National Academies Press: OpenBook

National Capacity in Forestry Research (2002)

Chapter: Front Matter

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page i

National Capacity in Forestry Research

Committee on National Capacity in Forestry Research

Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources

Division on Earth and Life Studies

National Research Council






NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page ii

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20418

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.

This study was supported by Contract/Grant No. 98-G-203 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number 0-309-08456-3

Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press , 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. , Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055 ; (800) 624–6242 or (202) 334–3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu

Printed in the United States of America

Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page iii

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

National Academy of Sciences

National Academy of Engineering

Institute of Medicine

National Research Council

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm.A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts and Dr. Wm.A.Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page iv

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page v

Committee on National Capacity In Forestry Research

FREDERICK W.CUBBAGE, Chair, North Carolina State University

PERRY J.BROWN, University of Montana

THOMAS R.CROW, University of Michigan

JOHN C.GORDON, Yale University

JOHN W.HUMKE, The Nature Conservancy, Colorado

REX B.MCCULLOUGH, Weyerhaeuser Co., Washington

RONALD R.SEDEROFF, North Carolina State University

Staff

CHARLOTTE KIRK BAER, Study Director

LUCYNA K.KURTYKA, Project Officer *

KAREN BEARD, Policy Intern

SHIRLEY B.THATCHER, Senior Project Assistant **

STEPHANIE PADGHAM, Project Assistant

NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Editor

*through May 2000

**through April 2000

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page vi

Board On Agriculture and Natural Resources

HARLEY W. MOON, Chair, Iowa State University

CORNELIA B. FLORA, Iowa State University

ROBERT B. FRIDLEY, University of California

BARBARA GLENN, Federation of Animal Science Societies

W.R. (REG) GOMES, University of California

LINDA GOLODNER, National Consumers League

PERRY R. HAGENSTEIN, Institute for Forest Analysis, Planning, and Policy

GEORGE R. HALLBERG, The Cadmus Group, Inc.

CALESTOUS JUMA, Harvard University

GILBERT A. LEVEILLE, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, Denville, New Jersey

WHITNEY MACMILLAN, Cargill, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota

TERRY MEDLEY, DuPont Biosolutions Enterprise

WILLIAM L. OGREN, U.S. Department of Agriculture

ALICE PELL, Cornell University

NANCY J. RACHMAN, Novigen Sciences, Inc.

G.EDWARD SCHUH, University of Minnesota

BRIAN STASKAWICZ, University of California, Berkeley

JOHN W. SUTTIE, University of Wisconsin

JAMES TUMLINSON, USDA, ARS

JAMES J. ZUICHES, Washington State University

Staff

CHARLOTTE KIRK BAER, Director

SHIRLEY B. THATCHER, Administrative Assistant *

*through April 2000

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page vii

Preface

In the past decade, the forestry sector and the research capacity in that sector have seen substantial changes. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Forest Service asked the National Research Council Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources to conduct a study that focused on the nation's capacity in forestry research. Forest Service leaders recognize the necessity for improving forest productivity and stewardship of all the forests in the United States, including the national forests, urban forests, nonindustrial and industrial private forests, and tribal, state, and community forests. Continuous research findings must inform the management and protection of the forests. However, our national capacity in forestry research appears to have waned even as the demands placed on our forests and the need for enhanced technical knowledge have increased. We must have better information on the status of forestry research and future research priorities if we are to identify critical research needs and we need to identify the types of scientists and disciplines required to produce knowledge about our nation's forests.

This study of our nation's capacity in forestry research was conducted to review the expertise and future needs of forestry-research organizations and to review the current approaches and capacity of natural-resource education to address shortfalls of scientists expected in selected disciplines in the next 10 to 15 years. In performing our assessment, we relied on a wealth of background information about forestry research and education capacity. We obtained literature, policy statements, strategic plans, and white papers from many organizations interested in forestry research and education. We sponsored a workshop on forestry-research capacity on July 16–17, 1999, which included speakers, focus groups, and comments from interested organizations. The workshop was an important component of this project because it provided direction to the report. During the workshop, participants were asked to address questions that were part of this committee's task in breakout sessions. First, the participants were asked to determine critical issues and priorities in forestry. Then, they were asked to determine how these priorities should be met in relation to knowledge base, research capacity, interdisciplinary and spatial applications and incentives, and university curricula and programs. The input that the committee received from the workshop participants was recorded and used to direct the study and recommendations presented in Chapters 2 through 5. We also collected background material on budgets, scientific efforts, and trends in graduate education.

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page viii

Clearly, the USDA Forest Service remains the largest forestry research organization in the world, but has experienced fairly steady declines in real funding levels and in personnel and facilities. Other federal government organizations, such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), have increased their broad focus on terrestrial research and development, in either applied or basic sciences. Universities provide almost as much support for forestry research as the Forest Service. They have slightly fewer scientist full-time equivalents (FTEs) dedicated to research than does the Forest Service, but more than double their FTEs in teaching and extension. The forest products industry performs some forestry research directly and contributes some funds to university and other research cooperatives. In total, annual expenditures on forestry research probably exceed $500 million per year. About 1400 scientist FTEs are dedicated to forestry research in the United States, as well as 600 teaching FTEs and 240 extension FTEs.

The significant amount of resources expended on forestry research and the substantial number of scientists working in these areas provide capacity for analyses of many subjects. The diversity of funding sources and organizations involved in forestry research provides avenues for incorporating different perspectives on the multiplicity of important forest values and some competition among agencies to provide leadership in areas uniquely related to their mission. The USDA Forest Service has focused on traditional forest management and protection questions, and has expanded their purview to emerging issues such as sustainable forest management, global change, and forest monitoring. The National Research Initiative within USDA has focused on more basic biological forestry science; NASA on remote sensing applications of ecological issues; DOE on industrial energy or competitiveness; EPA on terrestrial impacts on air or water systems; and the U.S. Geological Survey and Fish and Wildlife Service on terrestrial and aquatic fauna.

Of these organizations, the USDA Forest Service has experienced slightly decreased research funding and capacity in terms of real dollars, and the forest products industry probably has as well. Universities have had stable personnel numbers in total, but dynamic fluctuations at individual institutions. The other organizations and sectors are relatively new contributors to the nation's forestry research capacity and expertise. Thus one's perception of problems in forestry research capacity depends on one's perspective. The addition of capacity from new organizations is welcome, and indeed should be augmented if possible. The reduction of capacity in the USDA Forest Service is cause for concern. These trends outlined in this report should promote agency introspection about the direction of and support for their programs, and serious collaboration with external clients to redress the causes as well as symptoms of that decline.

Despite the diversity and relative depth of forestry research capacity, this report identifies critical needs and makes suggestions for significant improvements. In the committee's opinion forestry research capacity is at a crossroads, if not a precipice. First and foremost, the population in the United States and the world continues to increase moderately, while the forest area is stable at best, if not actually declining. Furthermore, the number of demands for commodity production and for environmental services from

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page ix

forests has increased at least as rapidly as population, and perhaps faster as forests become fewer or more fragmented. Even successful management efforts to produce more commodities (e.g., timber) or services (e.g., recreation) must meet much stricter environmental and social standards than in the past, which may impede short-run productivity gains. New factors are affecting forestry, such as the international agreements on Sustainable Forest Management and on Criteria and Indicators, large increases in forest recreation and tourism, demands for water quality protection and use of Best Management Practices, concern about invasive species and fire, advances in biotechnology, and broad based regional assessments. Political debates about forestry issues at the local, state, national, and world levels have increased greatly, but government funding, legislation, and reform often faces gridlock. On the other hand, market forces such as certification and international competition for market share have made major changes in corporate forestry ownership, structure, and practices.

This dichotomy between more demands for forest products and services and fewer forests suggests that we need more intensive management of some areas for timber and commodities; more areas set aside or managed for wildlife, biodiversity, recreation and non-market values; and more cooperation among various stakeholders on public and, increasingly, on private forest lands. Better research and implementation of those research advances provide the only practical means that we can meet increased demands with decreased supply.

Will we be able to satisfy these increased forestry research needs? Have our efforts to date been satisfactory? Do we have adequate scientists, facilities, management, and support for research efforts now? Will the forestry research capacity be prepared for the likely future emerging issues? Will the current status quo suffice? In brief, this report suggests that our current forestry research capacity is neither adequate now, nor poised for success in the coming years. This report identifies significant declines in real research capacity, fragmented cooperation and poor communication among the principal providers and users of forestry research, inadequate support of both foundation and emerging disciplines, and little strategic planning to address future forestry research needs.

The forestry research sector is indeed at a crossroads. If left unchanged, its future will entail a steady erosion of intellectual and institutional capacity, and dwindling capacity and impact. Alternatively, forestry research could renew its commitment to innovation, cooperation, relevance, and extension in order to prosper and enhance the practice of forestry in this century. This latter vision will require levels of cooperation, support, real exchange of financial and technical support, and stakeholder support that do not currently exist. This report of forestry research capacity makes recommendations that will help achieve this positive, proactive role for forestry research in the future. It summarizes our findings and recommendations regarding each of those components of our assessment of national forestry-research capacity. It presents our conclusions about the status of forestry-research capacity and our specific recommendations for enhancing it. Our review and our recommendations can be used to shape future forestry-research efforts, enhance research capacity, and encourage public and private interests to help to achieve a strong research foundation for sustainable forest management.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page x

Forestry research has many strengths and beneficial effects. A progressive and productive relationship among all the key players in forestry research is essential. We hope that this report will be useful to those players, including federal and state entities, university and research organizations, industry and business, student populations, and those in positions of decision-making that will affect future generations.

FREDERICK W.CUBBAGE

Chair, Committee on National Capacity in Forestry Research

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xi

Acknowledgments

The Committee wishes to thank the many people who provided input by letter or at the public workshop. Special thanks are due to Richard Guldin, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, for his willingness to respond to the Committee's numerous requests for data and information. Without his assistance and perseverance, the report would not have become a reality.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's (NRC) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Jo Ellen Force, University of Idaho

Perry Hagenstein, Institute for Forest Analysis, Planning, and Policy

John A.Helms, University of California, Berkeley

T.Kent Kirk, Verona, WI

Dennis LeMaster, Purdue University

Kenneth Munson, International Paper

John Pait, The Timber Company

Paula Stephan, Georgia State University

The review of this report was overseen by Ellis Cowling, North Carolina State University, and Henry Riecken, University of Pennsylvania. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

Finally, the committee wishes to thank Charlotte Kirk Baer, study director, for her encouragement and guidance of this project to completion.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xii

Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xiii

Contents

Executive Summary, 1
    Defining Forestry-Research Capacity, 2
    The Value of Forestry Research, 2
    Key Players, 3
    Knowledge Base and Priorities, 3
    Assessing the Status of Forestry Research, 4
    Enhancing Forestry-Research Personnel, Facilities, and Infrastructure, 5
    Leadership and Strategic Planning, 6
    Creating Intellectual and Scientific-Research Capital, 9
    Increasing Strength, Collaboration, and Diversification in Forestry Research, 10
    Ensuring Progress, 12
1.     Need, Context, and Foundation for Forestry Research, 14
    The Current Study, 15
        Boundaries of the Assessment, 16
    Defining Forestry-Research Capacity, 16
    Institutional Framework for Forestry-Related Research, 17
    Early Forestry Research and Education, 18
    The Importance of Maintaining, Protecting, and Enhancing Today's Forests for Tomorrow, 19
    Future Challenges, 21
    Forestry Education and Research, 21
2.     The Essential Knowledge Base for Forestry Issues, 23
    Knowledge Base Required, 25
        Foundation Education and Research Priorities, 26
        Emerging Education and Research Priorities, 26
        Stewardship and Sustainability of Public Lands, 28
        Sustainable-Management Criteria and Indicators, 28
        Forest Certification, 33
        Forest-Industry Priorities, 36
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xiv

Contents

        New Forestry-Research Challenges, 37
    Workshop Input on an Essential Knowledge Base, 37
    Conclusions and Recommendations, 40
3.     Current Forestry-Research Capacity in the United States, 42
    Assessing Forestry-Research Capacity, 43
    A Portrait of the Forestry-Research Workforce, 43
        USDA Forest Service, 44
            Research Scientists, 47
            Research Productivity, 49
            Research Quality, 51
            Research Advisory Body, 51
        Professional Forestry Schools and Colleges, 52
            Faculty, 52
            Forestry Extension, 53
        Private Industry, 56
        Total Forestry Research Workforce by Sector, Function, and Sustainable Forest Management Criteria, 56
    Investments in Forestry Research, 59
        Forest Service Research Support, 59
        Other Federal Forestry-Research Funding, 61
        Leveraging Research Support, 63
        University Research Support, 68
        Contributions of the Forest Products Industry, 68
        Other Sources of Research Support, 70
    Evaluating Return on Investment in Forestry Research, 73
    Conclusions and Recommendations, 76
        Personnel, 76
        Research Quality, Productivity, and Efficacy, 78
        Fiscal Strength, 80
        Toward Greater Capacity, 81
4.     Preparing Forestry Scientists and Users of Forestry Science, 82
    The Future of Forestry Education, 83
    Trends in Enrollment and Graduation, 85
    Forestry as an Academic Subject, 87
    Curriculum as a Concept, 87
    Models for Forestry Education, 88
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xv

        Broad Trends in Forestry Education, 90
    What About Research?, 91
    What about Curricula?, 92
    Adequacy and Capacity of University Programs to Meet Near-Future Needs, 93
        Disciplinary Breadth of Forestry Education, 93
        Numbers of Scientists, 94
        Diversity of Scientists, 98
        Future Demand for Scientists, 99
    Interdisciplinary and Integrative Capabilities, 100
        Institutional Arrangements, 100
    Conclusions and Recommendations, 102
5.     Capacity of Forestry-Research Organizations to Meet Future Research Needs, 105
    Continuity Through Time: Resources to Maintain Operations, 106
        University System, 107
        Forest Industry, 110
        USDA Forest Service, 111
    Facilities and Equipment to Perform High-Quality Research, 112
    Access to People with Appropriate Skills and Competences, 114
    Focus on High-Priority Goals and Needs, 115
    Conclusions and Recommendations, 116
6.     Summary and Conclusions, 119
    Recommendations, 120
    Conclusions, 127
References, 128
Appendixes, 136
    Appendix A—    Workshop Agenda, 136
    Appendix B—    Breakout Group Questions, 139
About the Authors, 140
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xvi

Tables and Boxes

Tables

1–1    Definitions of terms commonly used to describe what forests provide, 20
2–1    Comparative forestry-science education and research priorities according to selected sources, 27
2–2    Criteria for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests developed from the Montreal process, 30
3–1    Forestry-research statistics for the USDA Forest Service, fiscal years 1980–1999, 45
3–2    USDA Forest Service research funding by budget line item, fiscal years 1980–1999, 46
3–3    Number of Forest Service research scientists by discipline, fiscal year 1985–1998, 48
3–4    Number of Forest Service publications by discipline, fiscal years 1981–1998, 50
3–5    Trends in forestry employment in universities, 54
3–6    Full Time Equivalents of U.S. Forestry Scientists by Sector, Function, and SFM Criterion, 2001, 58
3–7    McIntire-Stennis funding in actual and constant dollars, fiscal year 1980–2000, 64
3–8    Distribution of McIntire-Stennis funds to eligible state institutions of institutional units fiscal year 2000, 65
3–9    Sustainable-forestry research funding by industry through the Sustainable Forestry Initiative program, in dollars, 69
3–10    Federal funding for forestry research by selected agency and program, fiscal years 1994–2000, 71
3–11    Returns on investments in forestry research, 75
4–1    Enrollment and degrees awarded in forest science programs, 1989–1998, 86
4–2    Enrollment in forestry, natural resources, and agriculture programs by program and degree level, 1993–1999, 86
4–3    Enrollment in forest science programs by academic specialization, 1993–1999, 95
4–4    Forest sciences enrollment statistics by gender, ethnicity, and citizenship, fall 1999, 98

Boxes

2–1    Excerpts from input received on education and research needs to form an essential knowledge base, 38
3–1    Hatch and McIntire-Stennis proposals at the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin, 62
3–2    Reviews improve quality of forestry research at the University of California, Berkeley, 67
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xvii

4–1    Graduate student support, 97
4–2    The corporate environmental management program at the University of Michigan —an example of creative partnerships within the University, and between business and the University, 100
4–3    National Science Foundation's Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training program, 101
4–4    NSF's Luquillo Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) —An Example of Forestry Research Conducted through a creative partnership between universities and federal research agencies, 102
5–1    Northwest stand management cooperative, 106
5–2    Centers of excellence in forestry, 107
5–3    Virtual center concept at work, 109
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×

Page xviii

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R16
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R17
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2002. National Capacity in Forestry Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10384.
×
Page R18
Next: Executive Summary »
National Capacity in Forestry Research Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $52.00 Buy Ebook | $41.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Forests are major components of the earth's natural resources and they are increasingly critical to the welfare of the U.S. economy, environment, and population. Desires to improve forest management and productivity, preserve biodiversity, maintain ecologic integrity, and provide societal services, such as recreation and tourism, necessitate a strong forestry-research base.

Given the clear importance of forestry research in sustaining forests for the future, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service asked the Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources of the National Academies to undertake a study of the nation's capacity in forestry research. The Committee on National Capacity in Forestry Research was appointed to carry out the study, which was conducted to review the current expertise and status of forestry research and to examine the approaches of natural resources education and forestry-research organizations to meet future needs.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!