Disturbance regimes are changing in forests across the world in response to global climate change. Despite the profound impacts of disturbances on ecosystem services and biodiversity, assessments of disturbances at the global scale remain scarce. Here, we analyzed natural disturbances in boreal and temperate forest ecosystems for the period 2001–2014, aiming to 1) quantify their within‐ and between‐biome variation and 2) compare the climate sensitivity of disturbances across biomes. We studied 103 unmanaged forest landscapes with a total land area of 28.2 × 10 ⁶ ha, distributed across five continents. A consistent and comprehensive quantification of disturbances was derived by combining satellite‐based disturbance maps with local expert knowledge of disturbance agents. We used Gaussian finite mixture models to identify clusters of landscapes with similar disturbance activity as indicated by the percent forest area disturbed as well as the size, edge density and perimeter–area‐ratio of disturbed patches. The climate sensitivity of disturbances was analyzed using Bayesian generalized linear mixed effect models and a globally consistent climate dataset. Within‐biome variation in natural disturbances was high in both boreal and temperate biomes, and disturbance patterns did not vary systematically with latitude or biome. The emergent clusters of disturbance activity in the boreal zone were similar to those in the temperate zone, but boreal landscapes were more likely to experience high disturbance activity than their temperate counterparts. Across both biomes high disturbance activity was particularly associated with wildfire, and was consistently linked to years with warmer and drier than average conditions. Natural disturbances are a key driver of variability in boreal and temperate forest ecosystems, with high similarity in the disturbance patterns between both biomes. The universally high climate sensitivity of disturbances across boreal and temperate ecosystems indicates that future climate change could substantially increase disturbance activity.

We celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Canadian Journal of Forest Research by reflecting on the considerable progress accomplished in select areas of Canadian wildland fire science over the past half century. Specifically, we discuss key developments and contributions in the creation of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System; the relationships between wildland fire and weather, climate, and climate change; fire ecology; operational decision support; and wildland fire management. We also discuss the evolution of wildland fire management in Banff National Park as a case study. We conclude by discussing some possible directions in future Canadian wildland fire research including the further evaluation of fire severity measurements and effects; the efficacy of fuel management treatments; climate change effects and mitigation; further refinement of models pertaining to fire risk analysis, fire behaviour, and fire weather; and the integration of forest management and ecological restoration with wildland fire risk reduction. Throughout the paper, we reference many contributions published in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research, which has been at the forefront of international wildland fire science.

The methods and approaches selected in a restoration project depend on the degree of ecosystem degradation and on future land use plans. Programs of monitoring and evaluation must therefore compare restoration progress and effectiveness relative to untreated conditions and to target conditions, particularly with respect to the attributes and functions essential to land use objectives. It is usually not feasible to directly monitor all important forest attributes and functions, so a few indicators must be selected. It is argued that natural recovery (or passive restoration) should always be considered a management option, and that the most appropriate evaluation of restoration techniques is by comparison with untreated areas that have been left for the same period of time as treated areas. Unambiguous evaluation therefore requires all restoration projects to be considered as formal experiments with proper controls, replicates, and the randomized application of treatment options. Adaptation to anticipated levels of climate change can be incorporated by emulating forest compositions and structures currently prevailing elsewhere under analogues of future climates and associated disturbance regimes. A structured program of monitoring and evaluation within a framework of adaptive management will engender management flexibility and resilience in an uncertain future.