Multi-objective optimization of forest ecosystem services under uncertainty

• Integrated multi-objective optimization with wood price uncertainty. • Identified trade-offs and synergies, considering wood price uncertainty. • Optimal management allocations shift with spatial and harvest size constraints. • Spatial restrictions and wood price uncertainty impact NPV and carbon sequestration. • Results inform strategic decisions in forest management. Forest ecosystems deliver multiple services crucial for human wellbeing and welfare, with complex relationships among forest ecosystem services (FESs). Implementing sustainable forest management (SFM) policy requires insights into trade-offs, conflicts and synergies among key FESs, necessitating decision-support tools for multiple objectives. However, uncertainty in key parameters adds complexity. We formulated a tri-objective optimization problem concentrating on three vital ecosystem services in Nordic boreal forests: timber supply, climate change mitigation, and biodiversity conservation. Furthermore, future timber price uncertainty was integrated into the optimization model. Utilizing the TreeSim individual-tree growth and yield simulator, we simulated forest growth and yields, carbon stocks, and biodiversity values. Pareto-optimal solutions were found for four distinct management strategies using the epsilon-constrain method to solve the optimization problem. These management strategies differed in spatial restrictions on harvest location and timing, including considerations like harvest adjacency, green-up and maximum harvest opening area (MOA). The analysis revealed trade-offs among all three objectives, with variations influenced by management intensity. Furthermore, within the Pareto solutions for each strategy, a compromise solution was identified based on the knee-point method. The study demonstrated nuanced impacts of green-up constraints related to harvest practices, showing minor effects on harvesting, carbon sequestration, and biodiversity conservation when MOA was restricted to 35 hectares or less. However, more substantial impacts were observed with a MOA limited to 60 hectares or in a strategy without spatial restrictions. Our results underscore the importance of considering multiple objectives in forest management and policy under uncertain wood prices, preventing undesired effects from a singular or deterministic approach. This work provides insights into trade-offs and synergies, contributing to strategic planning and policy design.