plant size or fecundity. Ecology 81:1139–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Foresta H, Somarriba E, Temu A, Boulanger D, Feuilly H, Gauthier M (2013) Towards the assessment of trees outside forests. Resources assessment working paper 183. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  17. FAO (2004) Global forest resources assessment update 2005. Terms and definitions. Working Paper 83/E. RomeGoogle Scholar
  18. FAO (2010) Thematic study on trees outside forest (TOF). Inception workshop. Summary. RomeGoogle Scholar
  19. Fattorini L, Marcheselli M (1999) Inference on intrinsic diversity profiles of biological populations. Environmetrics 10:589–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fattorini L, Marcheselli M, Pisani C (2006) A three-phase sampling strategy for large-scale multiresource forest inventories. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 11:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fattorini L, Puletti N, Chirici G, Corona P, Gazzarri C, Mura M, Marchetti M (2016) Checking the performance of point and plot sampling on aerial photoimagery of a large-scale population of trees outside forests. Can J For Res 46:1264–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fattorini L, Marcheselli M, Pisani C, Pratelli L (2017) Design-based asymptotics for two-phase sampling strategies in environmental surveys. Biometrika 104:195–205Google Scholar
  23. Foresta M, Carranza ML, Garfì V, Di Febbraro M, Marchetti M, Loy A (2016) A systematic conservation planning approach to fire risk management in Natura 2000 sites. J Environ Manag 181:574–581.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fridman J, Holm S, Nilsson M, Nilsson P, Ringvall A, Ståhl G (2014) Adapting national forest inventories to changing requirements the case of the Swedish national forest inventory at the turn of the 20th century. Silva Fenn 48:1–29.  https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Guo ZD, Hu HF, Pan YD, Birdsey RA, Fang JY (2014) Increasing biomass carbon stocks in trees outside forests in China over the last three decades. Biogeosciences 11:4115–4122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holmgren P, Masakha EJ, Sjöholm H (1994) Not all African land is being degraded: a recent survey of trees on farms in Kenya reveals rapidly increasing forest resources. Ambio 23:390–395Google Scholar
  27. Hurlbert SH (1971) The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology 52:577–586CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. INFC (2005) Inventario nazionale delle foreste e dei serbatoi di carbonio. http://www.sian.it/inventarioforestale/. Accessed 28 March 2017
  29. Jost L (2006) Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113:363–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kleinn C (2000) On large-area inventory and assessment of trees outside forests. Unasylva 51:3–10Google Scholar
  31. Kuyah S, Sileshi GW, Njoloma J, Mng'omba S, Neufeldt H (2014) Estimating aboveground tree biomass in three different Miombo woodlands and associated land use systems in Malawi. Biomass Bioenergy 66:214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee KH, Ehsani R, Castle WS (2010) A laser scanning system for estimating wind velocity reduction through tree windbreaks. Comput Electron Agric 73:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lister A, Scott C, Rasmussen S (2009) Inventory of trees in non-forest areas in the Great Plains States. USDA Forest Service Proceedings, RMRS-P-56.17Google Scholar
  34. Magurran AE (2003) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Science, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Marchetti M, Vizzarri M, Lasserre B, Sallustio L, Tavone A (2014) Natural capital and bioeconomy: challenges and opportunities for forestry. Ann Silvic Res 38:62–73Google Scholar
  36. Mbow C, Smith P, Skole D, Duguma L, Bustamante M (2014) Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 6:8–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McGroddy ME, Daufresne T, Hedin LO (2004) Scaling of C:N:P stoichiometry in forests worldwide: implications of terrestrial Redfield-type ratios. Ecology 85:2390–2401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nair PKR (2012) Carbon sequestration studies in agroforestry systems: a reality-check. Agrofor Syst 86:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nowak DJ, Greenfield EJ, Hoehn RE, Lapoint E (2013) Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States. Environ Pollut 178:229–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Nyyssönen A, Ahti A (1996) Proceedings of FAO Expert Consultation On Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 in cooperation with ECE and UNEP with the support of the government of Finland (Kotka III). Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja—The Finnish Forest Research Institute, Research Papers 620. 369 s. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  41. Pagliarella MC, Sallustio L, Capobianco G, Conte E, Corona P, Fattorini L, Marchetti M (2016) From one- to two-phase sampling to reduce costs of remote sensing-based estimation of land-cover and land-use proportions and their changes. Remote Sens Environ 184:410–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Patil GP, Taillie C (1982) Diversity as a concept and its measurement. J Am Stat Assoc 77:548–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Plieninger T (2011) Capitalizing on the carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry in Germany’s agricultural landscapes: realigning the climate change mitigation and landscape conservation agendas. Landsc Res 36:435–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Plieninger T, Schleyer C, Mantel M, Hostert P (2012) Is there a forest transition outside forests? Trajectories of farm trees and effects on ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape in eastern Germany. Land Use Policy 29:233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Price B, Gomez A, Mathys L, Gardi O, Schellenberger A, Ginzler C, Thürig E (2017) Tree biomass in the Swiss landscape: nationwide modelling for improved accounting for forest and non-forest trees. Environ Monit Assess 189:106–119CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Raimondo FM (2013) Biodiversità nella dendroflora italiana. Ital J For Mt Environ 68:233–257 (in Italian)Google Scholar
  47. Ruhl JB, Kraft SE, Lant CL (2007) The law and policy of ecosystem services. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  48. Ryszkowski L, Kedziora A (2007) Modification of water flows and nitrogen fluxes by shelterbelts. Ecol Eng 29:388–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sadio S, Negreros-Castillo P (2006) Trees outside forests: facing smallholder challenges. In: Garrity D, Okono A, Grayson M, Parrott S (eds) World agroforestry into the future. World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi, pp 169–172Google Scholar
  50. Sadio S, Kleinn C, Michaelsen T (2001) Expert consultation on enhancing the contribution of trees outside forests to sustainable livelihoods. Rome (Italy), 26–28 Nov 2001Google Scholar
  51. Saket M, Branthomme A, Piazza M, FAO NFMA (2010) Support to developing countries on national forest monitoring and assessment. In: Tomppo E, Gschwantner T, Lawrence M, McRoberts RE (eds) National forest inventories, pathways for common reporting. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 585–596Google Scholar
  52. Sallustio L, Munafo M, Riitano N, Lasserre B, Fattorini L, Marchetti M (2016) Integration of land use and land cover inventories for landscape management and planning in Italy. Environ Monit Assess 188:48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Schnell S, Altrell D, Ståhl G, Kleinn C (2015a) The contribution of trees outside forests to national tree biomass and carbon stocks—a comparative study across three continents. Environ Monit Assess 187:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schnell S, Kleinn C, Ståhl G (2015b) Monitoring trees outside forests: a review. Environ Monit Assess 187:600CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Shvidenko A, Barber CV, Persson R (2005) Forest and woodland systems. In: Rashid H, Scholes R, Ash N (eds) Ecosystems and human well-being. Current state and trends. The Millenium ecosystem assessment series. Island press, Washington, pp 587–621Google Scholar
  56. Singh K, Chand P (2012) Above-ground tree outside forest (TOF) phytomass and carbon estimation in the semi-arid region of southern Haryana: a synthesis approach of remote sensing and field data. J Earth Syst Sci 121:1469–1482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smeets EMW, Faaij APC (2007) Bioenergy potentials from forestry in 2050. An assessment of the drivers that determine the potentials. Clim Chang 81:353–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smith P, Wollenberg E (2011) Achieving mitigation through synergies with adaptation. In: Wollemberg E, Nihart A, Grieg-Gran M, Tapio-Bistrom ML (eds) Climate change mitigation and agriculture. Earthscan, London-New York, pp 50–57Google Scholar
  59. Tabacchi G, Di Cosmo L, Gasparini P (2011) Aboveground tree volume and phytomass prediction equations for forest species in Italy. Eur J For Res 130:911–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tewari V, Sukumar R, Kumar R, Gadow K (2013) Forest observational studies in India: past developments and considerations for the future. For Ecol Manag 316:32–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tomppo E, Gschwantner T, Lawrence M, McRoberts RE (2010) National forest inventories: pathways for common reporting. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vizzarri M, Sallustio L, Travaglini D, Bottalico F, Chirici G, Garfì V, Lafortezza R, la Mela Veca DS, Lombardi F, Maetzke F, Marchetti M (2017) The MIMOSE approach to support sustainable forest management planning at regional scale in Mediterranean contexts. Sustainability 9:316.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vos PE, Maiheu B, Vankerkom J, Janssen S (2013) Improving local air quality in cities: to tree or not to tree? Environ Pollut 183:113–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Marchetti
    • 1
  • Vittorio Garfì
    • 1
  • Caterina Pisani
    • 2
  • Sara Franceschi
    • 3
  • Marzia Marcheselli
    • 2
  • Piermaria Corona
    • 4
  • Nicola Puletti
    • 5
  • Matteo Vizzarri
    • 1
  • Marco di Cristofaro
    • 1
  • Marco Ottaviano
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Fattorini
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Bioscienze e TerritorioUniversità degli Studi del MolisePescheItaly
  2. 2.Department of Economics and StatisticsUniversity of SienaSienaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Economics, Statistics and FinanceUniversity of CalabriaArcavacata di RendeItaly
  4. 4.CREA Research Centre for Forestry and WoodArezzoItaly
  5. 5.CREA Research Centre for Forestry and WoodTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations