The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity
Abstract
New ideas in ecology have implications for managing forest ecosystems. The discipline of silviculture is at a crossroads. Silviculturists are under increasing pressure to develop practices that sustain the full function and dynamics of forested ecosystems and maintain ecosystem diversity and resilience while still providing needed wood products. A Critique of Silviculture offers a penetrating look at the current state of the field and provides suggestions for its future development.The book includes an overview of the historical developments of silvicultural techniques and describes how these developments are best understood in their contemporary philosophical, social, and ecological contexts. It also explains how the traditional strengths of silviculture are becoming limitations as society demands a varied set of benefits from forests and as we learn more about the importance of diversity on ecosystem functions and processes.The authors go on to explain how other fields, specifically ecology and complexity science, have developed in attempts to understand the diversity of nature and the variability and heterogeneity of ecosystems. The authors suggest that ideas and approaches from these fields could offer a road map to a new philosophical and practical approach that endorses managing forests as complex adaptive systems.A Critique of Silviculture bridges a gap between silviculture and ecology that has long hindered the adoption of new ideas. It breaks the mold of disciplinary thinking by directly linking new ideas and findings in ecology and complexity science to the field of silviculture. This is a critically important book that is essential reading for anyone involved with forest ecology, forestry, silviculture, or the management of forested ecosystems.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Silviculture: Concepts and Applications
Nyland, R. D. (1996) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 871
Cold-water corals: the biology and geology of deep-sea coral habitats
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-1421 · Cited by 186
Cited by
The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests
Paquette, A., & Messier, C. (2011) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00592.x · Cited by 924
Multiple forest attributes underpin the supply of multiple ecosystem services
Felipe-Lucia, M. R., Soliveres, S., Penone, C., Manning, P., van der Plas, F., Boch, S., Prati, D., Ammer, C., Schall, P., Gossner, M. M., et al. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07082-4 · Cited by 334
An individual-based process model to simulate landscape-scale forest ecosystem dynamics
Seidl, R., Rammer, W., Scheller, R. M., & Spies, T. A. (2012) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.015 · Cited by 309
Restoring fire-prone Inland Pacific landscapes: seven core principles
Hessburg, P. F., Churchill, D. J., Larson, A. J., Haugo, R. D., Miller, C., Spies, T. A., North, M. P., Povak, N. A., Belote, R. T., Singleton, P. H., et al. (2015) · Landscape Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0218-0 · Cited by 280
Viewing forests through the lens of complex systems science
Filotas, E., Parrott, L., Burton, P. J., Chazdon, R. L., Coates, K. D., Coll, L., Haeussler, S., Martin, K., Nocentini, S., Puettmann, K. J., et al. (2014) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1890/es13-00182.1 · Cited by 262
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2009-06-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 46-5609-46-5609
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W268047668
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 2
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.46-5609
- The paper
- A critique of silviculture: managing for complexity. (2009). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.46-5609
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.