Skip to Main Content
U.S. Forest Service
Caring for the land and serving people

United States Department of Agriculture

Home > Search > Publication Information

  1. Share via EmailShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Twitter
    Dislike this pubLike this pub
    Author(s): Karl ​Gabler; Klemens Schadauer; Erkki Tomppo; Claude Vidal; Camille Bonhomme; Ronald E. McRoberts; Thomas Gschwantner
    Date: 2012
    Source: Forest Science. 58(3): 201-213.
    Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
    Station: Northern Research Station
    PDF: Download Publication  (217.0 KB)


    For international reporting purposes, information on forest resources often has to be supplied according to international definitions. Nevertheless, the country reports of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 indicate that countries either prefer to use their own forest definitions or use national classes of forest and other biomes as a basis for reclassification to resolve the discrepancy between national and international forest definitions. These preferences are due to the complexity encountered when dealing with the problem of transforming national estimates into estimates according to an international definition but are also due to the lack of a methodological foundation. In view of the multitude of existing national forest definitions and the increasing international reporting requirements, a thorough methodological consideration of the problem appears to be particularly necessary. Therefore, a mathematical approach for comparing national definitions to an international definition is developed. After formalization of definitions and illustration of the peculiarities in national forest definitions, the basics of set theory and simple logic are applied to derive six relevant cases that describe how national definitions of forest are distinct from that of FAO. As a result, we are able to assign each country to a specific case and thus provide a basis for further analyses. We also reflect on the reclassification problem and describe two examples that illustrate the influence of assessment methods in the aim to report according to a common definition.

    Publication Notes

    • Check the Northern Research Station web site to request a printed copy of this publication.
    • Our on-line publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat.
    • During the capture process some typographical errors may occur.
    • Please contact Sharon Hobrla, if you notice any errors which make this publication unusable.
    • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.


    ​Gabler, Karl; Schadauer, Klemens; Tomppo, Erkki; Vidal, Claude; Bonhomme, Camille; McRoberts, Ronald E.; Gschwantner, Thomas. 2012. An enquiry on forest areas reported to the global forest resources assessment—is harmonization needed? Forest Science. 58(3): 201-213.


    Google Scholar


    Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005, National Forest Inventories, COST Action E43

    Related Search

    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page