Exploratory analysis of structural diversity indicators at stand level in three Italian beech sites and implications for sustainable forest management

  • Giada Bertini
  • Claudia Becagli
  • Ugo Chiavetta
  • Fabrizio Ferretti
  • Gianfranco Fabbio
  • Luca Salvati
Original Paper


The present study introduces an exploratory data analysis based on structural indicators with the aim to assess the effect of silvicultural practices on tree stand structure. The study was carried out in three Italian beech forests of different ages with stand structures that originated from dissimilar regeneration and cultivation techniques (Cansiglio, northern Italy, Chiarano, central Italy, and Mongiana, southern Italy). Ten structural indicators were considered when investigating the latent multivariate relationship between stand structure attributes before and after thinning operations by using a multiway factor analysis (MFA). The MFA results identified the older stand at Cansiglio as more homogeneous for cultivation regimes, and more stable to practices when compared with the younger sites (Chiarano and Mongiana). Heterogeneous stands were sensitive to silvicultural practice thus suggesting their possible impact on forest attributes. The proposed approach proved to be an operational tool to evaluate comprehensively the response of forest structure to planned interventions.


Forest diversity Multiway factor analysis Silviculture Structural diversity indicators Tree stand structure 


  1. ANPA (2000) Indicatori di gestione sostenibile in Italia. Agenzia Nazionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente, RomaGoogle Scholar
  2. Assmann E (1970) The principles of forest yield study. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p 506Google Scholar
  3. Becagli C, Puletti N, Chiavetta U, Cantiani P, Salvati L, Fabbio G (2014) Early impact of alternative thinning approaches on structure diversity and complexity at stand level in two beech forests in Italy. Ann Silv Res 37(1):55–63Google Scholar
  4. Bertini G, Fabbio G, Pichi M (2006) MAIN TreeS: a software designed for forest biodiversity assessment. In: Final forest biota meeting, Athens, May 9–10Google Scholar
  5. Biasi R, Colantoni A, Ferrara C, Ranalli F, Salvati L (2015) In-between sprawl and fires: long-term forest expansion and settlement dynamics at the Wildland–Urban Interface in Rome, Italy. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 22(6):467–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Briceño-Elizondo E, Jäger D, Lexer MJ, Garcia-Gonzalo J, Peltola H, Kellomäki S (2008) Multi-criteria evaluation of multi-purpose stand treatment programmes for Finnish boreal forests under changing climate. Ecol Ind 8(1):26–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coppi R, Bolasco S (1989) Multiway data analysis. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. Corona P, D’Orazio P, Lamonaca A, Portoghesi L (2005) L’indice Winkelmass per l’inventariazione a fini assestamentali della diversità strutturale di soprassuoli forestali. Forest 2(2):225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dale VH, Beyeler SC (2001) Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecol Ind 1(1):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards D, Søndergaard Jensen F, Marzano M, Mason B, Pizzirani S, Schelhaas M (2011) A theoretical framework to assess the impacts of forest management on the recreational value of European forests. Ecol Ind 11(1):81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fabbio G, Manetti MC, Bertini G (2006) Aspects of biological diversity in the CONECOFOR plots. I Structural and species diversity of the tree community. Ann CRA-SEL 30:17–28Google Scholar
  12. Failing L, Gregory R (2003) The common mistakes in designing biodiversity indicators for forest policy. J Environ Manag 68(2):121–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferrara A, Salvati L, Sateriano A, Carlucci M, Gitas I, Biasi R (2015) Unraveling the ‘stable’ landscape: a multi-factor analysis of unchanged agricultural and forest land (1987–2007) in a rapidly-expanding urban region. Urban Ecosyst 19(2):835–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferretti M, Bussotti F, Fabbio G, Petriccione B (2006a) Status and changes of key ecosystems attributes monitored at the CONECOFOR plots, 1995–2005—achievements, problems, perspectives. Ann CRA-SEL 34:115–120Google Scholar
  15. Ferretti M, Calderisi M, Bussotti F (2006b) Were there significant changes in the overall condition of the CONECOFOR plots over the 1995–2005 period? Ann CRA-SEL 34:101–114Google Scholar
  16. Fischer R, Pommerening A (2003) Methodology for stand structure assessments in the biodiversity test phase 2003–2005 of EU/ICP forests. Working group on biodiversity assessment in forests, ICP on assessment and monitoring of air pollution effects on forestsGoogle Scholar
  17. Gough AD, Innes JL, Allen SD (2008) Development of common indicators of sustainable forest management. Ecol Ind 8(5):425–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hickey GM (2008) Evaluating sustainable forest management. Ecol Ind 8(2):109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. INFC (2005) Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei Serbatoi Forestali di Carbonio. Metodi e Risultati, Edagricole, Milan, p 653Google Scholar
  20. Kotwal PC, Omprakash MC, Gairola S, Dugaya D (2008) Ecological indicators: imperative to sustainable forest management. Ecol Ind 8(1):104–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lavit C, Escoufier Y, Sabatier R, Triassac P (1994) The ACT (STATIS) method. Comput Stat Data Ann 18:97–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindenmayer DB, Margules CR, Botkin DB (2000) Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conserv Biol 14(4):941–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maes WH, Fontaine M, Rongé K, Hermy M, Muys B (2011) A quantitative indicator framework for stand level evaluation and monitoring of environmentally sustainable forest management. Ecol Ind 11(2):468–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McElhinny C, Gibbons P, Brack C, Bauhus J (2005) Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: its definition and measurement. Forest Ecol Manag 218:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MCPFE (2011). State of Europe’s forests 2011. Status and trend in sustainable forest management in Europe. Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  26. Mendoza GA, Prabhu R (2003) Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management. For Ecol Manag 174:329–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moldan B, Janouŝková S, Hák T (2012) How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: indicators and targets. Ecol Ind 17:4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neumann M, Starlinger F (2001) The significance of different indices for stand structure and diversity in forests. For Ecol Manag 145:91–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pili S, Grigoriadis E, Carlucci M, Clemente M, Salvati L (2017) Towards sustainable growth? A multi-criteria assessment of (changing) urban forms. Ecol Ind 76:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pommerening A (2006) Evaluating structural indices by reversing forest structural analysis. For Ecol Manag 224:266–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pretzsch H (2009) Forest dynamics growth and yield: from measurement to model. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rolstad J, Gjerde I, Gundersen VS, Sætersdal M (2002) Use of indicator species to assess forest continuity: a critique. Conserv Biol 16(1):253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Salvati L, Zitti M (2008) Assessing the impact of ecological and economic factors on land degradation vulnerability through multiway analysis. Ecol Ind 9:357–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salvati L, Zitti M (2009) Substitutability and equal weighting of environmental indicators: a proposal to estimate the importance of the different components of a composite index. Ecol Econ 68(4):1093–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singh RK, Murty HR, Gupta SK, Dikshit AK (2009) An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol Ind 9:189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Staudhammer CL, LeMay VM (2001) Introduction and evaluation of possible indices of stand structural diversity. Can J For Res 3:1105–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wolfslehner B, Vacik H (2011) Mapping indicator models: from intuitive problem structuring to quantified decision-making in sustainable forest management. Ecol Ind 11(2):274–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giada Bertini
    • 1
  • Claudia Becagli
    • 1
  • Ugo Chiavetta
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Ferretti
    • 1
  • Gianfranco Fabbio
    • 1
  • Luca Salvati
    • 1
  1. 1.CREA, Research Centre for Forestry and WoodArezzoItaly

Personalised recommendations