Forecasting forest development through modeling based on the legacy of forest structure over the past 43 years

  • E.Z. Baskent Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Forestry, Trabzon, Turkey.
  • Durmus Ali Celik Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Forestry, Trabzon, Turkey.


Aim of study: Sustainable management of forest ecosystems requires comprehensive coverage of data to reflect both the historical legacy and the future development of forests.  This study focuses on analyzing the spatio-temporal dynamics of forests over the past 43 years to help better forecast the future development of forest under various management strategies.

Area of study: The area is situated in Karaisalı district of Adana city in the southeastern corner of Turkey.

Material and methods: The historical pattern from 1969 to 2012 was assessed with digital forest cover type maps, produced with high resolution aerial photo interpretation using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The forest development over the next 120 years was forecasted using ecosystem-based multiple use forest management model (ETÇAP) to understand the cause-effect relationships under various management strategies.

Main results: The result showed that over the past 43 years while total forest areas decreased about 1194 ha (4%), the productive forest areas increased about 5397 ha (18%) with a decrease of degraded forest (5824 ha, 20%) and increase of maquis areas (2212 ha, 7%).The forecast of forest development under traditional management strategy resulted in an unsustainable forest due to broken initial age class structure, yet generated more total harvest (11%) due to 88% relaxing of even timber flow constraint. While more volume could be harvested under traditional management conditions, the sustainability of future forest is significantly jeopardized.

Research highlights: This result trongly implies that it is essential adopting modeling techniques to understand forest dynamics and forecast the future development comprehensively.

Keywords: Forest management; simulation; optimization; forest dynamics; land use change.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Durmus Ali Celik, Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Forestry, Trabzon, Turkey.
Forest Engineering


Armenteras D, Gast F, Villareal H. 2003. Andean forest fragmentation and the representativeness of protected natural areas in the eastern Andes. Colombia Biological Conservation 113, 245–256.

Baskent EZ, Jordan GA. 2002. Forest landscape management modeling using simulated annealing. Forest Ecology and Management 165, 29–45.

Baskent EZ, Baskaya S, Terzioglu S. 2008a. Developing and implementing participatory and ecosystem based multiple use forest management planning approach (ETÇAP): Yalnizçam case study. Forest Ecology and Management 256, 798–807.

Baskent EZ, Kadiogullari AI. 2007. Spatial and temporal dynamics of land use pattern in Turkey: A case study in Inegöl. Landscape and Urban Planning 81(4), 316-327.

Baskent EZ, Keles S, Yolasigmaz HA. 2008b. Comparing multi-purpose forest management with timber management in incorporating timber, carbon and oxygen values: A case study. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 23(2), 105-120.

Baskent EZ, Keles S. 2009. Developing alternative forest management planning strategies incorporating timber, water and carbon values: An examination of their interactions. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 14 (4), 467-480.

Baskent EZ, Mumcu-Kucuker D. 2010. Incorporating water production and carbon sequestration into forest management planning: a case study in Yalnizcam planning unit. Forest Systems 19(1), 98-111.

Bertomeu M, Romero C. 2001. Managing forest biodiversity: a zero – one goal programming approach. Agricultural Systems 68, 197-213.

Bettinger P, Boston K, Kim YH, Zhu J. 2007. Landscape-level optimization using tabu search and stand density-related forest management prescriptions. European Journal of Operational Research 176(2), 1265-1282.

Borges JG, Hoganson HM. 1999. Assessing the impact of management unit design and adjacency constraints on forestwide spatial conditions and timber revenues. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 29(11), 1764-1774.

Constantino M, Martins I, Borges J. 2008. A new mixed-integer programming model for harvest scheduling subject to maximum area restrictions. Operations Research 56(3), 542-551.

Davis LS, Johnson KN, Bettinger P, Howard TE. 2005. Forest management : to sustain ecological, economic, and social values. Waveland Press, Dubuque, USA. 804pp.

Diaz–Balteiro L, Romero C. 2003. Forest management optimisation models when carbon captured is considered: a goal programming approach. Forest Ecology and Management 174, 447-457.

Günlü A, Kadiogullari; A, Keles S, Baskent EZ. 2009. Spatiotemporal changes of landscape pattern in response to deforestation in Northeastern Turkey: a case study in Rize. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 148, 127-137. PMid:18240002

Hoen HF, Solberg B. 1994. Potential and economic efficiency of carbon sequestration in forest biomass through silvicultural management. Forest Science 40, 429 – 451.

Hof JG, Bevers M. 2000. Optimal timber harvest scheduling with spatially defined sediment objectives. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30(9), 1494-1500.

Houghton RA.1994. The worldwide extent of land-use change. BioScience 44, 305–313.

Ite UE, Adams WM. 1998. Forest conversion, conservation and forestry in Cross River State, Nigeria. Applied Geography 18(4), 301-314.

Johnson KH, Scheurman HL. 1977. Techniques for prescribing optimal timber harvest and investment under different objectives – discussion and synthesis. For. Sci. Mono. 18.

Kangas J, KuusipaloJ. 1993. Integrating biodiversity into forest management planning and decision-making. Forest Ecology and Management 61,1-15.

Karahalil U, Keles S, Baskent EZ, Köse S. 2009a. Integrating soil conservation, water production and timber production values in forest management planning using linear programming. African Journal of Agricultural Research 4(11), 1241-1250.

Karahalil U, Kadiogullari AI, Baskent EZ, Köse S. 2009b. The spatiotemporal forest cover changes in Köprülü Canyon National Park (1965-2008) in Turkey. African Journal of Biotechnology 8(18), 4495-4507.

Keles S, Baskent EZ. 2007. Modeling and analyzing timber production and carbon sequestration values of forest ecosystems: A case study. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 16(3), 473-479.

Keles S, Yolasigmaz HA, Baskent EZ. 2007. Long term modeling and analyzing of some important forest ecosystem values with linear programming. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin 16(8), 963-972.

Keles S. 2008. Designing and developing a decision support system for forest management planning, Doctoral thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.

Keles S, Baskent EZ. Kadiogullari AI;. 2009a. simulation-based multiple use forest management planning: A Framework. Kastamonu Univ., Journal of Faculty of Forestry 9(2), 136-145.

Keles S, Baskent EZ, Kadiogullari AI;, Bingöl Ö. 2009b. simulation-based forest management planning: ETÇAPOptimizasyon. Kastamonu Univ., Journal of Faculty of Forestry 9(2), 124-135

Köchli DA, Brang P. 2005. Simulating effects of forest management on selected public forest goods and services: A case study. Forest Ecology and Management 209, 57-68.

Krcmar E, Stennes B, Van Kooten GC, Vertinsky I. 2001. Carbon sequestration and land management under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research 135, 616 – 629.

Laurance WF. 1999. Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis. Biol. Conserv. 91, 109–117.

Masera OR, Garza-Caligaris JF, Kanninen M, Karjalainen T, Liski J, Nabuurs GJ, Puss-Inen A, De Jong BHJ, Mohren GMJ. 2003. Modeling carbon sequestration in afforestation, agroforestry and forest management projects: The CO2FIX V.2 approach. Ecological Modelling 164, 177-199.

Nelson J, Brodie JD. 1990. Comparison of random search algorithm and mixed integer programming for solving area-based forest plans. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 20, 934-942.

Noss RF. 2001. Beyond Kyoto: Forest management in a time of rapid climate change. Conservation Biology 15, 578-590.

Pukkala T, Nuutinen T, Kangas J. 1995. Integrating scenic and recreational amenities into numerical forest planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 32(3), 185 – 195.

Ribeiro R.P, Borges J.G, Oliveira V. 2004. A framework for data quality for Mediterranean sustainable ecosystem management. Annals of Forest Science 61(6), 557-568.

Seymour RS, Hunter ML. Jr. 1999. Principles of ecological forestry. In: Managing Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems (Hunter ML Jr) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 22–61.

Turner DP, Koerper GJ, Harmon ME, Lee JJ. 1995. A carbon budget for forests of the conterminous United States. Ecol. Appl. 5, 421–436.

Turner BL, Cortina Villar S, Foster D, Geoghegan J, Keys E, Klepeis P. et al. 2001. Deforestation in the southern Yucatan peninsular region an integrative approach. Forest Ecology and Management 154, 353-37.

Yolasigmaz HA. 2004. The concept and implementation of forest ecosystem management (a case study of Artvin Planning Unit). Doctoral thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.

Yoshimoto A, Brodie JD, Sessions J. 1994. A new heuristic to solve spatially constrained long-term harvest scheduling problems. Forest Science 40(3), 365-396.

How to Cite
BaskentE., & CelikD. A. (2013). Forecasting forest development through modeling based on the legacy of forest structure over the past 43 years. Forest Systems, 22(2), 232-240.
Research Articles