Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics

  • Review
  • Published:
European Journal of Forest Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For several reasons the conversion of mono-species into mixed-species forests is presently a major concern of forest management and policy in Central Europe. Although it is possible to show a clear trend in favour of mixed-species forests, private forest owners and some forest economists have often not favoured mixed forests, assuming that they are less profitable. The trend towards mixed forests seems mainly for ecological reasons, while sound economic analysis of mixed forests is still rare. Based on this background the objective of the study is to answer the following four questions: (1) Does the yield of mixed-species forests differ from that of pure forests? (2) Does the mixing of tree species influence the ecological stability of forests? (3) Is the economic value of a mixed forest less than that of a monoculture? (4) How do forest economic models integrate the findings on yield and ecological stability of mixed forests? To answer these questions a literature review was conducted on the possible impacts of mixed-species forests. In comparison to pure stands a greater yield is not necessarily given in mixed stands. Yet, mixed-species stands are better able to compensate disturbances than monocultures. Moreover, there is substantial evidence that mixed-species stands are more resistant against biotic and abiotic disturbances. Applying an extended forest economic model, it was possible to demonstrate that mixing large blocks of native broadleaf species into pure conifer forests may lead to a significant reduction of financial risk. From a risk-averse perspective the economic value of a mixed-species forest may thus be greater than that of a mono-species forest. Yet, it became clear that forest economists do not often integrate the research findings on yield and ecological stability of mixed stands in modelling, but rather apply simple bioeconomic modelling. Moreover, in the context of mixed forests economists also largely ignore even classical financial approaches, which consider risk and risk preferences. We concluded that forest economics has to close substantial research gaps. Firstly, the knowledge of how to integrate biophysical properties of mixed forests in bioeconomic modelling is still an open question. Secondly, forest economists have to adopt the modern approaches of financial theory and management science to value mixed forests.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Möller considered a forest not as the sum of its trees but as a kind of an organism formed by interacting plant and animal individuals and their environment.

References

  • Ammer S, Weber K, Abs C, Ammer C, Prietzel J (2006) Factors influencing the distribution and abundance of earthworm communities in pure and converted Scots pine stands. Appl Soil Ecol 33:10–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong CW (2007) A note on the ecological-economic modelling of marine reserves in fisheries. Ecol Econ

  • Assmann E (1954) Grundflächenhaltung und Zuwachsleistung Bayerischer Fichten-Durchforstungsreihen. Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt 73:257–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg G, Coenenberg AG (1992) Betriebswirtschaftliche Entscheidungslehre. Vahlen, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgarten M, von Teuffel K (2005) Nachhaltige Waldwirtschaft in Deutschland. In:von Teuffel K et al (eds) Waldumbau. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bavarian Forest Service (2003) Jahresbericht 2003. Bavarian State Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Munich

  • Bayerisches Landesamt für Statistik und Datenverarbeitung (2004) Statistische Berichte—Pflanzenbestände in Baumschulen in Bayern 2004, München

  • Ben-Haim Y (2005) Value-at-risk with info-gap uncertainty. J Risk Fin 6:388–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binkley D, Valentine D (1991) Fifty-year biogeochemical effects of green ash, white pine, and Norway spruce in a replicated experiment. For Ecol Manage 40:13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binkley D (1992) Mixtures of nitrogen2-fixing and non-nitrogen2-fixing tree species. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 99–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Binkley D, Menyailo O (2005) Gaining insights on the effects of tree species on soils. In: Binkley D, Menyailo O (eds) Tree species effects on soils: implications for global change. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 1–16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • BMVEL (Bundesministerium für Verbraucherschutz, Ernährung und Landwirtschaft), (2004) Die zweite Bundeswaldinventur: Das Wichtigste in Kürze. Sankt Augustin: Gekko

  • Böhme J (2001) Phytophage Käfer und ihre Wirtspflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Ein Kompendium. Bioform, Heroldsberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandl H (1989) Ergänzende Untersuchungen zur Ertragslage der Baumarten Fichte, Kiefer, Buche und Eiche in Baden-Württemberg. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagd-Zeitung 160:91–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Bravo F, Hann DW, Maguire DA (2001) Impact of competitor species composition on predicting diameter growth and survival rates of Douglas-fir trees in southwestern Oregon. Can J For Res 31:2237–2247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown AHF (1992) Functioning of mixed-species stands at Gisburn, N.W. England. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 125–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulte EH, van Kooten GC (1999) Metapopulation dynamics and stochastic bioeconomic modeling. Ecol Econ 30:293–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield J, Benitez Malvido J (1992) Effect of mixed-species tree planting on the distribution of soil invertebrates. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 255–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlowitz HC von (1713) Sylvicultura oeconomica. Anweisung zur wilden Baum-Zucht Reprint of edition Leipzig, Braun. TU Bergakademie Freiberg und Akademische Buchhandlung, Freiberg, 2000

  • Chen HYH, Klinka K (2003) Aboveground yield of western hemlock and western red cedar mixed species stands in southern coastal British Columbia. For Ecol Manage 184:55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotta H (1828) Anweisung zum Waldbau. 4. Auflage. Arnoldische Buchhandlung, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal RL, Hennon PE, Orlikouska EH, D’Amore DV (2004) Stand dynamics of mixed red alder—conifer forests of southeast Alaska. Can J For Res 34:969–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegen P, Hung BC, Mixdorf U (1997) Ökonomische Modellierung der Baumartenwahl bei Unsicherheit der zukünftigen Temperaturentwicklung. Forstarchiv 68:194–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieter M (1997) Berücksichtigung von Risiko bei forstbetrieblichen Entscheidungen. Schriften zur Forstökonomie Bd. 16. Frankfurt/Main: J.D. Sauerländer’s

  • Elmer M, La France M, Förster G, Roth M (2004) Changes in the decomposer community when converting monocultures to mixed Norway spruce/European beech stands. Plant Soil 264:97–109

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elton EJ, Gruber MJ (1995) Modern Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis. 5 th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming CM, Alexander RR (2003) Single-species versus multiple-species models: the economic implications. Ecol Model 170:203–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin JF, Norris LA, Berg DR, Smith GA (1999) The history of DEMO: an experiment in regeneration harvest of Northwestern forest ecosystems. Northwest Sci 73:3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritz P (ed) (2006) Ökologischer Waldumbau in Deutschland—Fragen, Antworten, Perspektiven. Oekom, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Frivold LH, Frank J (2002) Growth of mixed birch-coniferous stands in relation to pure coniferous stands at similar sites in South-eastern Norway. Scand J For Res 17:139–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg C, Larsen BJ (2003) Back to nature’—a sustainable future for forestry. For Ecol Manage 179:559–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gayer K (1886) Der gemischte Wald. Parey, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Gotoh J, Konno H (2000) Third degree stochastic dominance mean-risk analysis. Management Science 46:289–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern CB, Evans SA, Nelson CR, McKenzie D, Liguori DA (1999) Response of forest vegetation to varying levels and patterns of green-tree retention: an overview of a long-term experiment. Northwest Sci 73:27–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartig GL (1800) Anweisung zur Holzzucht für Förster. Dritte, vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. Akademische Buchhandlung, Marburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper DU et al (2005) Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol Monogr 75:3–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jactel H, Brockerhoff E, Duelli P (2005) A test of the biodiversity-stability theory: meta-analysis of tree species diversity effects on insect pest infestation, and re-examination of responsible factors. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze E-D (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems ecological studies, vol 176. Springer, Berlin, pp 235–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones HE, McNamara N, Mason WL (2005) Functioning of mixed-species stands: evidence from a long-term forest experiment. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze E-D (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennel R (1965) Untersuchungen über die Leistung von Fichte und Buche im Rein- und Mischbestand. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagd-Zeitung 136, 149–161 and 173–189

  • Kerr G, Nixon CJ, Matthews RW (1992) Silviculture and yield of mixed-species stands: the UK experience. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 35–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby KJ, Patterson G (1992) Ecology and management of semi-natural tree species mixtures. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 189–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke T, Wurm J (2006) Mixed forests and a flexible harvest strategy: a problem for conventional risk analysis? Eur J For Res 125:303–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke T, Stimm B, Ammer C, Moog M (2005) Mixed forests reconsidered: a forest economics contribution to the discussion on natural diversity. For Ecol Manage 213:102–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • König A (1995) Sturmgefährdung von Beständen im Altersklassenwald: Ein Erklärungs-und Prognosemodell. Frankfurt a.M.: Sauerländer's

  • Lee WY, Rao RKS (1988) Mean lower partial moment valuation and lognormally distributed returns. Manage Sci 34:446–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Légaré S, Paré D, Bergeron Y (2004) The responses of Black Norway spruce growth to an increased proportion of aspen in mixed stands. Can J For Res 34:405–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy H (1998) Sochastic dominance: investment decision making under uncertainty. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindén M, Agestam E (2003) Increment and yield in mixed and monoculture stands of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies based on an experiment in southern Sweden. Scand J For Res 18:155–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohmander P (1993) Economic two stage multi species management in a stochastic environment: the value of selective thinning options and stochastic growth parameters. Syst Anal Model Simul 11:287–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüdge W (1971) Der Einfluß von Laubholzunterbau auf die Schädlingsdichte in den Kiefernbeständen der Schwetzinger Hardt. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung 142:173–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüpke B von et al. (2004) Silvicultural strategies for conversion. In: Spiecker H et al. (eds) Norway spruce conversion—options and consequences. Brill Leiden, Boston, pp 121–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüpke B von, Spellmann H (1999) Aspects of stability, growth and natural regeneration in mixed Norway spruce-European beech stands as a basis of silvicultural decisions. In: Olsthoorn AFM et al. (eds) Management of mixed-species forest: silviculture and economics. IBN-DLO Scientific Contributions, Wageningen, pp 245–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüpke B von, (2004) Risikominderung durch Mischwälder und naturnaher Waldbau—ein Spannungsfeld. Forstarchiv 75:43–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbrot BB, Hudson RL (2005) Fraktale und Finanzen: Märkte zwischen Risiko, Rendite und Ruin. Piper, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz H (1952) Portfolio selection. J Fin 7:77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer P, Brang P, Dobbertin M, Hallenbarter D, Renaud J-P, Walthert L, Zimmermann S (2005) Forest storm damage is more frequent on acidic soils. Ann For Sci 62:303–311

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Messier C, Kneeshaw DD (1999) Thinking and acting differently for sustainable management of the boreal forest. For Chronicle 75:929–938

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitscherlich G (1952) Der Tannen-Fichten-(Buchen)-Plenterwald. Schriftenreihe der Badischen Forstlichen Versuchsanstalt Freiburg im Breisgau. Heft 8

  • Möhring B (2004) Betriebswirtschaftliche Analyse des Waldumbaus. Forst Holz 59:523–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Möller A (1922) Der Dauerwaldgedanke. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Bristow M, Vanclay JK (2006) Mixed-species plantations: prospects and challenges. For Ecol Manage 233:383–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otto HJ (1994) Waldökologie. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Pausch R (2005) Ein System-Ansatz zur Darstellung des Zusammenhangs zwischen Waldstruktur, Arbeitsvolumen und Kosten in naturnahen Wäldern Bayerns. Forstliche Forschungsberichte München 199

  • Pautasso M, Holdenrieder O, Stenlid J (2005) Susceptibility to fungal pathogens of forests differing in tree diversity. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze E-D (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems, vol 176. Ecol Stud Springer, Berlin, pp 263–289

  • Peck KM (1989) Tree species preferences shown by foraging birds in forest plantations in northern England. Biol Conserv 48:41–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penttinen M, Lausti A (2004) The competitiveness and return components of NIPF ownership in Finland. Finnish J Bus Econ Spec Edn 2/2004

  • Pflaumer P (1992) Investitionsrechnung. Oldenbourg München

    Google Scholar 

  • Post T, van Vliet P (2006) Downside risk and asset pricing. J Bank Fin 30:823–849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prescott CE, Hope GD, Blevins LL (2003) Effect of gap size on litter decomposition and soil nitrate concentrations in a high-elevation spruce-fir forest. Can J For Res 33:2210–2220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretzsch H (2003) Diversität und Produktivität von Wäldern. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung 174:88–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretzsch H (2005) Diversity and productivity in forests: evidence from long-term experimental plots. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze E-D (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems, vol 176. Ecol Stud, Springer, Berlin, pp 41–64

  • Ripken H, Spellmann H (1980) Modell-Berechnungen der Reinerträge der wichtigsten Baumarten sowie der gesamten Holzproduktion in den Niedersächsischen Landesforsten. Der Forst- und Holzwirt 35:153–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothe A, Binkley D (2001) Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: a synthesis. Can J For Res 31:1855–1870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothe A, Borchert H (2003) Der Wald für morgen: Eine Naturalbilanz über 25 Jahre naturnahe Forstwirtschaft im Bayerischen Staatswald. Berichte aus der Bayerischen Landesanstalt für Wald und Forstwirtschaft, no 39

  • Rothe A, Mellert K-H (2004) Effects of forest management on nitrate concentrations in seepage water of forests in Southern Bavaria, Germany. Water Air Soil Pollut 156:337–355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rothe A (2005) Tree species management and nitrate contamination of groundwater: a central Europe perspective. In: Binkley D, Menyailo O (eds) Tree species effects on soils: Implications for Global change. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 71–83

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze E-D (2005) The functional significance of forest diversity: the starting point. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M et al (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems. ecological studies, vol 176. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Haas P, Bachofen H (1991) Die Sturmgefährdung von Einzelbäumen und Beständen. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für das Forstwesen 142:477–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Schütz J-P, Götz M, Schmid W, Mandallaz D (2006) Vulnerability of spruce (Picea abies) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) forest stands and consequences for silviculture. Eur J For Res 125:291–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitschek O (1988) Aufbau stabiler Wälder - zentrale Aufgabe des Waldbaus. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift 43:1286–1287

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitschek O (1991a) Mischwald als Ziel des Waldbaus. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift 46:1246–1251

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitschek O (1991b) Waldbauliche Möglichkeiten auf Kahlflächen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Vorwaldbaumarten. Forst Holz 46:351–355

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe WF (1964) Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. J Fin 14:425–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons EA, Buckley GP (1992) Ground vegetation under planted mixtures of trees. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 211–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith KW (1992) Bird populations: effects of tree species mixtures. In: Cannell MGR, Malcolm DC, Robertson PA (eds) The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 233–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Spellmann H (2005) Produziert der Waldbau am Markt vorbei? Allg. Forstzeitschrift/Der Wald 60:454–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Spremann K (1996) Wirtschaft, Investition und Finanzierung. 5., vollständig überarbeitete, ergänzte und aktualisierte Auflage. München und Wien: Oldenbourg

  • Thomson TA (1991) Efficient combinations of timber and financial market investments in single-period and multiperiod portfolios. For Sci 37:461–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Valkonen S, Valsta L (2001) Productivity and economics of mixed two-storied spruce and birch stands in Southern Finland simulated with empirical models. For Ecol Manage 140:133–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilà M, Inchausti P, Vayreda J, Barrantes O, Garcia C, Ibáñez JJ, Mata T (2005) Confounding factors in the observed productivity-diversity relationship in forests. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, et al. (eds) Forest diversity and function: temperate and boreal systems. Ecological studies, vol 176. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilà M, Vayreda J, Gracia CA, Ibáñez JJ (2003) Does tree diversity increase wood production in pine forests. Oecologia 135:299–303

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner JE, Rideout DB (1991) Evaluating forest management investments: The Capital Asset Pricing Model and the Income Growth Model. For Sci 37:1591–1604

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner JE, Rideout DB (1992) The stability of the capital asset pricing model’s parameters in analysing forest investments. Can J For Res 22:1639–1645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner S (2004) Möglichkeiten und Beschränkungen eines funktionsorientierten Waldbaus. Forst Holz 59:105–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber M-W (2002) Portefeuille- und Optionspreis-Theorie und forstliche Entscheidungen. Schriften zur Forstökonomie Band 23. Frankfurt a.M.: Sauerländer’s

  • Wippermann C, Möhring B (2001) Exemplarische Anwendung der Portefeuilletheorie zur Analyse eines forstlichen Investments. Forst Holz 56:267–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinkhan FC, Cubbage FW (2003) Financial analysis of timber investments. In: Sills EO, Abt, Karen Lee (eds) Forests in a market economy. forestry sciences, vol 72. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 77–95

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank David Dunn, Anne Stephens and Joanne Jukes for English corrections and helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript and Mrs. Edith Lubitz for the final corrections. The study has also benefited from a literature research during the project KN 586/4-1 funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). Two anonymous reviewers provided extensive comments and instructive recommendations, which improved the first version our paper significantly. Moreover, the subject editor’s comments further increased the quality of a second version of our paper (remaining errors are of course our own).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Forest Management, Technische Universität München, Am Hochanger 13, 85354, Freising, Germany

    Thomas Knoke

  2. Bavarian Forest Institute, Unit for Silvicultural Research, Am Hochanger 11, 85354, Freising, Germany

    Christian Ammer

  3. Institute of Silviculture, Technische Universität München, Am Hochanger 13, 85354, Freising, Germany

    Bernd Stimm & Reinhard Mosandl

Authors
  1. Thomas Knoke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Ammer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernd Stimm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Reinhard Mosandl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Knoke.

Additional information

Communicated by Jürgen Bauhus.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Knoke, T., Ammer, C., Stimm, B. et al. Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics. Eur J Forest Res 127, 89–101 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0186-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0186-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation