Growing biodiverse carbon‐rich forests
65
Citation
52
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
Regrowing forests on cleared land is a key strategy to achieve both biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation globally. Maximizing these co-benefits, however, remains theoretically and technically challenging because of the complex relationship between carbon sequestration and biodiversity in forests, the strong influence of climate variability and landscape position on forest development, the large number of restoration strategies possible, and long time-frames needed to declare success. Through the synthesis of three decades of knowledge on forest dynamics and plant functional traits combined with decision science, we demonstrate that we cannot always maximize carbon sequestration by simply increasing the functional trait diversity of trees planted. The relationships between plant functional diversity, carbon sequestration rates above ground and in the soil are dependent on climate and landscape positions. We show how to manage 'identities' and 'complementarities' between plant functional traits to achieve systematically maximal cobenefits in various climate and landscape contexts. We provide examples of optimal planting and thinning rules that satisfy this ecological strategy and guide the restoration of forests that are rich in both carbon and plant functional diversity. Our framework provides the first mechanistic approach for generating decision-makingrules that can be used to manage forests for multiple objectives, and supports joined carbon credit and biodiversity conservation initiatives, such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation REDD+. The decision framework can also be linked to species distribution models and socio-economic models to find restoration solutions that maximize simultaneously biodiversity, carbon stocks, and other ecosystem services across landscapes. Our study provides the foundation for developing and testing cost-effective and adaptable forest management rules to achieve biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and other socio-economic co-benefits under global change.Keywords:
Deforestation
Restoration Ecology
Soil carbon
Restoration Ecology
environmental restoration
Land restoration
Reforestation
Vision
Novel ecosystem
Ecoregion
Cite
Citations (136)
The speed with which restoration will, or can, be accomplished depends on the initial state and location of the sites. However, many factors can undermine the process of choosing sites that are deemed the best ecological choice for restoration. Little attention has been paid to whether site selection follows ecological criteria and how this may affect restoration success. We used habitat inventory data to investigate whether ecological criteria for site selection and restoration have been followed, focusing on restoration for the white-backed woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos B.) in Sweden. In our study region, which is situated in an intensively managed forest landscape with dense and young stands dominated by two coniferous species, purely ecological criteria would entail that sites that are targeted for restoration would (1) initially be composed of older and more deciduous trees than the surrounding landscape, and (2) be at a scale relevant for the species. Furthermore, restoration should lead to sites becoming less dense and less dominated by coniferous trees after restoration, which we investigated as an assessment of restoration progress. To contextualize the results, we interviewed people involved in the restoration efforts on site. We show that although the first criterion for ecological site selection was largely met, the second was not. More research is needed to assess the motivations of actors taking part in restoration efforts, as well as how they interlink with public efforts. This would allow us to identify possible synergies that can benefit restoration efforts.
Restoration Ecology
Woodpecker
Site selection
environmental restoration
Cite
Citations (2)
Abstract Forest restoration requires strategies such as passive restoration to balance financial investments and ecological outcomes. However, the ecological outcomes of passive restoration are traditionally regarded as uncertain. We evaluated technical and legal strategies for balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive versus active restoration in agricultural landscapes. We focused in the case of Brazil, where we assessed the factors driving the proportion of land allocated to passive and active restoration in 42 programs covering 698,398 hectares of farms in the Atlantic Forest, Atlantic Forest/cerrado ecotone and Amazon; the ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in 2955 monitoring plots placed in six restoration programs; and the legal framework developed by some Brazilian states to balance the different restoration approaches and comply with legal commitments. Active restoration had the highest proportion of land allocated to it (78.4%), followed by passive (14.2%) and mixed restoration (7.4%). Passive restoration was higher in the Amazon, in silviculture, and when remaining forest cover was over 50 percent. Overall, both restoration approaches showed high levels of variation in the ecological outcomes; nevertheless, passively restored areas had a smaller percentage canopy cover, lower species density, and less shrubs and trees (dbh > 5 cm). The studied legal frameworks considered land abandonment for up to 4 years before deciding on a restoration approach, to favor the use of passive restoration. A better understanding of the biophysical and socioeconomic features of areas targeted for restoration is needed to take a better advantage of their natural regeneration potential.
Restoration Ecology
Cite
Citations (160)
Abstract Restoring forest landscapes is critical in the face of continued global forest loss and degradation. In this article, we explore some challenges underlying the delivery of global commitments to restore forest landscapes. We propose that three fundamental questions need to be resolved upfront for the effective implementation of Forest Landscape Restoration and related commitments: (1) What social and ecological landscape objectives are being sought through Forest Landscape Restoration? (2) How are specific areas being selected for restoration? (3) How is success measured when restoring forest landscapes? We believe that there is an urgent need to adequately answer these questions to successfully implement political commitments for large‐scale forest restoration.
Restoration Ecology
environmental restoration
Forest cover
Tree (set theory)
Cite
Citations (90)
Restoration Ecology
Cite
Citations (19)
AbstractAn estimated 2 billion ha of forests are degraded globally and global change suggests even greater need for forest restoration. Four forest restoration paradigms are identified and discussed: revegetation, ecological restoration, functional restoration, and forest landscape restoration. Restoration is examined in terms of a degraded starting point and an ending point of an idealized natural forest. Global change, climate variability, biotechnology, and synthetic biology pose significant challenges to current restoration paradigms, underscoring the importance of clearly defined goals focused on functional ecosystems. Public debate is needed on acceptable goals; one role for science is to inform and help frame the debate and describe feasibility and probable consequences.KEYWORDS: reconstructionrehabilitationreclamationnovel ecosystemsintervention ecology
Restoration Ecology
Revegetation
Novel ecosystem
Cite
Citations (118)
Restoration Ecology
Atlantic forest
environmental restoration
Limiting
Forest cover
Cite
Citations (0)
Abstract Forest conservation and restoration are key components of ecological engineering. Previous studies often focused on the forest restoration impact on vegetation greening, ignoring the importance of forest conservation, and the link between forest conservation and restoration remains unclear. Based on land use data, forest cover loss data, and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer Leaf Area Index, in this study, we explored the spatial pattern of forest conservation and restoration from 2000 to 2020, and quantitatively calculated the contribution of forest conservation and restoration to vegetation greening. The results showed that the forest conservation area was 821,888 km 2 , and the forest restoration area was 100,266 km 2 in South China karst. The forest conservation and restoration area with vegetation greenness increasing were 358,236 and 54,397 km 2 , respectively, which contributed 39.85% and 6.05% to vegetation greening. Moreover, there was a nonlinear relationship between forest conservation and restoration, and the results showed an inverted U‐shape in most provinces. This study evaluated ecological engineering from the perspective of forest conservation and restoration, which could provide the scientific basis for differentiated ecological engineering planning.
Restoration Ecology
Cite
Citations (14)
Forest restoration projects are occurring throughout the world. Restoration projects can vary greatly depending on the type of forest and the type of stressors that have caused ecosystem degradation and the need for restoration. Because of this variability, and because objective criteria for determining the success of restoration projects are lacking, it is difficult to evaluate the overall success of forest restoration projects. Using ecological standards developed for river restoration as a model, a similar set of standards was applied to forest restoration projects. The standards put forward can be used to evaluate the success of ecosystem restoration universally through the use of site-specific indicators of ecological success. This analysis found that many but not all of the criteria are being used to evaluate forest restoration success. Furthermore, the ecological health of the restored ecosystem is not always prioritized, as socioeconomic values are occasionally favored. Thus, it is important for a set of evaluation criteria primarily related to ecological health to be readily accepted by forest restoration practitioners.
Restoration Ecology
environmental restoration
Cite
Citations (1)
Abstract Two billion ha have been identified globally for forest restoration. Our meta-analysis encompassing 221 study landscapes worldwide reveals forest restoration enhances biodiversity by 15–84% and vegetation structure by 36–77%, compared with degraded ecosystems. For the first time, we identify the main ecological drivers of forest restoration success (defined as a return to a reference condition, that is, old-growth forest) at both the local and landscape scale. These are as follows: the time elapsed since restoration began, disturbance type and landscape context. The time elapsed since restoration began strongly drives restoration success in secondary forests, but not in selectively logged forests (which are more ecologically similar to reference systems). Landscape restoration will be most successful when previous disturbance is less intensive and habitat is less fragmented in the landscape. Restoration does not result in full recovery of biodiversity and vegetation structure, but can complement old-growth forests if there is sufficient time for ecological succession.
Restoration Ecology
Cite
Citations (504)