Remote sensing and forest inventories in Nordic countries – roadmap for the future

References

• Ali-Sisto D, Packalen P. 2017. Forest Change Detection by Using Point Clouds from Dense Image Matching Together with a LiDAR-Derived Terrain Model. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing. 99:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Anon. 1914. Värmlands läns skogar. Betänkande avgivet av kommissionen för försökstaxering rörande virkeskapital, tillväxt m.m. av skogarna i Värmlands län. Stockholm, Sweden. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Ågren AM, Lidberg W, Strömgren M, Ogilvie J, Arp PA. 2014. Evaluating digital terrain indices for soil wetness mapping – a Swedish case study. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci. 18:3623–3634. doi: 10.5194/hess-18-3623-2014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohlin J, Bohlin I, Jonzén J, Nilsson M. 2017. Mapping forest attributes using data from stereophotogrammetry of aerial images and field data from the national forest inventory. Silva Fenn. 51(2). https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.2021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollandsås OM, Maltamo M, Gobakken T, Næsset E, Lien V. 2011. Prediction of timber quality parameters of forest stands by means of small footprint airborne laser scanner data. Int J For Eng. 22:14–23.
   Google Scholar
• Breidenbach J, Astrup R. 2012. Small area estimation of forest attributes in the Norwegian national forest inventory. Eur J For Res. 131:1255–1267. doi: 10.1007/s10342-012-0596-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breidenbach J, McRoberts RE, Astrup R. 2015. Empirical coverage of model-based variance estimators for remote sensing assisted estimation of stand-level timber volume. Remote Sens Environ. 173:274–281. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.07.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chirici G, McRoberts RE, Winter S, Bertini R, Braendli U-B, Asensio IA, Bastrup-Birk A, Rondeux J, Barsoum N, Marchetti M. 2012. National forest inventory contributions to forest biodiversity monitoring. For Sci. 58:257–268.
   Google Scholar
• Corona P. 2010. Integration of forest mapping and inventory to support forest management. IForest. 3:59–64. doi: 10.3832/ifor0531-003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corona P. 2016. Consolidating new paradigms in large-scale monitoring and assessment of forest ecosystems. Environ Res. 144:8–14. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2015.10.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotta H. 1804. Systematische Anleitung zur Taxation der Waldungen. Berlin.
   Google Scholar
• Det statistiske Departement. 1925. Skovbruget i Danmark i 1923, Statistiske Meddelelser 4. række, 74. bind, 1. hæfte.
   Google Scholar
• Ehlers S, Grafström A, Nyström K, Olsson H, Ståhl G. 2013. Data assimilation in stand-level forest inventories. Can J For Res. 43:1104–1113. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2013-0250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eid T, Gobakken T, Næsset E. 2004. Comparing stand inventories for large areas based on photo-interpretation and laser scanning by means of cost-plus-loss analyses. Scand J For Res. 19:512–523. doi: 10.1080/02827580410019463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fransson JES, Walter F, Blennow K, Gustavsson A, Ulander LMH. 2002. Detection of storm-damaged forested areas using airborne CARABAS-II VHF SAR image data. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens. 40:2170–2175. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2002.804913
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fridman J, Holm S, Nilsson M, Nilsson P, Ringvall AH, Ståhl G. 2014. Adapting national forest inventories to changing requirements – the case of the Swedish national forest inventory at the turn of the 20th century. Silva Fenn. 48(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.14214/sf.1095.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fryjordet T. 1962. Skogadministrasjonen i Norge gjennom tidene. Bind II. Tiden etter 1857. Landsbruksdepartementet, Skogdirektoratet og Direktoratet for Statens skoger, Oslo, Norway. 710 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Fryjordet T. 1968. Generalforstamtet 1739-1746. Norsk Skogbruksmuseums særpublikasjon nr. 1. Vol. 203. Elverum: Norsk Skogbruksmuseum; p. 1739–1746.
   Google Scholar
• Gjertsen AK. 2007. Accuracy of forest mapping based on Landsat TM data and a kNN-based method. Remote Sens Environ. 110:420–430. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.08.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gjertsen AK, Tomter S, Tomppo E. 2000. Combined use of NFI sample plots and Landsat TM data to provide forest information on municipality level. Conference on Remote Sensing and Forest Monitoring, Proceedings;Jun 1–3, 1999;Rogow, Poland. p. 167–174.
   Google Scholar
• Gobakken T, Bollandsås O-M, Næsset E. 2014. Comparing biophysical forest characteristics estimated from photogrammetric matching of aerial images and airborne laser scanning data. Scand J For Res. 30:73–86. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2014.961954
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grafström A, Saarela S, Ene L. 2014. Efficient sampling strategies for forest inventories by spreading the sample in auxiliary space. Can J For Res. 44:1156–1164. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2014-0202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grafström A, Zhao X, Nylander M, Petersson H. 2017. A new sampling strategy for forest inventories applied to the temporary clusters of the Swedish national forest inventory. Can J For Res. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2017-0095.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregoire TG, Ståhl G, Næsset E, Gobakken T, Nelson R, Holm S. 2011. Model-assisted estimation of biomass in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway. Can J Forest Res. 41:83–95. doi: 10.1139/X10-195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haakana H. 2017. Multi-source forest inventory data for forest production and utilization analyses at different levels. Diss For. (243). https://doi.org/10.14214/df.243.
   Google Scholar
• Haara A, Korhonen K. 2004. Kuvioittaisen arvioinnin luotettavuus. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja. 4/2004:489–508.
   Google Scholar
• Hagner O, Reese H. 2007. A method for calibrated maximum likelihood classification of forest types. Remote Sens Environ. 110:438–444. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.08.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen K, Malmaeus M. 2016. Ecosystem services in Swedish forests. Scand J For Res. 31:626–640. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1164888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig GL. 1795. Anweisung zur Taxation der Forste. Gießen.
   Google Scholar
• Heikkinen J. 2006. Assessment of uncertainty in spatially systematic sampling. In: Kangas A, Maltamo M, editors. Forest inventory, methods and applications. Managing forest ecosystems. Dordrect: Springer; Chapter 10, Vol. 10, p. 155–178. 362 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Ilvessalo Y. 1927. Suomen metsät. Tulokset vuosina 1921–1924 suoritetusta valtakunnan metsien arvioinnista. Commun Inst For Fenn. 11. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Kallio E, Maltamo M, Packalen P. 2010. Effect of sampling intensity on the accuracy of species-specific volume estimates derived with aerial data. Silvilaser 2010 proceedings.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas A. 2006. Model-based inference. In: Kangas A, Maltamo M, editors. Forest inventory, methods and applications. Managing forest ecosystems. Dordrect: Springer; Chapter 3, Vol. 10, p. 39–52. 362 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas A. 2010. Value of forest information. Eur J For Res. 129:863–874. doi: 10.1007/s10342-009-0281-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangas A, Hartikainen M, Miettinen K. 2014. Simultaneous optimization of harvest schedule and measurement strategy. Scand J For Res. 29:224–233. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2013.823237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangas A, Myllymäki M, Gobakken T, Næsset E. 2016. Model-assisted forest inventory with parametric, semi-parametric and non-parametric models. Can J For Res. 46:855–868. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2015-0504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kankare V, Joensuu M, Vauhkonen J, Holopainen M, Tanhuanpää T, Vastaranta M, Hyyppä J, Hyyppä H, Alho P, Rikala J, et al. 2014. Estimation of the timber quality of Scots pine with terrestrial laser scanning. Forests. 5:1879–1895. doi:10.3390/f5081879.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kivinen VP. 2004. A genetic algorithm approach to tree bucking optimization. For Sci. 50:696–710.
   Google Scholar
• Koivuniemi J, Korhonen KT. 2006. Inventory by compartments. In: Kangas A, Maltamo M, editors. Forest inventory, methodology and applications. Managing forest ecosystems. Dordrecht: Springer; Vol. 10, p. 271–278.
   Google Scholar
• Korhonen L, Pippuri I, Packalen P, Heikkinen V, Maltamo M, Heikkilä J. 2013. Detection of the need for seedling stand tending using high-resolution remote sensing data. Silva Fenn. 47(2). doi: 10.14214/sf.952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korpela I, Tuomola T, Tokola T, Dahlin B. 2008. Appraisal of seedling stand vegetation with airborne imagery and discrete-return LiDAR – an exploratory analysis. Silva Fenn. 42(5). https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotivuori E, Korhonen L, Packalen P. 2016. Nationwide airborne laser scanning based models for volume, biomass and dominant height in Finland. Silva Fenn. 50: 28p. http://dx.doi.org/10.14214/sf.1567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuusela K, Salminen S. 1969. The 5’th national forest inventory in Finland. General design, instructions for field work and data processing. Commun Inst For Fenn. 69.
   Google Scholar
• Langsæter A. 1926. Om beregning av middelfeilen ved regelmessige linjetaksering. Meddel fra det norske Skogforsøksvesen. 4:431–563.
   Google Scholar
• Lappi J. 1993. Metsäbiometria menetelmiä [Methods of forest biometrics, in Finnish]. Silva Carelica 24. University of Joensuu.
   Google Scholar
• Lindeberg JW. 1924. Über die Berechnung des Mittelfehlers des Resultates einer Linientaxierung. Acta Forestalia Fennica 25. 22 p.
   Google Scholar
• Loetsch F, Haller KE. 1973. Forest inventory. Vol. 1. BLV Verlagsgesellschaft. 436 p.
   Google Scholar
• Magnussen S, Frazer G, Penner M. 2016. Alternative mean-squared error estimators for synthetic estimators of domain means. J Appl Stat. 43(14):2550–2573. doi: 10.1080/02664763.2016.1142942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Bollandsås OM, Gobakken T, Næsset E. 2016. Large-scale prediction of aboveground biomass in heterogeneous mountain forests by means of airborne laser scanning. Can J For Res. 46:1138–1144. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2016-0086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Bollandsås OM, Vauhkonen J, Breidenbach J, Gobakken T, Næsset E. 2010. Comparing different methods for prediction of mean crown height in Norway spruce stands using airborne laser scanner data. Forestry. 83:257–268. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpq008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Korhonen KT, Packalén P, Mehtätalo L, Suvanto A. 2007. Testing the usability of truncated angle count sample plots as ground truth in airborne laser scanning-based forest inventories. Forestry. 80:73–81. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpl045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Packalen P. 2014. Species specific management inventory in Finland. In: Maltamo M, Naesset E, Vauhkonen J., editors. Forestry applications of airborne laser scanning – concepts and case studies. Managing forest ecosystems. Vol. 27. Dordrecht: Springer; p. 241–252.
   Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Packalén P, Suvanto A, Korhonen KT, Mehtätalo L, Hyvönen P. 2009. Combining ALS and NFI training data for forest management planning: a case study in Kuortane, western Finland. Eur J For Res. 128:305–317. doi: 10.1007/s10342-009-0266-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Peuhkurinen J, Malinen J, Vauhkonen J, Packalén P, Tokola T. 2009. Predicting tree attributes and quality characteristics of Scots pine using airborne laser scanning data. Silva Fenn. 43:507–521. doi: 10.14214/sf.203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metla Statistics. 2011. Available at: http://www.metla.fi/metinfo/kestavyys/c3-coverage-offorest.htm.
   Google Scholar
• McRoberts RE, Næsset E, Gobakken T, Bollandsås O-M. 2015. Indirect and direct estimation of forest biomass change using forest inventory and airborne laser scanning data. Remote Sens Environ. 164:36–42. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.02.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mononen L, Auvinen A-P, Ahokumpu A-L, Rönkä M, Aarras N, Tolvanen H, Kamppinen M, Viirret E, Kumpula T, Vihervaara P. 2016. National ecosystem service indicators: measures of social–ecological sustainability. Ecol Indic. 61:27–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myllymäki M, Gobakken T, Næsset E, Kangas A. 2017. The efficiency of poststratification compared with model-assisted estimation. Can J For Res. 47:515–526. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2016-0383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E. 1991. Stand volume estimation by means of aerial photographs. Res Pap Skogforsk. 4/91:1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Næsset E. 2004. Practical large-scale forest stand inventory using a small-footprint airborne scanning laser. Scand J For Res. 19:164–179. doi: 10.1080/02827580310019257
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E. 2007. Airborne laser scanning as a method in operational forest inventory: Status of accuracy assessments accomplished in Scandinavia. Scand J For Res. 22:433–442. doi: 10.1080/02827580701672147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E. 2014. Area-based inventory in Norway – from innovation to an operational reality. In: Maltamo M, Naesset E, Vauhkonen J, editors. Forestry applications of airborne Laser scanning – concepts and case studies. Managing forest ecosystems. Vol. 27. Dordrecht: Springer; p. 215–240.
   Google Scholar
• Næsset E, Bjerknes K-O. 2001. Estimating tree heights and number of stems in young forest stands using airborne laser scanner data. Remote Sens Environ. 78:328–340. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00228-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E, Bollandsås OM, Gobakken T, Solberg S, McRoberts RE. 2015. The effects of field plot size on model-assisted estimation of aboveground biomass change using multitemporal interferometric SAR and airborne laser scanning data. Remote Sens Environ. 168:252–264. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E, Gobakken T. 2008. Estimation of above- and below-ground biomass across regions of the boreal forest zone using airborne laser. Remote Sens Environ. 112:3079–3090. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2008.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset E, Skråmo G, Tomter SM. 1992. Norske erfaringer med bruk av flybilder ved skogregistrering (Norwegian experiences by using aerial photography in forest inventory). In: Næsset E, editor. Skogregistrering og skogbruksplanlegging. Aktuelt fra Skogforsk 13:3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson M, Nordkvist K, Jonzén J, Lindgren N, Axensten P, Wallerman J, Egberth M, Larsson S, Nilsson L, Eriksson J. 2017. A nationwide forest attribute map of Sweden predicted using airborne laser scanning data and field data from the national forest inventory. Remote Sens Environ. 194(194):447–454. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2016.10.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nissen K. 1937. Brødrene von Langen og deres virksomhet i Norge 1937–1947. Tidsskift for Skogbruk. 45(12):379–387.
   Google Scholar
• Nord-Larsen T, Johannsen VK, Riis-Nielsen T, Thomsen IB, Larsen K, Jørgensen BB. 2014. Skove og plantager 2013, Skov & Landskab, Frederiksberg, 2014. 65 p.
   Google Scholar
• Nord-Larsen T, Riis-Nielsen T, Ottosen MB. 2017. Forest resource map of Denmark: mapping of Danish forest resource using ALS from 2014–2015. Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen. IGN report.
   Google Scholar
• Nord-Larsen T, Schumacher J. 2012. Estimation of forest resources from a country wide laser scanning survey and national forest inventory data. Remote Sens Environ. 119:148–157. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.12.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsson H. 2015. Forestry remote sensing in Sweden. In: Proceedings of the EARSeL Symposium; June 15–18; Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Ørka HO, Gobakken T, Næsset E. 2016. Predicting attributes of regeneration forests using airborne laser scanning. Can J Remote Sens. 42:541–553. doi: 10.1080/07038992.2016.1199269
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packalen P, Strunk J, Pitkänen J, Temesgen H, Maltamo M. 2015. Edge-tree correction for predicting forest inventory attributes using area-based approach with airborne Laser scanning. IEEE J Sel Topics Appl Earth Observ Remote Sens. 8:1274–1280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packalén P, Maltamo M. 2007. The k-MSN method for the prediction of species-specific stand attributes using airborne laser scanning and aerial photographs. Remote Sens Environ. 109(3):328–341. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2007.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packalén P, Maltamo M. 2008. Estimation of species-specific diameter distributions using airborne laser scanning and aerial photographs. Can J For Res. 38:1750–1760. doi: 10.1139/X08-037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peuhkurinen J, Maltamo M, Malinen J. 2008. Estimating species-specific diameter distributions and saw log recoveries of boreal forests from airborne laser scanning data and aerial photographs: a distribution-based approach. Silva Fenn. 42(4):625–641. doi: 10.14214/sf.237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poso S, Kujala M. 1971. Groupwise sampling based on photo and filed plots in forest inventory of Inari. Utsjoki and Enontekiö. Folia Forestalia 132. 40 p. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Puliti S, Gobakken T, Ørka HO, Næsset E. 2017. Assessing 3D point clouds from aerial photographs for species-specific forest inventories. Scand J For Res. 32:68–79. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1186727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahlf J, Breidenbach J, Solberg S, Næsset E, Astrup R. 2014. Comparison of four types of 3D data for timber volume estimation remote sensing of environment. Remote Sens Environ. 155:325–333. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2014.08.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranneby B, Cruse T, Hägglund B, Jonasson H, Swärd J. 1987. Designing a new national forest inventory for Sweden. Studia Forestalia Suecica no. 177. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Räty M, Heikkinen J, Kangas A. 2011. Kriging with external drift in model localization. Math Comput For Nat Resour Sci. 3:1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Räty M, Kangas A. 2012. Comparison of k-MSN and Kriging in local prediction. For Ecol Manage. 263:47–56. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.09.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rondeux J, Bertini R, Bastrup-Birk A, Corona P, Latte N, McRoberts RE, Ståhl G, Winter S, Chirici G. 2012. Assessing deadwood using harmonized national forest inventory data. For Sci. 58:269–283.
   Google Scholar
• Saad R, Wallerman J, Lämås T. 2015. Estimating stem diameter distributions from airborne laser scanning data and their effects on long term forest management planning. Scand J For Res. 30:186–196. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2014.978888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saarela S, Grafström A, Ståhl G, Kangas A, Holopainen M, Tuominen S, Nordkvist K, Hyyppä J. 2015. Model-assisted estimation of growing stock volume using different combinations of LiDAR and Landsat data as auxiliary information. Remote Sens Environ. 158:431–440. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2014.11.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saarela S, Schnell S, Grafström A, Tuominen S, Nordkvist K, Hyyppä J, Kangas A, Ståhl G. 2015. Effects of sample size and model form on the accuracy of model-based estimators of growing stock volume. Can J For Res. 45:1524–1534. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2015-0077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saarela S, Schnell S, Tuominen S, Balazs A, Hyyppä J, Grafström A, Ståhl G. 2016. Effects of positional errors in model-assisted and model-based estimation of growing stock volume. Remote Sens Environ. 172:101–108. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savolainen P. 2016. VMI-koealojen käyttö SMK-puustotulkinnassa. Technical report. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Sironen S, Kangas A, Maltamo M, Kalliovirta J. 2008. Localization of growth estimates using non-parametric imputation methods. For Ecol Manage. 256:674–684. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.05.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SOU. 1932. SOU 1932:26. Uppskattning av Sveriges skogstillgångar. Stockholm, Sweden. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Ståhl G. 1992. En studie av kvalitet i skogliga avdelningsdata som insamlats med subjektiva inventerigsmetoder [Summary a study on the quality of compartmentwise forest data acquired by subjective inventory methods]. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Biometry and Forest Management. Rapport 24. 128 p.
   Google Scholar
• Ståhl G, Allard A, Esseen P-A, Glimskär A, Ringvall A, Svensson J, Sundquist S, Christensen P, Torell AG, Högström M, et al. 2011. National inventory of landscapes in Sweden (NILS)—scope, design, and experiences from establishing a multiscale biodiversity monitoring system. Environ Monit Assess. 173:579–595. doi: 10.1007/s10661-010-1406-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ståhl G, Carlsson D, Bondesson L. 1994. A method to determine optimal stand data acquisition policies. For Sci. 40:630–649.
   Google Scholar
• Ståhl G, Holm S, Gregoire TG, Gobakken T, Næsset E, Nelson R. 2011. Model-based inference for biomass estimation in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway. Can J For Res. 41:96–107. doi: 10.1139/X10-161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorell KE, Östlin EO. 1931. The national forest survey of Sweden. J For. 4:585–591.
   Google Scholar
• Tikkanen J, Hokajärvi R, Hujala T. 2010. Development phases of forest planning on non-industrial private lands in Finland: Perspective of planners' work. Small-scale Forestry. 9:331–347. doi: 10.1007/s11842-010-9119-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomppo E. 1990. Satellite image-based national forest inventory of Finland. Photogramm J Finland. 12(1):115–120.
   Google Scholar
• Tomppo E, Gschwantner T, Lawrence M, McRoberts RE, editors. 2010. National forest inventories – pathways for common reporting. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tomppo E, Halme M. 2004. Using coarse scale forest variables as ancillary information and weighting of variables in k-nn estimation: a genetic algorithm approach. Remote Sens Environ. 92:1–20. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2004.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomppo E, Heikkinen J, Henttonen HM, Ihalainen A, Katila M, Mäkelä H, Tuomainen T, Vainikainen N. 2011. Designing and conducting a forest inventory – case: 9th national forest inventory of Finland. Springer, Managing forest ecosystems 21. 270 p.
   Google Scholar
• Tomppo E, Kuusinen N, Mäkisara K, Kalital M, McRoberts RE. 2016. Effects of field plot configurations on the uncertainties of ALS-assisted forest resource estimates. Scand J For Res. 32(6):488–500. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1259425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Totrtrup C, Nord-Larsen T, Johannsen VK. 2014. Satellitbaseret monitering af stormfald [Satellite-based monitoring of windthrow] (in Danish). DHI GRAS, Copenhagen. 18 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Tuominen S, Pitkänen J, Balazs A, Korhonen KT, Hyvönen P, Muinonen E. 2014. NFI plots as complementary reference data in forest inventory based on airborne laser scanning and aerial photography in Finland. Silva Fenn. 48(2):20 p. doi: 10.14214/sf.983
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuominen S, Pitkänen T, Balázs A, Kangas A. 2017. Improving multi-source national forest inventory by 3D aerial imaging. Silva Fenn.
   Google Scholar
• Ulander LMH, Smith G, Eriksson L, Folkesson K, Fransson JES, Gustavsson A, Hallberg B, Joyce S, Magnusson M, Olsson H, et al. 2005. Mapping of wind-thrown forests in southern Sweden using space- and airborne SAR. Proc. IGARSS 2005;July 25–29, 2005;Seoul, Korea; p. 3619–3622.
   Google Scholar
• Varvia P, Lähivaara T, Maltamo M, Packalen P, Tokola T, Seppänen A. 2017. Uncertainty quantification in ALS-based species-specific growing stock volume estimation. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens. 55(3):1671–1681. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2016.2628960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vauhkonen J, Ruotsalainen R. 2017. Assessing the provisioning potential of ecosystem services in a Scandinavian boreal forest: suitability and tradeoff analyses on grid-based wall-to-wall forest inventory data. For Ecol Manage. 389:272–284. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2016.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Berg E. 1995. Kertomus Suomenmaan metsistä 1858 sekä kuvia suuresta muutoksesta. Metsälehti Kustannus. 93 p. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• von Segebaden G. 1998. Rikstaxen 75 år. Utvecklingen 1923–1998. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Resource Management and Geomatics. Report 8. Umeå, Sweden. 562 pp. ISSN 1401-0070. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Wallenius T, Laamanen R, Mehtätalo L, Kangas A, Peuhkurinen J. 2012. Analysing the agreement between an airborne Laser scanning based forest inventory and a control inventory – a case study in the state owned forests in Finland. Silva Fenn. 46:111–129. doi: 10.14214/sf.69
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu XJ, Karjalainen M, Nurminen K, Karila K, Vastaranta M, Kankare V, Kaartinen H, Holopainen M, Honkavaara E, Kukko A, et al. 2015. Comparison of laser and stereo optical, SAR and InSAR point clouds from air- and space-borne sources in the retrieval of forest inventory attributes. Remote Sens (Basel). 7:15933–15954. doi: 10.3390/rs71215809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Gove J. 2005. Spatial assessment of model errors from four regression techniques. For Sci. 51(4):334–346.
   Google Scholar