Forests are critical for climate mitigation, yet minimizing harvesting may accelerate forest aging and mortality, potentially constraining long-term carbon sequestration while increasing timber dependence. Using 15.5 million tree records from China’s National Forest Inventory and a spatially explicit forest dynamics model, we assessed how alternative harvesting strategies affect carbon storage and wood production through 2100 under climate change. We show that current low-intensity harvesting promotes forest aging and mortality over time, reducing carbon-retention efficiency. In contrast, age-structured and spatially differentiated harvesting, expanded to suitable multifunctional forests, maintains more dynamic forest age structures, lowers mortality losses, increases total forest carbon stocks by 4.2%, and enhances timber production by 38% relative to current management regime. Despite modest reductions in standing biomass, gains in harvested wood products and reduced mortality have potential to generate a net climate benefit. Our results demonstrate that optimizing forest age structure through rational harvesting can reconcile carbon sequestration and wood supply, providing a scalable pathway for sustainable forest management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: