Airborne laser scanning as a method in operational forest inventory: Status of accuracy assessments accomplished in Scandinavia
By Erik Næsset. 2007
287 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Environmental Engineering, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3243bf35c2312c76c21be47654861161406f976d
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Environmental Engineering
- Erik Næsset
- Terje Gobakken
- Matti Maltamo
- Petteri Packalen
- Ole Martin Bollandsås
- Johan Holmgren
- Lindi J. Quackenbush
- Håkan Olsson
In Insect Science
- Erik Næsset
- Terje Gobakken
- Matti Maltamo
- Petteri Packalen
- Ole Martin Bollandsås
- Johan Holmgren
- Göran Ståhl
- Håkan Olsson
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Erik Næsset
- Terje Gobakken
- Matti Maltamo
- Petteri Packalen
- Ole Martin Bollandsås
- Johan Holmgren
- Lindi J. Quackenbush
- Håkan Olsson
Citations in the corpus
- Non-parametric prediction of diameter distributions using airborne laser scanner data (2009, methodology): “These differences between Norway and Finland will also affect diameter distributions of living trees, i.e. distributions are likely to be more variable in Norway (Bollandsås & Næsset, 2007).”
- Trends in Automatic Individual Tree Crown Detection and Delineation - Evolution of LiDAR Data (2016, background): “LiDAR (light detection and ranging) in particular has been broadly applied and has contributed to the efficiency of local-scale inventories over the past decade [20].”
- Forest Structure Estimation from a UAV-Based Photogrammetric Point Cloud in Managed Temperate Coniferous Forests (2017, background): “The relative height between the point cloud and the local terrain height is well suited for measuring stand-level forest biophysical properties, including stand volume [2,3], and tree height [2,4].”
- Estimation of tree lists from airborne laser scanning by combining single-tree and area-based methods (2010, methodology): “ALS is used operationally in Scandinavian forestry (Næsset and Bjerknes 2001, Næsset 2007).”
- Potential of UltraCamX stereo images for estimating timber volume and basal area at the plot level in mixed European forests (2013, background): “The introduction of airborne laser scanning (ALS) has revolutionized the process of mapping forests in the last decade and has been used operationally for forest inventories in Norway (Næsset 2007).”
- Comparison of small-footprint discrete return and full waveform airborne lidar data for estimating multiple forest variables (2016, methodology): “139 140 The use of small-footprint DR lidar data for forest inventory using an area-based regression 141 approach is now well established (Næsset, 2007).”
- Inventory of Small Forest Areas Using an Unmanned Aerial System (2015, background): “Currently, forest inventories in many countries are conducted by adopting an area-based approach (ABA) using a combination of field samples and wall-to-wall airborne laser scanning (ALS) data [12,13].”
- Model-based inference for biomass estimation in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway (2011, background): “Today, it is common practice in many countries to apply ALS when stand level information for forest management plans is compiled (e.g. Næsset 2004b, 2007).”
- Predicting wood quantity and quality attributes of balsam fir and black spruce using airborne laser scanner data (2014, background): “In recent years, the increasing availability and decreasing cost of commercial ALS systems and recognition of the wide range of information that can be obtained from ALS data have resulted in operational use for producing forest inventory data in Norway (Næsset, 2007) and Finland (Maltamo et al.”
- Using semi-global matching point clouds to estimate growing stock at the plot and stand levels: application for a broadleaf-dominated forest in central Europe (2015, background): “equations implemented, please refer to McGaughey (2013). In accordance with Nilsson (1996) and Næsset (2002), all height measurements below 2 m were not considered in the calculation to exclude noncanopy measurements (e.”