A commitment to sustainability is often demonstrated through both management plans and the implementation of practices. We applied content analysis to a sample of state forest management plans from the United States to examine the terms associated with sustainability, and to assess explicit demonstrations of a commitment to sustainable forestry. We expected that the language employed would signal an interpretation of terms associated with forest sustainability. We queried the plans for a list of terms associated with sustainability and analyzed the textual context. Eight categories and 11 subcategories were developed to code the plans for the presence/absence of statements associated with dimensions of sustainability. Our results show that the three dimensions of sustainability are addressed in these forest management plans. Further, certain terms generally associated with sustainability did not appear in the text of the forest management plans sampled. Both, procedural and prescriptive measures seem valid to ensure compliance with management requirements. Differences between regions regarding the use of terms and the emphasis given to each sustainability consideration are evident. Our findings suggest that forest management plans may lack some discursive components that might be important in aiding public understanding of forest management planning to evidence demonstrations of forest sustainability.

Forest management plans often suggest that economic, ecological, and/or social sustainability will be achieved if the proposed management actions are followed. Using forest plans developed by the US Department of Agriculture Forest Service and the Republic of Turkey, the purposes of this study were to (i) extract those statements that suggest sustainability will be achieved and (ii) assess whether there exist statistical differences between the two countries’ plans and the emphases of the findings. A content analysis and non-parametric statistical tests were employed to measure the frequency of a set of terms related to sustainability and to estimate significant differences in the use of sustainability terms in the plans sampled. Results suggest that ecological aspects are dominant in forest plans from both countries. While silviculture, sustained yield, and multiple use were the most frequently used terms in Turkish plans, the occurrences of conservation and recreation were significantly higher in US plans (p < 0.001). These findings suggest that the differences in the plans’ emphases could be attributable to the importance of Turkey’s forests for the wood production-related needs of Turkish society, whereas US national forests might no longer be seen as an important wood supply base but instead have been given a more “passive” forest use.

Over the last fifty years, management plans have become more descriptive with regard to potential sustainability of forest systems, raising questions about the feasibility of implementing management activities and ensuring sustainability of a wide variety of ecosystem services. To assess this issue, we conducted a survey among forest planning and operation research communities to understand their perceptions regarding the potential of a sample of sustainability statements currently used in forest plans to be incorporated into optimization models or other mathematical operations. The results revealed that only a few statements from the sample were deemed to have relatively mature or firm methodologies and data to enable inclusion in modern mathematical models for land use optimization. These statements were mostly related to economic sustainability, offering quantifiable information such as a non-declining flow of wood products over time and limits on the amount of timber harvested per decade. In contrast, sociocultural and, to some extent, ecological statements regarding sustainability were generally perceived to be more difficult to translate into mathematical modeling efforts. Particularly challenging were statements corresponding to sustaining natural or scenic characteristics of a forest. These findings may be attributed to various factors, including a lack of measurable indicators for sustainability and a potential lack of understanding about the modeling components and their interactions with planned management activities.

Tree species distributions presented as range maps are powerful tools for forest-based decision-making processes. In the United States, Silvics of North America is a well-known reference for over 200 tree species. However, the current range maps are likely outdated due to changes in land use, advancements in technology, shifts in plant hardiness zones due to climate change, and shifting societal values that influence the development of these resources. Therefore, a survey was distributed to two stakeholder groups, registered foresters in four states and members of several professional organizations, to gain insight into whether Silvics of North America range maps should be updated. Although the survey delivery method varied between the two survey sampling frames, the opinions on updating species range maps between the two stakeholder groups were similar. Both groups indicated that updating the current range maps would be valuable and would best be informed by remote sensing, national field inventories, and expert insight, and by adding color and perhaps importance classes.