Boman, M., Norman, J., Kindstrand, C. & Mattsson, L. 2005b. On the budget fornational environmental objectives and willingness to pay for protection of forestland.Submitted.Bostedt, G. & Mattsson, L., 2005. On the benefits and costs of adjusting forestry to meetrecreational demands. Submitted.Bostedt, G., Parks, P.J. & Boman, M. 2003. Integrated natural resource management innorthern Sweden: An application to forestry and reindeer husbandry. Land Economics79(2), pp. 149-159.Edenius, L. & Mikusiński, G. 2006. Utility of habitat suitability models as biodiversityassessment tools in forest management. Scandinavian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong> 21,Supplement 7:62-72.Edenius, L. & Mikusiński, G., et al. Matching national bird breeding surveys with foresthabitat data: influence of spatial and structural components of the data. Submitted toecography.Edman, T., Angelstam, P., Mikusiński, G., Roberge, J.-M., Gromadzki, M. & Carlson, A.Assessment of forest landscapes´ conservation value using umbrella species requirements:spatial evaluation of a meta-population model in Poland. Manuscript.Elfving, B. & Jakobson, R. 2006. Effects of retained trees on tree growth and field vegetationin Pinus sylvestris stands in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong> 21,Supplement 7:29-36.Elfving, B., Freeman, M. & Mörling, T. 200X. Correlation between weather conditionsand tree growth for Scots pine and Norway spruce in northern Sweden 1980 – 2001.Manuscript in prep.Elfving, B. 2009. Natural mortality in thinning and fertilization experiments with pineand spruce in Sweden. (submitted)Elfving, B. 2009. Top height development in thinning and fertilization experiments withpine and spruce in Sweden. (submitted)Eriksson, E. Gillespie, A.R. Gustafsson, L. Langvall, O. Olsson, M. Sathre, R. Stendahl, J.2007. Integrated carbon analysis of forest management practises & wood substitution.Canadian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong> 37 (3), 671-681.Eriksson L. A model predicting silviculture and cut for Swedish private forest owners.Manuscript.Erikson, M. & Olofsson, K., (2005). Comparison of three individual tree crown detectionmethods. Machine Vision and Applications. 14(4), 258-265Eriksson, L.O. 2006. Planning under uncertainty at the forest level – A system approach.Scandinavian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong> 21, Supplement 7:111-117.Fahlvik, N. & Nyström, K. 2006. Models for predicting individual tree height incrementand tree diameter in young stands in southern Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Forest<strong>Research</strong> 21, Supplement 7:16-28.Fahlvik, N., Agestam, E., Nilsson, U. & Nyström, K. 2005. Simulating the influence ofinitial stand structure on the development of young mixtures of Norway spruce andbirch. For. Ecol. Manage. 213: 297-311.Forsberg M., Frisk M. & Rönnqvist, M. 2005. FlowOpt – a decision support tool forstrategic and tactical transportation planning in forestry. International Journal of ForestEngineering, vol 6. No2 pp. 101-114 July 2005Fraver S., Ringvall A. & Jonsson B-G. 2007. Refining volume estimates of down woodydebris. Canadian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong>, 37: 627-633104
Freeman, M., Severinsson, T., Morén, A.-S. & Linder, S. 200X. Coarse root biomass ofNorway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.): results from excavation of whole root systems inunfertilised and fertilised stands in Northern and Southern Sweden. Manuscript in prep.Freeman, M. & Sahlée, E. 2009. Effects of climate change on net primary production ofSwedish forests. Manuscript in prep.Freeman, M. Wikström, P., Elfving, B. 2009. Adjustment of an empirical growth and yieldmodel to account for effects of climate change on forest production. Manuscript in prep.Gilichinsky, M., Heiskanen, J., Wallerman, J., Egberth, M., and Nilsson, M. 2009. Histogrammatching for post-processing of stem volume estimates imputed from forest inventoryand satellite data. Submitted to Remote Sensing of Environment.Gong, P., Boman, M. & Mattsson, L. 2005. Nontimber benefits, price uncertainty andoptimal harvest of an even-aged stand. Forest Policy and Economics 7:283-29.Hankala, A., Wikström, P., and Eriksson, L.O. 2009. Using Software to support forestrydecision making with multiple goals: a case study with the MCDA application of the<strong>Heureka</strong> planning system. (in Prep).Hannrup, B. et al. (manuscript). Models for predicting MOE and MOR on centerboardsfrom logs of Norway spruce.Hugosson, M. & Ingemarson, F. 2004. Objectives and Motivations of Small-scale Forestowners; <strong>The</strong>oretical Modelling and Qualitative Assessment. Silva Fennica 38 (2), 217-231.Huhtala, A., Toppinen, A. & Boman, M. 2003. When the theory is not enough – valuationof forest resources with “efficiency” prices in practice. Journal of Forest Economics9, 205-222.Ingemarson F., Hedman L. & Dahlin B. 2004. Nature conservation in forest managementplans for small-scale forestry in Sweden. Small-scale Forest Economics, Management andPolicy, 3(1):17-34, 2004Ingemarson, F., Lindhagen A. & Eriksson L. 2005. Small-scale forestry in Sweden – owners’objectives, silvicultural practices and management plans. Accepted for Scand. J. For.Sc.Ikonen, V-P. Peltola, H. Wilhelmsson, L. Kilpelaäinen, A. Väisänen, H. Nuutinen, T. Kellomäki,S. 2008. Modelling the distribution of wood properties along the stems of Scotspine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) as affected by silviculturalmanagement. Forest Ecology and Management 256. pp 1356–1371.Jakobsson, R. and Elfving, B. 2004. Development of an 80-year old mixed stand withretained Pinus sylvestris in northern Sweden. For. Ecol. Manage. 194: 249-258.Jakobsson, R. & Elfving, B. 2005. Retained pines growth pattern and growth variation asmeasured on increment cores from standing trees. Manuscript under revision.Karlsson, J., Rönnqvist, M. & Frisk, M. 2006. RoadOpt - A decision support system forroad upgrading in forestry. Scandinavian Journal of Forest <strong>Research</strong> 21, Supplement 7:5-15.Karlsson P. E., Pleijel H., Belhaj M., Danielsson H., Dahlin B., Andersson M., HanssonM., Munthe J. & Grennfelt P. 2004. An economic assessment of the negative impacts ofozone on the crop yield and forest production at the Östad Estate in south-west Sweden.AMBIO 34(1):32-40.Lindhagen, A. 2005a. Predicting recreation value of Swedish forest stands. Manuscript.Lohmander, P. & Olsson, L. 200X, Adaptive optimisation in the roundwood supply chain.Submitted to <strong>The</strong> International Journal of Systems Sciences105
- Page 3:
ContentsResearch Programme 5Applica
- Page 7 and 8:
Growth and yieldmodelsSP1 Forest Ec
- Page 9 and 10:
forest production, and social value
- Page 11 and 12:
Applications of the Heureka systemT
- Page 13 and 14:
data, improving opportunities to in
- Page 15 and 16:
User valueA complete decision suppo
- Page 17 and 18:
opment scenarios for a stand that w
- Page 19 and 20:
Programme meeting including an excu
- Page 21 and 22:
forest roads, 10 time periods, four
- Page 23 and 24:
Figure 6. Examples of screen layout
- Page 25 and 26:
Implementations in practical forest
- Page 27 and 28:
Thematic research projectsGrowth an
- Page 29 and 30:
600PineSpruceBirch500400Max-age, yr
- Page 31 and 32:
Specification of silviculturaland n
- Page 33 and 34:
zones and other tree groups. Border
- Page 35 and 36:
expresses the expected potential in
- Page 37 and 38:
tions, mainly using current forest
- Page 39 and 40:
ReferencesPopular science publicati
- Page 41 and 42:
identified relationships were used
- Page 43 and 44:
Fulfilment of objectivesThe goal of
- Page 45 and 46:
Soil biogeochemical modellingProjec
- Page 47 and 48:
Scientific resultsSoil carbon model
- Page 49 and 50:
model (Fig. 18). In addition, the w
- Page 51 and 52:
Hodson, M.E., Langan, S.J. & Wilson
- Page 53 and 54: phytes, fungi, lichens, invertebrat
- Page 55 and 56: forest net value revenues and the p
- Page 57 and 58: Wood propertiesProject leader: Lars
- Page 59 and 60: pulpwood energy wood sections) are
- Page 61 and 62: Table 1. Properties that can be pre
- Page 63 and 64: Hannrup, B. et al. (manuscript). Mo
- Page 65 and 66: value model, based on both stand at
- Page 67 and 68: uscript in prep.Working papersLindh
- Page 69 and 70: een tested.Estimates of forest para
- Page 71 and 72: Conference proceedingsNilsson, M.,
- Page 73 and 74: Selection of plot data to represent
- Page 75 and 76: set, in the BIOMASS and IRIS projec
- Page 77 and 78: the end of the project period. The
- Page 79 and 80: y a study of the consequences for H
- Page 81 and 82: Field trials in the project Data ac
- Page 83 and 84: Fulfillment of objectivesThe main e
- Page 85 and 86: vests? As a result, for the identif
- Page 87 and 88: Figure 26. The spatial layout of ha
- Page 89 and 90: Multi-Criteria Decision AnalysisPro
- Page 91 and 92: !"#$%&'N)';%&4&32-2",3',6'5-2-'6,%'
- Page 93 and 94: problems. Spatial problems pose par
- Page 95 and 96: Forest owner behaviour and dynamics
- Page 97 and 98: area between these size groups has
- Page 99 and 100: Programme managementWhen the second
- Page 101 and 102: Funding and expenditureFundingThe s
- Page 103: Publications in phase I and phase I
- Page 107 and 108: Pettersson, H. & Ståhl, G. 2006. F
- Page 109 and 110: forests at the landscape level. MSc
- Page 111 and 112: Lanvin, J-D. Bajric, F. Wilhelmsson
- Page 113 and 114: ceedings from the 24th EARSeL Sympo
- Page 115 and 116: ceedings 3rd Forest Engineering Con
- Page 117 and 118: Lämås, T., Ståhl, G. och Dahlin,
- Page 119: Anon., 2005. The Heureka Research P