At the international level, various definitions have been established for the compilation and publication of forest resources assessment results over the last decade. These international definitions frequently rely on terms that are not precisely specified for inventory purposes and do not completely cover the requirements arising from the application of National Forest Inventory (NFI) data. Also, with respect to conventional topics such as forest area and growing stock estimation, several terms and expressions referring to individual trees are not, or are only vaguely, defined until now. Since the individual tree is the basic element of any forest resources assessment, the clarification of tree-related terms is an important part of COST Action E43 to harmonise common reporting of National Forest Inventories. Based on a review of existing definitions and on the requirements for harmonised reporting, common tree-related definitions are established. One objective of this study is to refine and enhance the applicability of available tree and shrub definitions, in particular with regard to the distinction between trees and shrubs. The study also focuses on the parts or “elements” of trees and on the distinction between these elements as they are of particular importance in growing stock and biomass definitions. Furthermore, several definitions for tree characteristics such as “living” and “standing”, as well as tree variables such as height, length, diameter at breast height, and crown projection area are adjusted with respect to NFI purposes. A concluding discussion reflects upon the reviewed, refined and newly established definitions. The definitions presented in this paper provide a firm basis for a common set of harmonised reference definitions developed by COST Action E43 and contribute to the precise and consistent use of terms.

National forest inventories typically estimate individual tree volumes using models that rely on measurements of predictor variables such as tree height and dia

We simulated Austrian forests under different sustainable management scenarios. A reference scenario was compared to scenarios focusing on the provision of bioenergy, enhancing the delivery of wood products, and reduced harvesting rates. The standing stock of the stem biomass, carbon in stems, and the soil carbon pool were calculated for the period 2010–2100. We used the forest growth model Câldis and the soil carbon model Yasso07. The wood demand of all scenarios could be satisfied within the simulation period. The reference scenario led to a small decrease of the stem biomass. Scenarios aiming at a supply of more timber decreased the standing stock to a greater extent. Emphasizing the production of bioenergy was successful for several decades but ultimately exhausted the available resources for fuel wood. Lower harvesting rates reduced the standing stock of coniferous and increased the standing stock of deciduous forests. The soil carbon pool was marginally changed by different management strategies. We conclude that the production of long-living wood products is the preferred implementation of climate-smart forestry. The accumulation of carbon in the standing biomass is risky in the case of disturbances. The production of bioenergy is suitable as a byproduct of high value forest products.

Key message The increment estimation methods of European NFIs were explored by means of 12 essential NFI features. The results indicate various differences among NFIs within the commonly acknowledged methodological frame. The perspectives for harmonisation at the European level are promising. Context The estimation of increment is implemented differently in European National Forest Inventories (NFIs) due to different historical origins of NFIs and sampling designs and field assessments accommodated to country-specific conditions. The aspired harmonisation of increment estimation requires a comparison and an analysis of NFI methods. Aims The objective was to investigate the differences in volume increment estimation methods used in European NFIs. The conducted work shall set a basis for harmonisation at the European level which is needed to improve information on forest resources for various strategic processes. Methods A comprehensive enquiry was conducted during Cost Action FP1001 to explore the methods of increment estimation of 29 European NFIs. The enquiry built upon the preceding Cost Action E43 and was complemented by an analysis of literature to demonstrate the methodological backgrounds. Results The comparison of methods revealed differences concerning the NFI features such as sampling grids, periodicity of assessments, permanent and temporary plots, use of remote sensing, sample tree selection, components of forest growth, forest area changes, sampling thresholds, field measurements, drain assessment, involved models and tree parts included in estimates. Conclusion Increment estimation methods differ considerably among European NFIs. Their harmonisation introduces new issues into the harmonisation process. Recent accomplishments and the increased use of sample-based inventories in Europe make perspectives for harmonised reporting of increment estimation promising.

Key message: Volume predictions of sample trees are basic inputs for essential National Forest Inventory (NFI) estimates. The predicted volumes are rarely comparable among European NFIs because of country-specific dbh-thresholds and differences regarding the inclusion of the tree parts stump, stem top, and branches. Twenty-one European NFIs implemented harmonisation measures to provide consistent stem volume predictions for comparable forest resource estimates. Context: The harmonisation of forest information has become increasingly important. International programs and interest groups from the wood industry, energy, and environmental sectors require comparable information. European NFIs as primary source of forest information are well-placed to support policies and decision-making processes with harmonised estimates. Aims: The main objectives were to present the implementation of stem volume harmonisation by European NFIs, to obtain comparable growing stocks according to five reference definitions, and to compare the different results. Methods: The applied harmonisation approach identifies the deviations between country-level and common reference definitions. The deviations are minimised through country-specific bridging functions. Growing stocks were calculated from the un-harmonised, and harmonised stem volume estimates and comparisons were made. Results: The country-level growing stock results differ from the Cost Action E43 reference definition between − 8 and + 32%. Stumps and stem tops together account for 4 to 13% of stem volume, and large branches constitute 3 to 21% of broadleaved growing stock. Up to 6% of stem volume is allocated below the dbh-threshold. Conclusion: Comparable volume figures are available for the first time on a large-scale in Europe. The results indicate the importance of harmonisation for international forest statistics. The presented work contributes to the NFI harmonisation process in Europe in several ways regarding comparable NFI reporting and scenario modelling.