Accurate quantification of below-ground biomass (BGB) of woody vegetation is critical to understanding ecosystem function and potential for climate change mitigation from sequestration of biomass carbon. We compiled 2 054 measurements of individual tree and shrub biomass from across a broad range of ecoregions (arid shrublands to tropical rainforests) to develop allometric models for prediction of BGB. We found that the relationship between BGB and stem diameter was generic, with a simple power-law model having a BGB prediction efficiency of 72-93% for four broad plant functional types: (i) shrubs and Acacia trees, (ii) multi-stemmed mallee eucalypts, (iii) other trees of relatively high wood density, and; (iv) a species of relatively low wood density, Pinus radiata. There was little improvement in accuracy of model prediction by including variables (e.g. climatic characteristics, stand age or management) in addition to stem diameter alone. We further assessed the generality of the plant functional type models across 11 contrasting stands where data from whole-plot excavation of BGB were available. The efficiency of model prediction of stand-based BGB was 93%, with a mean absolute prediction error of only 6.5%, and with no improvements in validation results when species-specific models were applied. Given the high prediction performance of the generalised models, we suggest that additional costs associated with the development of new species-specific models for estimating BGB are only warranted when gains in accuracy of stand-based predictions are justifiable, such as for a high-biomass stand comprising only one or two dominant species. However, generic models based on plant functional type should not be applied where stands are dominated by species that are unusual in their morphology and unlikely to conform to the generalised plant functional group models.

Current policy is driving renewed impetus to restore forests to return ecological function, protect species, sequester carbon and secure livelihoods. Here we assess the contribution of tree planting to ecosystem restoration in tropical and sub-tropical Asia; we synthesize evidence on mortality and growth of planted trees at 176 sites and assess structural and biodiversity recovery of co-located actively restored and naturally regenerating forest plots. Mean mortality of planted trees was 18% 1 year after planting, increasing to 44% after 5 years. Mortality varied strongly by site and was typically ca 20% higher in open areas than degraded forest, with height at planting positively affecting survival. Size-standardized growth rates were negatively related to species-level wood density in degraded forest and plantations enrichment settings. Based on community-level data from 11 landscapes, active restoration resulted in faster accumulation of tree basal area and structural properties were closer to old-growth reference sites, relative to natural regeneration, but tree species richness did not differ. High variability in outcomes across sites indicates that planting for restoration is potentially rewarding but risky and context-dependent. Restoration projects must prepare for and manage commonly occurring challenges and align with efforts to protect and reconnect remaining forest areas. The abstract of this article is available in Bahasa Indonesia in the electronic supplementary material. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Understanding forest landscape restoration: reinforcing scientific foundations for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration’.

Indonesia is home to around 45% of the world’s tropical peatlands which continue to be degraded on a large scale by deforestation, drainage and fire, contributing massively to global GHG emissions. Approaches to restoring the peat–water balance and reducing emissions in peat hydrological units, through managing them based either on full protection or large-scale commercial production, have generally failed to address environmental and local community needs. We present published and unpublished findings pointing to the need for an integrated peatland protection and restoration strategy based first on raising water levels in degraded (drained) peatlands and maintaining them in forested peatlands, thus, reducing GHG emissions. Second, the strategy incorporates ecologically sound agroforestry business models that strengthen livelihoods of smallholders and so sustain their interest in sustainably managing the peatlands. In this paper, we focus on the second element of this strategy in Indonesia. Eight agroforestry business models are proposed based on their merits to attract both smallholders and commercial investors as well as their compatibility with hydrological rehabilitation of the peatlands. While financial returns on investment will vary across sites and countries, our analysis indicates that some models can be profitable over both short and longer time periods with relatively low levels of investment risk.

No abstract

Successful restoration and fire prevention in peat landscapes require full rewetting and permanent revegetation for optimal water retention. The ecological and socio-economic heterogeneity of these landscapes calls for integrated approaches based on participatory zonation and locally appropriate business models. Primary activities in deep-peat core zones are blocking of drainage canals and revegetation; in shallow-peat buffer zones, forestry and agroforestry on fully rewetted peat, aquaculture, and duck farming; while on surrounding non-peat mineral soils, more intensive tree plantations and agriculture. Community-oriented enterprises require private investment, including microfinance. Blended public and private investment is needed for core-zone restoration. Assuming restoration costs of USD 250-1,000 per ha on moderately drained peat, with emissions of 40tCO2/ha/year, carbon finance could pay for the cost of restoration in under 10 years if emissions are fully or largely abated. To stimulate investment in multiple peatland landscapes we propose a provincial ‘enabling platform’ to support participatory zoning, project design, and monitoring based on common standards and methodologies; technical assistance and incubation for project start-up; multi-stakeholder support for enabling policies, plans and institutions; strengthened finance mechanisms and bundled investments for large and small enterprises; and robust scientific support and knowledge exchange.