Cited by 69Forest Management and PolicyLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesForest ecology and management

Ecosystem services of mixed species forest stands and monocultures: Comparing practitioners’ and scientists’ perceptions with formal scientific knowledge

Open access
Carnol, Monique, Baeten, Lander, Branquart, Etienne, Grégoire, Jean-Claude, Heughebaert, André, Muys, Bart, Ponette, Quentin, Verheyen, Kris·2014·Forestry An International Journal of Forest Research

Abstract

Mixed species stands might contribute to important goals of sustainable forest management, such as higher biological diversity, more resistance and resilience to disturbances and higher carbon storage. Knowledge of stakeholders' perceptions of such ecosystem services in mixed species stands is required for effective policy development. We showed that practitioners' and scientists' perceptions of ecosystem services in mixed species stands in Belgium differed from formal scientific knowledge derived from a synthesis of published studies. The positive perception of supporting, regulating and cultural services in mixed species stands contrasted with less conclusive results from the literature, where positive, negative and neutral effects were reported. Many respondents also signified a lack of information about regulating services. Furthermore, provisioning services were perceived as equal in mixed species stands and monocultures, in contrast to higher productivity demonstrated in mixed species stands in the literature. The regional (Flanders and Wallonia) ecological and socio-economic context influenced both the perception of ecosystem services and of the importance of management objectives. Our results highlighted the need to address the lack of scientific data, to adapt communication to the ecological and socio-economic context, as well as to improve information flow on regulating services and productivity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/forestry/cpu024

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 93 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Delbeuck, C. (ed.). Direction Ge ´ne ´rale des Ressources Naturelles et de l'Environnement, pp. 184-195.
  2. Delbeuck, C. (ed.). Direction Ge ´ne ´rale des Ressources Naturelles et de l'Environnement, pp. 202-207.
  3. MEA. 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Current State and Trends. Island Press.
  4. SPW-DGARNE-DNF. 2011 Carte d'identite ´du Patrimoine naturel de Wallonie. Edition 2011, Jambes, 26 pp.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carnol, M., Baeten, L., Branquart, E., Grégoire, J.-C., Heughebaert, A., Muys, B., Ponette, Q., & Verheyen, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Liège (BE)
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • UCLouvain (BE)
Corresponding author
Carnol, Monique
Venue
Forestry An International Journal of Forest Research
Published
2014-06-17
Volume
87
Issue
5
Pages
639-653
ISSN
  • 0015-752X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3626
OpenAlex
W2071940102
Cited by
69
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Forestry An International Journal of Forest Research (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • DIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
Belgian Federal Science Policy Office
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
Keywords
ecosystem services, mixed stands, monoculture, stakeholder perspectives, knowledge gaps, regulating services, provisioning services, cultural ecosystem services, supporting services, sustainable forest management, forest productivity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review