Resolving the trade-off between production and biodiversity conservation in integrated forest management: comparing tree selection practices of foresters and conservationists

Integrated forest management aims to balance economic timber production with biodiversity conservation. In continuous cover forests (the norm in Central Europe), selecting which trees to keep (especially “habitat trees” with microhabitats like cavities or deadwood) can profoundly affect both biodiversity and economic returns. This article uses a mixed methods approach (quantitative and qualitative) to compare how conservationists and foresters perform tree-selection exercises using forestry software (“I+”), focusing on a marteloscope plot in Germany.

Key findings include:

• Conservationists almost exclusively retain large trees (e.g., oaks with high microhabitat value), accepting higher economic costs.

• Foresters include more, smaller trees (e.g., hornbeams) with lower economic value and different trade-offs between habitat and revenue.

• Differences stem from distinct perceptions of what constitutes ecological value and opportunity costs, as well as underlying strategies and reasoning behind choices.

• Qualitative insights reveal substantial differences in how both groups weigh ecological structures, economic outcomes, and stand-level consequences.

This research suggests that fostering mutual understanding and shared benchmarks between conservation practitioners and forestry professionals is essential to reconcile conservation and production goals.