Germany is one of the most densely populated countries on earth. Over 12 percent of is total land is defined as settled area. It is not, however, the construction of roads and housing which is the most serious species-killer number one but high tech intensive agriculture, followed by forestry. Three quarters of all endangered mammals in Germany, for example, live in forests. There is therefore substantial public pressure on forestry to take biodiversity more into account within forest management.
The state forest administration is responding to demands for more protection of wild animals and plants with the concept of an ecologically adapted silviculture. Conservationist go further than this, however, with the demand that 10 percent of the total wooded area be kept completely free of forest management and that a further 10 percent be managed more extensively. At the same time, the difficult economic situation is forcing forestry enterprises to increase productivity through raising revenue and lowering costs.
Already now German forestry produces timber within a tight legal framework orientated towards an ecologically defined sustainability principle. At the same the importance of the renewable resource timber will increase in the future. Nevertheless, timber production must be economically viable for forestry enterprises. If additional demands beyond sustainability are made on them by society as regards to further enhance biodiversity, then these should also be adequately compensated for. Until now, however, these and other infrastructural benefits for society have been supplied by forestry virtually free of charge.
The problem of monetary evaluation infrastuctural services including biodiversity is still unresolved. A solution which would be politically and socially acceptable still represents a major challenge for forest policy. Under consideration of all the demands made on forests, it is to be recommended that forestry itself, whether in private, corporate or state hands, continues or begins again to prioritise the objective of timber production. On the other hand nature groups for example should be responsible for the consequences of the enhancement of biodiversity in the forests including the additional costs according to an adjusted forest management.
Key words: land-use, biodiversity, forestry, forest policy, evaluation of benefits.
Correspondence: Hans Essmann, Institut fur Forstpolitik und Raumordnung, Betroldstr. 17, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany
Telefax: +49-761-2033705