Sustainable Management Practices of State-Owned Forest Farms in Subtropical Regions: Case Study of S Forest Farm in China

Abstract

The construction quality of state-owned forest farms is crucial to the overall development of ecological civilization. Evaluating the development status of these forest farms is essential. Based on field research and existing studies, this paper uses the S (S is a Mandarin Pinyin abbreviation for the name of the forest farm, to maintain anonymity) state-owned forest farm in Fujian Province, a subtropical region, as a case study. The Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) are employed to determine the weight values of various standard indicators. Compared to previous research, this study finds that the sustainability of human resources and socioeconomic factors in forest farms also play a significant role in achieving sustainable management of state-owned forest farms. By collecting indicator values and reference values, an evaluation of the sustainable management status of the S state-owned forest farm is conducted, revealing that its sustainable management status is at a “good” level. However, there are still problems in forest classification, the ratio of plantation to natural forest, pest outbreaks, mechanization of forest production, employee incentives, tourism, and forest certification, which constrain sustainable management. This study proposes strategies to optimize sustainable management from forest production operations and management perspectives.

1. Introduction

Globally, the emergence of various environmental issues in the 20th century has underscored the critical role of forests in sustainable development. In 2000, the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) was established to promote forest management, protection, and sustainable development under different ownership types. Under the auspices of the UNFF, the “International Forest Instrument” was adopted by the 62nd United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 62/98 in 2007. The core content of this instrument is to strengthen political commitment and action at all levels for the effective implementation of sustainable forest management, aiming to achieve common global forest goals. In May 2015, the 11th session of the United Nations Forum on Forests adopted the “Resolution on International Arrangement on Forests Beyond 2015” and the ministerial declaration “The International Arrangement on Forests We Envision”. These documents have profound implications for world forest policy and sustainable forest development strategies over the next fifteen years. They significantly elevate the status of forests within the global sustainable development strategy, and their inclusion in the agenda for the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit for review underscores their importance.

As China’s socioeconomic development progresses, the public is increasingly focused on ecological construction. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), ecological civilization construction has been incorporated as a critical component of the “five-in-one” overall layout for building socialism with Chinese characteristics. This elevation underscores its foundational role for other types of civilization construction, placing it at unprecedented importance. The report from the 18th National Congress emphasized the need to prioritize ecological civilization construction and integrate it into economic, political, cultural, and social development to ensure the sustainable development of the Chinese nation.

Forestry construction is pivotal in ecological construction and is essential for achieving ecological civilization’s goals. At the beginning of 2014, China’s eighth National Forest Resource Inventory results were published, revealing significant achievements in forestry construction. However, challenges remain in meeting the ambitious forest growth targets set for 2020 and addressing the gap between forest supply and societal demand [1]. President Xi Jinping issued directives regarding the eighth National Forest Resource Inventory results in response to these challenges. He called for comprehensive deepening of forestry reforms and the steady expansion of forest areas to create better ecological conditions for building a beautiful China [2].

As the province with the highest forest coverage rate, Fujian plays a crucial role in China’s forestry development. Leveraging its unique geographical features, encapsulated by the saying “eight parts mountain, one part water, and one part farmland”, Fujian has implemented several strategic initiatives such as the “Big Study of Mountains and Seas”, “Three-Five-Seven Afforestation”, “Building a Forestry Powerhouse”, “Collective Forest Tenure Reform”, “Building a Green West Coast” and the “Four Greens Project”. These strategies have been instrumental in promoting sustainable forestry development. Effective forestry development is integral to achieving these goals and constructing a sustainable model.

For a long time, the management of forest resources in state-owned forest farms has been based on the functional types of forest resources. Public forests are strictly protected, while commercial forests are managed under a quota system. However, there are deficiencies in formulating and implementing scientific forest management plans that consider the comprehensive realization of ecological, economic, and social benefits, whether from the perspectives of sustainable forest management, forest landscape restoration, or the overall integrity of the ecosystems in the regions where state-owned forest farms are located, leading to lower effectiveness in forest resource protection and management [3,4,5].

Scholars have conducted in-depth research on the sustainable management of forest management units. Some scholars have used the target method and Delphi method to construct an indicator system and applied the AHP and assignment method to determine indicator weight values, thereby studying the sustainable management status of forest management units [6]. Other scholars, based on grey system theory, have employed the AHP and comprehensive grading method to construct an indicator system for sustainable forestry development at the county level, inviting experts to score and determine indicator weight values to evaluate the sustainable development status of county-level forestry [7].

Internationally, many international forestry organizations have developed indicator systems for sustainable forest management at the unit level. The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) process and the African Timber Organization process include standard indicators at both the national and management unit levels. The Helsinki Process, the Tarapoto Proposal, and the Near East Process have gradually developed and refined unit-level criteria and indicators in their development [5,7,8,9]. The indicator systems for sustainable management at the unit level, established by these international processes, all include aspects of forestry human resources and sociocultural resources. However, the criteria and indicators face challenges, such as differing definitions of indicator connotations and difficulty in measuring and evaluating indicators.

Evaluations of the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in China often focus primarily on assessing the sustainability of the forests themselves [3,5,6,7], equating forest sustainability with the overall sustainability of the forest farms. When defining the connotation of the indicator system, most studies focus on the ecological, economic, and social aspects of sustainable management when defining the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms. They do not pay enough attention to factors such as human resources and management within the forest farms, and the external social environment. More than 150 countries and numerous international organizations are involved in the development and implementation of forest sustainability criteria and indicators. However, there is limited research on how forest farm production and management units can achieve sustainable management, and how to construct and quantify their indicator system.

To address this gap, this paper explores the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province within the broader socioeconomic development environment. This study incorporates factors like human resources and social resources into the indicator system for the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms. Based on existing research results of indicator systems, the weight values of various indicators are calculated. By conducting in-depth field investigations in this region’s state-owned forest farms, this study gathers operational information and evaluates the sustainable management status of S state-owned forest farm.

Our study contributes to sustainable management from a public management perspective. While sustainable forest management within state-owned forest farms is a core component of achieving overall sustainable management, it is crucial to recognize that this extends beyond forest sustainability alone. A holistic view of the organization is necessary, encompassing human resources, production activities, and social resources to achieve comprehensive sustainable management. First, this paper covers a broader scope compared to previous research on sustainable forest management at the management unit level. It addresses the gaps in prior studies that mainly focused on forest sustainability by selecting key forest management indicators and incorporating research on human resources and social resources within state-owned forest farms. By integrating the public–private partnership (PPP) theory, this study aims to propose new measures to promote the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms.

Second, the focus on the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province can help refine the standard indicator system for sustainable management at the management unit level. Since the study area is part of China’s subtropical region, the findings may also contribute to developing a sustainable forest management standard indicator system for subtropical regions in China and globally. The research on the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province can, therefore, enhance both local and broader regional criteria for sustainable forestry management.

2. Literature Review

2.1. International Practices in Sustainable Forest Management

Different countries have varied forest management concepts, and their forestry policies also have unique characteristics, reflecting a trend where forestry development levels align with economic development levels. Developed countries generally have a higher level of forestry development with a more comprehensive and complete forestry industry system. Despite a higher proportion of privately owned forests, public forests still constitute a significant portion.

Globally, according to the 2005 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) definition of public forests, public forests include not only those owned by central, local, or local public institutions but also those owned by groups (villages, communities, and indigenous groups) [10,11]. Based on this definition, 84.4% of the world’s forests are public forests, 13.3% are private forests, and the remaining 2.3% are categorized as other types. Russia, the United States, Japan, Australia, Canada, and Germany exhibit significant differences in forest land ownership types due to their unique national conditions and forestry management traditions [10]. The area and proportion of state-owned forests in various countries are shown in

Table 1. Area and proportion of state-owned forests in a selection of forestry-developed countries.

Country	Forest Area (10,000 Hectares)	Public Forest Area (10,000 Hectares)	State-Owned Forest Area (10,000 Hectares)	Proportion of State-Owned Forest to Total Forest Area (%)	Main Use of State-Owned Forests
Russia	80,926.8	80,926.8	77,689.7	96.00	Ecological forest
U.S.	30,312.3	15,481.0	14,110.8	46.55	Public benefit forest
Japan	2486.6	1042.8	763.1	30.69	Public benefit forest
Australia	15,731.9	11,470.6	3317.7	21.09	Nature reserve
Canada	31,013.4	28,558.7	4962.1	16.00	Ecological forest, Timber forest
Germany	1107.6	584.6	66.5	6.00	National defense and military

, which is adapted from and based on previously published data [10,12].

From the table, it is evident that although the proportion of state-owned forests varies among countries, the common objective in forestry policies is to position these forests as public benefit and ecological forests, thereby maximizing their public benefits. However, how to achieve sustainable management and development of state-owned forests, which have significant positive externalities, remains an ongoing exploration for major countries.

Currently, there is no unified standard for sustainable forest management indicators. Don argues that some criteria or indicators in sustainable forest management are difficult to measure and evaluate, such as biodiversity, the value of non-timber forest products, non-market value, carbon sequestration benefits, and socioeconomic benefits. He emphasizes the need to promote and disseminate the concepts and techniques of sustainable forest management to facilitate its adoption [13]. Gough states that the basic consensus in forestry research is that sustainable forest management models generally encompass ecological, economic, social, and cultural aspects [14]. However, there are varying opinions and perspectives on the specific indicators and measurement methods for sustainable forest management across different countries and regions [14,15]. Therefore, it is essential to develop forest sustainability assessment systems tailored to the actual conditions of local forestry development.

Previous research has explored sustainable forest management in various countries and regions. Studies on the pan-European process highlight that differences in defining indicator connotations among countries lead to inconsistent quality, completeness, and representativeness of forest data, and a lack of clear and specific reference criteria for indicators [15]. Moreover, the absence of strong constraints and changes in forestry support policies and commitment implementation among countries hinder sustainable forest management in the region. However, this region has the advantage of obtaining forest management status data and opportunities to promote sustainable forest development through scientific research and information technology. Strengthening education and outreach to build consensus on sustainable development, establishing a unified criteria and indicator system, increasing stakeholder participation, and enhancing communication between forestry policymakers and stakeholders can reduce the challenges of sustainable forest management [14].

In Australia, sustainable forest management is shaped by its unique environmental challenges, such as frequent bushfires and a variable climate. The Australian framework places significant emphasis on adaptive management practices, which allow for flexibility in response to these environmental conditions. Criteria and indicators in Australia focus on maintaining biodiversity, soil and water conservation, and integrating indigenous knowledge into forest management [16]. In New Zealand, sustainable forestry development emphasizes the formulation and improvement of comprehensive national forest policies and regulations, the use of non-chemical methods to control forest pests and diseases, scientific research to prevent or reduce soil erosion, leveraging the technical expertise of forestry experts, and encouraging public participation in forestry conservation to achieve sustainable forest management [17].

North America, particularly Canada and the United States, has developed sustainable forest management that integrates ecological, economic, and social dimensions. In Canada, sustainable forestry development not only focuses on the environmental aspects of forest management but also emphasizes the importance of social responsibility and economic sustainability, and the Canadian indicators have been instrumental in evaluating and maintaining the sustainability of Canada’s vast forest resources [18]. The U.S. developed a more extensive framework with seven criteria and sixty-four indicators, which is distinctive for its strong emphasis on the legal and economic frameworks that support sustainable forest management, ensuring that environmental goals are met alongside economic viability and stakeholder participation [19].

In Asia, sustainable forest management has been characterized by a strong emphasis on balancing ecological preservation with economic development. Japan’s system emphasizes the importance of preserving forest ecosystems while also promoting the sustainable use of timber and other forest products [20]. South Korea’s Framework Act on Forest underscores the need for regular monitoring and evaluation of forest sustainability, incorporating legal frameworks that support environmental protection and resource management [21]. However, the integration of social and economic dimensions into forest management in some Asian countries, particularly in less economically developed regions, remains less comprehensive compared to other regions. In some African countries, sustainable forestry development focuses on developing non-timber forest product production in economically underdeveloped areas, promoting the under-forest economy, expanding the processing industry chain of non-timber forest products, increasing employment, and enhancing the income and poverty alleviation of forest area residents [22].

In addition to management systems and budgetary considerations, more than 100 countries around the world are involved in developing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. These include processes such as the International Tropical Timber Organization Process (1992), the Helsinki Process (1993) [23], the Montreal Process (1995) [24], the Tarapoto Proposal (1995), the Dry Zone Africa Process (1995) [12], the Near East Process (1996), the Lepaterique Process of Central America (1997) [25], and the African Timber Organization Process (1997) [26]. The International Tropical Timber Organization Process and the African Timber Organization Process include both national and management unit-level criteria and indicators, while the Helsinki Process, Tarapoto Proposal, and Near East Process have gradually developed and refined management unit-level criteria and indicators in subsequent years.

These representative processes cover key areas such as forest resources and conditions, production management, biodiversity, forestry talent, soil and water conservation, carbon sequestration cycles, laws and regulations, and socioeconomic aspects related to forestry. They encompass both the management of forests themselves and the legal, technical, human, and community aspects necessary for sustainable management [12,23,24,25,26]. Since most of these processes are based on the international level, the criteria and indicators they include are characterized by large-scale forest management requirements, such as carbon sequestration cycles and soil and water conservation, which require extensive, high-tech monitoring and evaluation. In smaller watersheds or localized assessments [12,23,24,25,26], these aspects may be difficult to achieve due to the lack of technical support and the difficulty of data collection in small areas.

Internationally, forest management theories are well-developed, particularly in Western forestry-developed countries, such as Europe and the U.S. These theories are integrated with or incorporate sustainable development concepts, leading to the formulation of sustainable forest management criteria and indicators at both international and national levels. However, discrepancies in the definitions of standards and indicators, difficulties in their measurement and assessment, and low levels of public awareness hinder effective implementation [13,14]. The varying levels of forestry development, policy focus, and implementation across large regions make it difficult to establish unified policies to promote sustainable forest management. Researchers call for strengthened forestry dialogue and consultation among countries to unify criteria and indicators and enhance education and outreach to promote sustainable forest management concepts and techniques.

2.2. Sustainable Management of State-Owned Forest Farms in China

According to the Chinese Forest Law, state-owned forests refer to forests, trees, forest land, and the associated wildlife, plants, microorganisms, and forest landscapes whose ownership is vested in the state or designated state-authorized entities. State-owned forests include state-owned forest farms, initially known as state-operated forest farms. Different scholars have researched the definition of state-owned forest farms from various perspectives. It is generally believed that state-operated forest farms are forestry production organizations established by the state using state-owned afforestation land, in line with national economic construction needs [27,28,29], and undergoes several periods [30].

State-owned forest farms are the basic units of forestry construction in China and are managed as public institutions. Approximately 10% of state-owned forest farms are directly managed by provincial governments, about 15% by municipal governments, and 75% by county governments. Following the reform and opening-up policy, China implemented “enterprise-style management for public institutions” for state-owned forest farms, reducing various inputs, which gradually marginalized these farms [31]. Sustainable management of state-owned forest farms is a crucial part of sustainable forestry management in China. Given their significant role in the national forestry sector, sustainable management of state-owned forest farms is key to achieving overall sustainable forestry management.

Regarding sustainable management assurance, scholars believe that heavy tax burdens and insufficient investment in afforestation severely impact the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian [32]. The misalignment between the nature and functions of state-owned forest farms, the management authority mainly at the county level, and the construction and development tasks hinder sustainable management [33]. Additionally, unclear property rights and outdated forestry policies necessitate improved management policies and reliance on forestry science and technology for development [34]. Regionally, Fujian’s forestry resources face several challenges that hinder sustainable development, including an imbalanced regional distribution of resources, low productivity of forest land, a limited variety of tree species used for timber, a relatively small proportion of mature timber forests, and suboptimal forest stand quality [35].

Regarding forest and condition sustainability, the irrational structure of forest resources and the lack of a classified management mechanism affect the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian [32]. Poor forest stand quality and traditional management models hinder sustainability [36]. Low forest resource quality and a single industry structure also restrict sustainable management [33]. Resource crises, economic difficulties, inconsistent management system changes, and rigid management mechanisms that do not adapt to the market economy impede sustainable management [4,37].

In terms of sustainable production management, outdated production and living infrastructure, poor transportation conditions, and heavy forest management and reconstruction tasks severely constrain sustainable management [33]. Additionally, the lack of financial support is a significant challenge [38,39]. Insufficient investment in afforestation and forest management, overall backward infrastructure, and asset liabilities impact operational development [4,40].

Regarding sustainable human resources, studies have found that the social security mechanism for forest farm employees is inadequate, with gaps in housing, pensions, healthcare, and high contribution ratios for employees [4,41,42,43]. The aging workforce and shortage of professional technical personnel hinder forest farm construction and development [4,36].

In terms of socioeconomic sustainability, the “13th Five-Year Plan for Forestry Development” by the National Forestry Administration of the People’s Republic of China highlights that reforms in state-owned forest areas and forest farms have just begun and face numerous difficulties, heavy historical burdens, insufficient reform momentum, lagging integration into local economic and social development, weak social security, and challenging industrial transformation [44,45].

Scholars indicate that factors hindering the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in China include outdated policies and regulations [34], inconsistent management systems [37], weak financial support, debt pressure [38,40], outdated infrastructure [46], rigid personnel mechanisms [41], and internal factors like irrational forest resource structure, low forest stand quality, poor afforestation technology, poor forest land endowment [34,40,47], and limited operational projects. Insufficient attention to human resources, management, and external social environment factors further impacts sustainable management at the forest management unit level.

Research on sustainable management criteria and indicator systems for forest management in China is still in its early stages, with particularly limited studies focusing on the sustainability criteria and indicators for state-owned forest farms [6,7,8,9]. China’s level of sustainable forest development is generally between that of Western forestry-developed countries and those with lagging forestry development. China faces forest management issues and should consider and analyze domestic forestry problems and strategies in the context of international forestry research to promote sustainable forest development in China. This study seeks to address this gap by examining the sustainable management status of state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province. The study aims to refine the sustainability standards and indicator system specifically for Fujian’s state-owned forest farms and to evaluate their current sustainable management.

3. Material and Methods

3.1. Research Subject

Fujian Province has a long history of forest management. Historical records from the Song and Yuan dynasties note that local residents had a tradition of planting Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) as part of dowries for their daughters. During the Qing Dynasty, timber merchants would travel upstream to procure timber and forest products from the northwest timber harvesting areas of Fujian. In the Republic of China era, agricultural and forestry extension offices were established to oversee production management and technical promotion in the sector [48].

Fujian’s state-owned forest farms began operations relatively early. In the 1950s, responding to national forestry development initiatives, various regions established timber transfer stations, state-run logging camps, and state-owned forest farms, with central government funding supporting the construction of forestry infrastructure, including forest railways. In the 1980s, Fujian took the lead in implementing forestry reforms focused on clarifying forest tenure rights, delineating privately retained forest areas, and establishing forestry production responsibility systems. In 1998, Fujian reallocated and downsized staff within the provincial state-owned forest farm system, reducing management and logistics personnel.

After more than 60 years of continuous efforts, Fujian’s state-owned forest farms have achieved significant milestones. They now cover approximately 9.5% of the province’s forest area, with their timber reserves accounting for 14.7% of the provincial total [49]. These forests are primarily located along major rivers, around large reservoirs, in areas prone to severe soil erosion, along coastal windbreaks, and adjacent to highways, railways, and urban areas. They serve as vital infrastructure for national ecological security, playing crucial roles in improving the environment and enhancing disaster prevention and mitigation [50].

In 2016, the Fujian Provincial Party Committee and Provincial Government issued the “Implementation Plan for the Reform of Provincial State-Owned Forest Farms” and the “Guiding Opinions on the Reform of County-Level State-Owned Forest Farms in Fujian Province”, marking the official start of forest farm reforms. These reforms aimed to prioritize ecological protection and livelihood security, clearly defining the roles of state-owned forest farms in protecting and nurturing forest resources, maintaining national ecological security, and providing ecological public services. The reforms set targets to increase the provincial state-owned forest farm area by more than 33,300 hectares, increase timber reserves by over 13 million cubic meters, and reduce commercial logging by 20% by 2020. County-level state-owned forest farms were to maintain stable management areas, increase timber reserves, gradually reduce commercial logging, and completely halt commercial logging of natural forests. The reforms also outlined financial support policies [49]. Forestry development in Fujian Province is a microcosm of the broader trends in subtropical forestry development in China. The S state-owned forest farm in Fujian serves as a representative example of this progress.

The S state-owned forest farm, established in 1956, is located in the northwest mountainous area of Fujian Province, primarily within the low mountainous and hilly regions of the Wuyi Mountains (see Figure 1). It is a forest farm in subtropical regions. The forest farm spans approximately 20 km in length and 10 km in width, with a total management area of about 4330 hectares, of which 3645.07 hectares are forested, achieving a forest coverage rate of 84.18%. This includes approximately 330 hectares of natural forest and about 3300 hectares of plantation forest, with 153.4 hectares designated as ecological public welfare forest and around 2817 hectares of Chinese fir plantation. The forest consists of 1852 hectares of young and middle-aged forest, 1504.8 hectares of near-mature forest, and 288.27 hectares of over-mature forest. The total standing timber volume is 610,000 cubic meters, with an average annual growth of about 50,000 cubic meters and an average annual harvest of 10,000 cubic meters, resulting in a volume of 152.6 cubic meters per hectare. Managed by the provincial forestry department with provincial and municipal oversight, it operates as a sub-prefecture-level unit with full fiscal funding. From 2011 to 2015, it received annual subsidies of over 20 million yuan from higher authorities, accounting for more than 85% of its total revenue.

The forest farm employs 100 staff members and has 159 retired personnel. Among the 40 professional and technical staff, 15 hold senior titles, 9 have intermediate titles, and 6 possess other titles (see

Table 2. S state-owned forest farm staff.

Year	Management Staff	Production Staff	Technical Staff	Total
2014–2015	34	26	40	100
2012–2013	39	38	40	117
2010–2011	33	42	40	115
2008–2009	36	55	40	131
2006–2007	52	65	40	157

, made based on the authors’ field investigation). It has maintained a research collaboration with Nanjing Forestry University and other institutions for over 60 years, promoting technological advantages in Chinese fir breeding. The overall management of the forest farm is at a relatively high level, having established the largest and most diverse germplasm resource bank for Chinese fir in China, known as the “National Key Tree Breeding Base” and the “National Chinese Fir Germplasm Resource Bank”.

3.2. Research Methods

To explore the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms, we employed multifaceted research methods. We constructed the sustainable management indicator system for state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions based on international and domestic key guidelines and reports. This indicator system was developed and refined using the expert consultation method and AHP to calculate the weight values for each level of the indicators. S state-owned forest farm was selected as the empirical case, where actual and reference values corresponding to each indicator were collected and processed to calculate the evaluation values for each indicator. Finally, the comprehensive evaluation value for S state-owned forest farm was calculated and compared against national forestry evaluation to assess its level of sustainable management.

3.2.1. Field Investigation

The authors conducted in-depth field research in representative state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province. This involved participating in forest compartment measurements and recording detailed information on production and management activities, which allows for a thorough understanding of the operational aspects of the forest farms. To supplement the field observations, stakeholder interviews were conducted with forest farm managers, employees, nearby residents, and forestry department officials. These interviews provided qualitative insights into the management practices and the challenges faced by these stakeholders. Additionally, surveys were distributed to various departments within the forest farm to collect quantitative data on the indicators relevant to the research. International benchmarks were also considered.

3.2.2. Sustainable Indicator System

To construct an indicator system for the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions, we began by reviewing existing domestic [51,52,53,54,55,56] and international studies on the management and operation of state-owned forests and forest farms [18,19,57]. Research on the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province falls within the broader scope of sustainable management at the forest management unit level. By examining forest sustainability research on different levels (i.e., international, national, and regional), based on the characteristics of the research subject, we draw on the following established criteria and indicators system:

At the international level, ITTO’s policy guidance on the management of natural tropical forests Voluntary Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Natural Tropical Forests, published in 1990, updated in 2015, provides guidance for implementation and evaluation of sustainable forest management (SFM) in natural tropical forests [57].

At the national level, due to certain similarities and wide acceptance, the sustainable forest management indicator systems developed by Canada, the United States, and China offer frameworks that guide our selection of indicator dimensions for forest sustainability. “Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in Canada 2005”, established by Natural Resources Canada in 2005, includes 6 criteria and 45 indicators, addressing biodiversity, ecological conditions and productivity, soil and water conservation, global ecological cycles, economic and social benefits, and social responsibility [18]. The United States has developed a national standard comprising 7 criteria and 64 indicators, focusing on biodiversity conservation, forest ecosystem productivity, ecosystem health, soil and water conservation, contribution to the global carbon cycle, multifunctional social benefits, and the associated legal and economic frameworks [19]. China’s forestry industry standards, “LY/T1594–2002: National Level Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in China”, provides theoretical guidance for forest management [58], while “LY/T1958–2011: Guidelines for Forest Sustainability Evaluation” offers practical guidance for assessing and evaluating forest sustainability, including 8 criteria and 41 indicators that cover biodiversity protection, forest ecosystem productivity, ecosystem health and vitality, soil and water conservation, contribution to the global carbon cycle, long-term social benefits, and legal and policy frameworks [59].

At the specific regional level, China issued forestry standards for sustainable forest management indicators specific to four regions: the Northeast Forest Region, Tropical Region, Southwest Forest Region, and Northwest Region; however, the criteria and indicators for the Subtropical Region have yet to be published. Thus, we choose “Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in Southwest China” [60] and “Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in tropical China” [61] for reference.

We then investigated the problems and underlying causes within the management of these farms. A SWOT analysis was conducted to identify key factors influencing the sustainability of these forest farms. Informed by the authors’ the fieldwork at the forest farms, e.g., the surveys and interviews with forest farm staff and experts, relevant standards and indicators were selected and adjusted accordingly. For instance, as the surveys revealed minimal rodent damage but the presence of rabbit damage, the previous rodent damage indicator was replaced with a more comprehensive animal damage indicator. Due to the minimal impact of acid rain over the years, an acid rain impact indicator was not included. After constructing the indicator system, it was distributed for expert evaluation. Based on the feedback, the system was further refined and optimized. Some indicators were removed due to their high calculation complexity and unreliable results. The finalized indicator system for sustainable management of state-owned forest farms includes five main goals: ensuring sustainable management support, maintaining forest conditions, sustainable forest production management, human resource sustainability, and socioeconomic sustainability. The criteria and indicator system encompasses 33 indicators aligned with these goals, and the adjusted and revised indicator system for state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions is detailed in

Table 3. Sustainable management indicator system of state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions.

Criteria (B)		Indicator (C)	Evaluation Value (Pc)		Comprehensive Evaluation Value (Ai)
Forest farm sustainable Management Assurance		Management Laws and Regulations	C1	Pc1	A1
		Land Ownership	C2	Pc2	A2
		Forest Right Ownership	C3	Pc3	A3
	B1	Forestry Financial Loans	C4	Pc4	A4
		Research Expenditure	C5	Pc5	A5
		Subsidies and Grants	C6	Pc6	A6
		Management Participation	C7	Pc7	A7
Forest Conditions and Sustainability		Forest Coverage Rate	C8	Pc8	A8
		Dominant Tree Species	C9	Pc9	A9
		Age Classes of Trees	C10	Pc10	A10
	B2	Forest Density(Canopy Closure)	C11	Pc11	A11
		Scientific Experimental and Demonstration Forest	C12	Pc12	A12
		Volume of Standing Timber per Unit Area	C13	Pc13	A13
		Fire Disasters	C14	Pc14	A14
		Areas Affected by Pests	C15	Pc15	A15
Sustainable Production Management		Forest Classification	C16	Pc16	A16
		Ratio of Plantation to Natural Forest	C17	Pc17	A17
		Annual Growth and Decline Ratio of Timber Volume	C18	Pc18	A18
	B3	Ratio of Afforestation Without Slash-and-Burn	C19	Pc19	A19
		Forest Roads	C20	Pc20	A20
		Scientific Achievements	C21	Pc21	A21
		Number and Value of Mechanical Equipment for Production	C22	Pc22	A22
Sustainable Human Resources		Types of Employees	C23	Pc23	A23
		Educational Level	C24	Pc24	A24
	B4	Income	C25	Pc25	A25
		Social Security Insurance Coverage Rate	C26	Pc26	A26
		Employee Incentives	C27	Pc27	A27
		Recruitment of Personnel	C28	Pc28	A28
Socioeconomic Sustainability		Tourism Activities	C29	Pc29	A29
		History of Operations	C30	Pc30	A30
	B5	Cultural Development	C31	Pc31	A31
		Social Employment Contribution Rate	C32	Pc32	A32
		Forest Certification	C33	Pc33	A33

, Indicator column.

3.2.3. Weight Value Calculation

After the construction of the indicator system, a thorough process was undertaken to determine the precise weight values for each indicator using the AHP combined with expert consultation methods. This procedure began with an expert consultation phase, where a diverse panel of specialists—including managers and staff from forest farms, technical personnel, esteemed forestry academics from various universities, and officials from forestry departments—were invited to participate. These experts were tasked with performing pairwise comparisons of the standards at both the criteria and indicator levels. Through this comparative analysis, they evaluated the relative importance of each criterion and indicator, leading to the construction of judgment matrices that encapsulate the collective expert opinions.

A total of six judgment matrices were crafted for the sustainable management standards indicator system, specifically labeled A-B, B1-C, B2-C, B3-C, B4-C, and B5-C. Given the nature and structure of these judgment matrices, methods such as the least squares method, logarithmic least squares method, and eigenvalue method were employed to calculate the weights. The data gained from this expert group were systematically processed using specialized AHP calculation software (yaahp 9.1 version). The weight values of these indicators (C) were then obtained, represented as W_c1, W_c2, W_c3…. in Table 3.

The consistency of the comparisons was tested to ensure the validity and reliability of the weight calculations. The consistency ratio (CR) values, which ranged from 0.0241 to 0.0956, were all well within the acceptable threshold of 0.1. This validation step confirmed that the expert judgments were consistent, thereby ensuring the dependability of the calculated weights and the robustness of the overall indicator system.

3.2.4. Evaluation Value Calculation

The indicator evaluation value (P_c) is calculated by comparing the actual value (p) with the reference value (S). Actual values are determined according to the defined methods for each indicator, while reference values are derived from forestry criteria, statistical results, or other research findings. Reference values for the indicators were primarily sourced from authoritative guidelines and plans [59,62,63,64,65,66], such as the “Guidelines for Forest Sustainability Evaluation (LY/T1958–2011)”, the “12th Five-Year Plan for Forestry Development Plan in Fujian Province”, “The 13th Five-Year Plan for Forestry Development Plan in Fujian Province”, and “The Fujian Statistical Yearbook 2016”.

Indicators are categorized based on their impact on system goals and their direction of effect into positive and negative indicators:

• Positive Indicators: Higher values are better. The evaluation value for a positive indicator is calculated as P_c = p/S.
• Negative Indicators: Lower values are better. The evaluation value for a negative indicator is calculated as P_c = S/p.

The evaluation values reflect the proximity of the actual values to the reference values. When the actual value reaches the ideal value, the score is 1.00; deviations from the ideal value result in scores tending towards 0.

Some indicators, such as forest coverage rate and dominant tree species, can be directly scored based on criteria issued by the National Forestry Administration of the PRC and other relevant departments. For these indicators, the scores are calculated directly according to the defined criteria. Other statistical indicators are qualitatively scored based on whether the activities related to the indicator have been carried out and their outcomes. This subjective evaluation considers the extent to which the work content associated with the indicator has been implemented and the results achieved.

3.2.5. Comprehensive Evaluation Value Calculation

The comprehensive evaluation value (A) is measured using Equation (1). m denotes the number of indicators at the indicator level; i denotes a specific indicator; n represents the number of criteria at the criteria level; j represents a specific criterion. W_b is the weight value of the criterion, W_c is the weight value of the indicator, and P_c is the evaluation value for each indicator.

$$A={\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^m\left[{\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^n\left(P_c\times W_c\right)\times W_b}\right]}$$

(1)

Below is an example of comprehensive evaluation value calculation using the indicator $C_1$ (Forest Management Laws and Regulations) to count its comprehensive evaluation value $A_1$. For $C_1$, the actual evaluation value $P_{c1}$ is 1, the criteria weight value $W_{b1}$ = 0.1763, and the indicator weight value $W_{c1}$ = 0.0785; thus, the calculated comprehensive evaluation value:

$$A_1=\left(P_{c1}\times W_{c1}\right)\times W_{b1}$$

(2)

This process is repeated for all indicators, calculating each comprehensive value (A₁, A₂,..., A₃₃, Table 3, Comprehensive Evaluation Value column). The weighted sum of these indicators yields the total comprehensive evaluation value. That is, the sum of all these individual comprehensive evaluation values constitutes the total comprehensive evaluation value (A).

$$A={\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{33}\left[{\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^5\left(P_c\times W_c\right)\times W_b}\right]}=A_1+A_2+\cdots +A_{33}$$

(3)

After calculating the comprehensive sustainability indicator values for state-owned forest farms, the “LY/T1958–2011 Guidelines for Forest Sustainability Evaluation” [53] is used to establish the grading system for sustainable forest management status for forest management units, which is shown in

Table 4. Grading of sustainable management of forest farms.

Grade	Excellent	Good	Moderate	Poor
A	A ≥ 0.8	0.8 > A ≥ 0.6	0.6 > A ≥ 0.4	A < 0.4

.

4. Results

Taking the S state-owned forest farm in Fujian Province as a case study, this study measures its development status to assess its sustainable development. This evaluation serves to reflect the sustainable development status of state-owned forest farms in the region.

According to the methods outlined above, we first obtain the weight value of criteria and the weight value of each indicator for the S state-owned forest farm. Then, we calculate the evaluation value of each indicator based on its actual value and standard value. The calculated weight value and evaluation values are presented in

Table 5. Weight values and evaluation values of sustainable management indicators of S state-owned forest farm.

Criteria (B)	Weight (Wb)	Indicator (C)	Weight (Wc)	Evaluation Value (Pc)	Comprehensive Evaluation Value (Ai)
		C1	0.0785	1.00	A1	0.0138
		C2	0.1102	1.00	A2	0.0194
		C3	0.1046	1.00	A3	0.0184
B1	0.1763	C4	0.0942	1.00	A4	0.0166
		C5	0.0302	1.00	A5	0.0053
		C6	0.4353	1.00	A6	0.0767
		C7	0.1470	0.62	A7	0.0161
		C8	0.2311	1.00	A8	0.0507
		C9	0.1241	0.62	A9	0.0169
		C10	0.0966	0.98	A10	0.0208
B2	0.2196	C11	0.1009	0.62	A11	0.0137
		C12	0.0237	1.00	A12	0.0052
		C13	0.2048	1.00	A13	0.0450
		C14	0.1180	1.00	A14	0.0259
		C15	0.1009	0.10	A15	0.0022
		C16	0.1266	0.14	A16	0.0056
		C17	0.1993	0.35	A17	0.0219
		C18	0.1704	1.00	A18	0.0536
B3	0.3143	C19	0.1266	1.00	A19	0.0398
		C20	0.1543	1.00	A20	0.0485
		C21	0.1082	1.00	A21	0.0340
		C22	0.1146	0.00	A22	0.0000
		C23	0.1967	0.75	A23	0.0214
		C24	0.2652	1.00	A24	0.0384
B4	0.1449	C25	0.1967	0.85	A25	0.0242
		C26	0.1104	1.00	A26	0.0160
		C27	0.0919	0.50	A27	0.0067
		C28	0.1391	1.00	A28	0.0202
		C29	0.2344	0.00	A29	0.0000
		C30	0.1055	0.75	A30	0.0115
B5	0.1449	C31	0.2483	1.00	A31	0.0360
		C32	0.2692	1.00	A32	0.0390
		C33	0.1426	0.00	A33	0.0000

. W_b represents the weight value of the specific criterion B (specifically B₁, B₂, B₃…). W_c denotes the weight of the indicator C (specifically C₁, C₂, C₃…). Ai represents the comprehensive evaluation value of the indicator calculated using Equation (1) with W_b, W_c, and P_c (specifically, A₁, A₂, A₃…).

At the criteria level (refer to the W_b column in Table 5), sustainable production management emerged as the most critical factor, contributing 31.43% to the overall sustainability of state-owned forest farms (W_b3). Furthermore, the sustainability of human resources within forest farms (W_b4) and socioeconomic sustainability (W_b5) together accounted for 28.98%, underscoring their substantial impact on the sustainable management of these farms. This finding confirms that sustainable management of state-owned forest farms cannot be confined solely to the sustainability of the forest itself. However, this does not imply that the condition of the forests can be overlooked, as it contributes 21.96% to the overall sustainability of the forest farms (W_b3). This highlights that promoting forest sustainability is a fundamental aspect of forest farm management. In addition, the assurance of sustainable management, encompassing legal frameworks, subsidies, grants, and stakeholder participation, forms the foundation of sustainable management practices within forest farms, contributing 17.63% (W_b1) to their overall sustainability.

At the indicator level, it can be observed that the indicators exhibit different levels of importance in the sustainable development of forest farms (see the Wc column in Table 5). Factors such as the amount and size of subsidy received from higher authorities (0.4353), forest coverage rate (0.2311), the ratio of plantation to natural forest (0.1993), forest roads (0.1543), education level of forest farm employees (0.2652), and the contribution rate to social employment (0.2692) have a more substantial impact on the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms.

Further, based on the constructed sustainable management indicator system for state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions, the comprehensive evaluation value A_i for the case of the S state-owned forest farm in subtropical regions is calculated (see the column Comprehensive Evaluation Value in Table 5). The weighted sum of comprehensive evaluation values of these indicators represents the sustainable management of the S state-owned forest farm is 0.7635.

$$A={\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{33}\left[{\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^5\left(P_c\times W_c\right)\times W_b}\right]}=A_1+A_2+\cdots +A_{33}=0.7635$$

(4)

According to the grading system (see Table 4), the empirical results show that the sustainable management of the S state-owned forest farm falls into the “Good” category. As indicated by the comprehensive evaluation values (see A_1, A_2, A₃… in Table 5), the “good” sustainable management benefit from several strength indicators. For instance, the farm benefits significantly from sustainable management assurance, as reflected in Ai and Pc, with land ownership (A₂ = 0.0194, P_c2 = 1.00) and forest right ownership (A₃ = 0.0184, P_c3 = 1.00). Strong financial support is also evident, with high evaluation values in forest farm subsidies and grants (A₅ = 0.0767, P_c5 = 1.00) and forest financial loans (A₄ = 0.0166, P_c4 = 1.00). The farm has actively engaged in scientific research, particularly focusing on the genetic breeding of Chinese fir, and has strictly adhered to quota-based logging requirements, exhibiting higher management participation (A₇ = 0.0161, P_c5 = 1.00).

The farm’s forest conditions reinforce environmental sustainability, such as a commendable forest coverage rate (A₈ = 0.0507, P_c8 = 1.00) and the volume of standing timber per unit area (A₁₃ = 0.0450, P_c13 = 1.00). The farm has implemented effective fire disaster prevention measures to reduce fire disasters (A₁₄ = 0.0259, P_c14 = 1.00) and avoided slash-and-burn practices (A₁₉ = 0.0398, P_c19 = 1.00).

Sustainable production management is another strength. Efforts are made to enhance the forest coverage rate (A₈ = 0.0507, P_c8 = 1.00) and the annual growth and decline ratio of timber volume (A₁₈ = 0.0536, P_c18 = 1.00). Infrastructure development is highlighted by the presence of forest roads (A₁₉ = 0.0485, P_c19 = 1.00) and significant scientific achievements (A₂₁ = 0.0340, P_c21 = 1.00).

On the human resources and socioeconomic front, the farm has invested in building a highly skilled and qualified workforce, which is evident from the high educational levels of its employees (A₂₄ = 0.0384, P_c24 = 1.00). Cultural development within the forest farm has also been emphasized, leading to a strong organizational culture (A₃₁ = 0.0360, P_c31 = 1.00), while also contributing positively to social employment (A₃₂ = 0.0390, P_c32 = 1.00). These factors collectively underscore the farm’s comprehensive approach to sustainability, addressing environmental, economic, and social dimensions in an integrated manner.

Despite this positive evaluation, several issues that may constrain the sustainable management of the S state-owned forest farm are evidenced based on Table 5. Firstly, the forest classification (A₁₆ = 0.0056, P_c16 = 0.14) and the ratio of plantation to natural forest (A₁₇ = 0.0219, P_c17 = 0.35) shows a significant imbalance, where the S state-owned forest farm has a high proportion of plantation forests (90.53%) compared to natural forests (9.47%). Moreover, commercial forests make up 95.79% of the total, while public forests represent only 4.21%. Secondly, the area affected by harmful forest pests is 7.62‰, exceeding the target rate of less than 3‰ [57] set by the People’s Government of Fujian Province during the “13th Five-Year Plan” period. Thirdly, the mechanization level of forest production is low (A₁₅ = 0, P_c15 = 0), which may be attributed to Fujian’s challenging terrain and the financial constraints that limit the ability to purchase and maintain machinery equipment. Fourthly, the employee incentives are insufficient (P_c27 = 0.5, A₂₇ = 0.067), indicating a need for a stronger organizational culture and human resource management that can better motivate and engage the employees. Lastly, the development of tourism and efforts towards forest certification are lagging (A₂₉ = 0, P_c29 = 0; A₃₃ = 0, P_c33 = 0, respectively), which are necessary for enhancing the forest farm’s sustainability and economic viability.

5. Discussion

Based on the standard indicator weight values and the empirical results from the S state-owned forest farm and the author’s field investigation, efforts can be made in production operations and management to continue enhancing the sustainable management level of state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions.

5.1. Transforming the Existing Production and Operation Model

State-owned forests should shift from a production model focused mainly on timber production and processing to one that cultivates more ecological forests and increases the proportion of natural forest conservation, thereby improving forest stand quality. Currently, the proportion of plantation and commercial forests in state-owned forest farms is still too high, while the proportion of natural and ecological forests is too low. This imbalance is primarily due to the unique history of forestry production and operation since the founding of the People’s Republic of China. As the country now emphasizes ecological civilization, the development trend of forestry work has changed. State-owned forest farms should adapt accordingly, taking the lead in the construction of ecological civilization.

Developing the under-forest economy and industries can create more economic benefits, promote the development of ecological civilization and forestry modernization, and enhance the sustainable management level of state-owned forest farms. Experiences have suggested implementing intensive management, with afforestation as the foundation, leveraging the advantages of the forest farm to develop various types of forestry businesses to achieve sustainable management of the forest farm [67]. State-owned forest farms should implement classified management, develop a diversified economy, and improve operations by advancing forestry science and technology [68]. The reform experience of the Z state-owned forest farm in Fujian demonstrated the potential to implement production and sales classification, promote scientific demonstration, implement classified management, carry out logging reform pilots, and pursue FSC forest certification to drive the development of state-owned forest farms [69].

5.2. Improving Forestry Mechanization

According to the investigation and results analysis, the level of mechanization and information technology development in state-owned forest farms in Fujian Province is relatively low, adversely affecting the achievement of sustainable production goals. The reasons for the insufficient mechanization of forest farms can be categorized into two aspects: First, the terrain of forest farms in China’s subtropical regions is predominantly mountainous, posing significant challenges for large-scale mechanized production and management. The uneven and steep landscape limits the feasibility of implementing conventional forestry machinery. Second, state-owned forest farms often lack sufficient funds to purchase and maintain high-value forestry machinery and equipment.

To address this mechanization problem, countermeasures could be adopted; first, based on the actual needs of forest farm management, the phased introduction of foreign forestry cultivation and harvesting equipment should be implemented. It is necessary to learn from the advanced experience of forest mechanization cultivation, production, and management in developed countries [70]. Forest farms should gradually introduce forestry cultivation and harvesting equipment from abroad, in collaboration with domestic machinery units, to jointly build forestry machinery equipment. Drawing from the mechanization experiences in Europe and America, relevant departments should guide state-owned forest farms to collaborate with machinery design and manufacturing companies to produce forestry equipment [71] suited to the terrain of subtropical regions in China. This would enhance production efficiency, allowing for them to focus more on the management and operation of the forest farms. Second, the importance of mechanization and informatization in forest farms should be emphasized for their sustainable management. In this regard, tax incentives and financial subsidies should be provided for the purchase and maintenance of forestry machinery and information technology equipment.

5.3. Building an Information Platform for Forestry Management

The investigation revealed that forest farm infrastructure construction lags, and the level of forestry information technology is not high. Forestry experts and state-owned forest farms call for strengthening the construction of forest roads and related information technology infrastructure, which would help improve the mechanized and information-based operations in state-owned forest farms. The National Forestry Administration’s “13th Five-Year Plan for Forestry Development” points out the need to accelerate the construction of forest farm water and electricity facilities, roads, and management stations, and to improve integration with urban development [45]. Building a forest resource database and dynamic monitoring system and a smart forestry comprehensive service platform and establishing online platforms for forestry application and approval, forestry data development, and smart decision-making will provide accurate information services and optimized decision-making solutions for core forestry operations [45].

The rapid development of modern information technology, remote sensing, and drone technology offers significant advantages for remote monitoring and disaster prevention [22]. The state, local governments, and forest farms can work together to build platforms for forestry production operations, early warning monitoring, and disaster prevention. An integrated forestry management information platform encompassing production planning, cultivation management, harvesting, processing, and sales would facilitate the exchange and sharing of production data and management information. This would improve the modernization of national forestry with a focus on forest cultivation, production operations, and disaster prevention and control. The development of big data, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence technologies has provided new technical means for the preparation of forest management plans, which allows for the balancing, coordination, integration, and optimization of forest management by utilizing existing resources to quickly establish computing clusters and enhance the computational speed of intelligent algorithms [5,72].

5.4. Developing a High-Level Forestry Talent Team

The siphon effect of industrial economic development has led to significant talent loss in national forestry construction and state-owned forest farms, resulting in weak workforce development. Sustainable management of state-owned forest farms requires deepening internal reforms, optimizing employment mechanisms, and relying on forestry science and technology for development [34]. Additionally, it is suggested that market-oriented classified management of forest farms be promoted and staff reallocation to support sustainable management be facilitated [37]. It is essential to establish a sound social security system for forest farm employees, ensuring unified policies, unified income and expenditure, and unified management, which will reduce the disparity in social security levels between forest farms and other industries, thereby increasing the enthusiasm of forest farm employees [41].

To further promote the sustainable management of forest farm human resources, both national and local governments should take advantage of the significant efforts to build an ecological civilization to create better conditions that attract more high-quality talent to construct state-owned forest farms. Regarding talent cultivation models, lessons can be drawn from international experiences in specialized and professional forestry talent training and management to develop a high-skilled forestry talent team with advanced technical expertise [73]. Regarding employee remuneration and benefits, it is crucial to ensure the living and working conditions of forest farm employees, perfect the salary assessment and incentive system, and enable state-owned forest farm employees to work with peace of mind and dedication, contributing to the modernization of national forestry.

5.5. Innovating New Business Models for Forest Farms

As social and economic development progresses, new green economy models such as forest carbon trading, tourism, and health and wellness have emerged, expanding the scope of forestry operations. State-owned forest farms could leverage their unique landscapes and ecological advantages [74]. First, by collaborating with the government and society to introduce funding and technology, they can address deficiencies in infrastructure, such as roads and their geographical location. Enhancing planning and construction in these areas can expand state-owned forest farms’ management and operational space, creating new drivers of production and economic growth points to improve their sustainable management capabilities [73]. Second, by developing diverse operations within the forest farms, such as under-forest farming, flower cultivation, and constructing eco-health tourism routes, a virtuous cycle can be promoted within the forest farms. Third, it is essential to promote the significant role of state-owned forest farms in enhancing social, ecological, and economic benefits to the surrounding communities. This can gain social recognition and support, creating a favorable environment for developing state-owned forest farms [75]. Moreover, public participation should be fostered; forest farmers, as important stakeholders and vulnerable participants, should work with the government to formulate sustainable forest management decisions to achieve the goals of sustainable forest farm management [76]. Lastly, strengthening cooperation with universities can contribute to technological innovation and promote the sustainable management of forest farms [73].

5.6. Ways of Continuous Monitoring Forest Farms Sustainability

To ensure the long-term sustainability of state-owned forest farms, particularly those in subtropical regions like Fujian Province, it is essential to implement a continuous and adaptive monitoring system, which should integrate both the empirical findings from the state-owned forest farms and insights from international best practices and research.

First, a critical aspect of continuous monitoring is to regularly update and refine sustainability indicators to reflect the evolving ecological, social, and economic conditions of forest farms. The development of common indicators for sustainable forest management is crucial for creating a consistent and adaptable monitoring framework [13]. Similarly, the importance of using a SWOT analysis to evaluate the implementation of sustainability criteria and indicators can help in identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in forest management [14]. Second, incorporating advanced technologies such as remote sensing and geographic information systems (GISs), which offer advantages for monitoring forest conditions and managing resources more efficiently [77], can optimize ecosystem services and improve decision-making processes in forest management [78], allowing for quicker responses to environmental changes and potential threats. Third, the monitoring system should also include adaptive management practices that allow for flexibility in response to new challenges, which integrate ecological, economic, and social dimensions [79,80]. It is also essential to engage stakeholders and maintain transparency throughout the monitoring process. Multi-criteria decision-making approaches and stakeholder involvement are key to assessing and enhancing the sustainability of forest management practices [81], as engaging local communities, governments, and other stakeholders will help build trust and ensure that forest management practices are socially inclusive and environmentally responsible. Last, continuous monitoring should be supported by ongoing research and capacity building. Collaborating with international research institutions and universities helps forest farms to stay at the forefront of sustainable forest management practices. Integrating global trends and opportunities in sustainable forest management with local knowledge can offer valuable insights for local adaptation and improvement [68].

6. Conclusions

Employing the Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), this system integrates ecological, economic, and social dimensions, providing a holistic approach to forest management evaluation. Through the case study of the S state-owned forest farm, the research provides empirical evidence on the current state of sustainable management, identifying key issues such as forest classification, the balance between plantation and natural forests, pest management, and mechanization. This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge on sustainable forest management by developing a comprehensive indicator system for evaluating the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms in subtropical regions.

The findings of this study have several important implications. Firstly, the comprehensive indicator system and empirical findings can inform policymakers in the formulation of targeted policies that address the specific challenges faced by state-owned forest farms, leading to more effective and efficient management practices. Secondly, forest managers can use strategic recommendations to implement changes that enhance the sustainability of their operations, including adopting new production models, investing in advanced technologies, and fostering community engagement. Thirdly, improving the sustainable management of state-owned forest farms can yield significant ecological and economic benefits, such as better conservation of biodiversity, increased carbon sequestration and improved resilience to climate change, alongside new income sources from eco-tourism and forest carbon trading. Lastly, fostering community engagement is crucial for the success of sustainable forest management, as involving local communities and promoting the benefits of well-managed forests can secure the support and cooperation needed for long-term sustainability.

This study also has limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the geographic scope is limited to forest farms in subtropical regions, specifically Fujian Province, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings to other climatic regions. Second, the methodological framework and indicator system developed are tailored to the specific environmental and operational conditions of these subtropical regions, which may not be applicable to forest farms in different contexts. Additionally, there are data limitations, as the indicators used reflect the current state of technology and operations. As advancements such as drone technology emerge, certain indicators, like the importance of forest roads, may require re-evaluation and adjustment. Lastly, this study was bound by time limitations, recognizing that the indicator system may need dynamic updates to stay relevant as forestry technology and practices continue to evolve.