A financial comparison: clearcutting vs. selective logging

Recent years have brought rising timber prices. Since 2017, average sawlog prices across Sweden have doubled—from 500 SEK/m3fub to 1,000 SEK/m3fub. That makes it especially interesting to compare clearcutting—where most revenue comes at one point in time—with selective logging (plockhuggning), where revenues are more continuous.

Financial comparisons between different forestry measures are generally done using present value calculations (nuvärdesberäkningar). In short, you apply a discount rate based on an alternative return (an alternative investment) to compare different options and determine which one is most profitable today. The basic idea is that money now is worth more than money later—so selective logging often comes out ahead compared with clearcut forestry, because revenues arrive more frequently.

Even so, it can be useful to compare outcomes in absolute terms—which is what we do below.

Here’s a plausible scenario using the timber prices in 2017:

Forest owner A clearcuts 10 hectares with a standing volume of 270 m3sk per hectare. The harvest is 2,180 m3fub, with an operations cost (drivningskostnad) of SEK 196,222, and subsequent site preparation/planting costs another SEK 90,000. The net harvesting income is SEK 584,598, calculated with a sawlog share of 50%.

Forest owner B selectively logs the same stand, harvesting 30% of the standing volume—i.e., 688 m3fub. Operations cost is SEK 113,520. Net harvesting income is SEK 226,696, calculated with a sawlog share of 70%.

In 2025, forest owner A orders a precommercial thinning (röjning) on the 10 hectares that were clearcut, at a cost of SEK 33,000.

In 2025, forest owner B makes a second harvest (30%) in the same stand of 480 m3fub. Operations cost is SEK 70,000. Net harvesting income is SEK 401,812, calculated with a sawlog share of 70%.

In addition to lower costs and higher revenue, forest owner B also keeps 40% of the standing volume for the future. With a correctly executed selective harvest using Hyggligt, the remaining trees can also see strong value growth—because we consistently prioritize leaving the trees with the greatest potential.

Net, forest owner A over the period 2017–2025: SEK 550,603. Harvest: 2,180 m3fub.

Net, forest owner B over the period 2017–2025: SEK 628,508. Harvest: 1,168 m3fub.

In summary, the example shows that selective logging can deliver higher net income over the same time period—while keeping a valuable standing volume in the forest. For many forest owners, it can therefore be both a more profitable and more sustainable strategy than traditional clearcut forestry.