We used spatial optimization to analyze alternative restoration scenarios and quantify tradeoffs for a large, multifaceted restoration program to restore resiliency to forest landscapes in the western US. We specifically examined tradeoffs between provisional ecosystem services, fire protection, and the amelioration of key ecological stressors. The results revealed that attainment of multiple restoration objectives was constrained due to the joint spatial patterns of ecological conditions and socioeconomic values. We also found that current restoration projects are substantially suboptimal, perhaps the result of compromises in the collaborative planning process used by federal planners, or operational constraints on forest management activities. The juxtaposition of ecological settings with human values generated sharp tradeoffs, especially with respect to community wildfire protection versus generating revenue to support restoration and fire protection activities. The analysis and methods can be leveraged by ongoing restoration programs in many ways including: 1) integrated prioritization of restoration activities at multiple scales on public and adjoining private lands, 2) identification and mapping of conflicts between ecological restoration and socioeconomic objectives, 3) measuring the efficiency of ongoing restoration projects compared to the optimal production possibility frontier, 4) consideration of fire transmission among public and private land parcels as a prioritization metric, and 5) finding socially optimal regions along the production frontier as part of collaborative restoration planning.

Abstract:The implementation of US federal forest restoration programs on national forests is a complex process that requires balancing diverse socioecological goals with project economics. Despite both the large geographic scope and substantial investments in restoration projects, a quantitative decision support framework to locate optimal project areas and examine tradeoffs among alternative restoration strategies is lacking. We developed and demonstrated a new prioritization approach for restoration projects using optimization and the framework of production possibility frontiers. The study area was a 914,657 ha national forest in eastern Oregon, US that was identified as a national priority for restoration with the goal of increasing fire resiliency and sustaining ecosystem services. The results illustrated sharp tradeoffs among the various restoration goals due to weak spatial correlation of forest stressors and provisional ecosystem services. The sharpest tradeoffs were found in simulated projects that addressed either wildfire risk to the urban interface or wildfire hazard, highlighting the challenges associated with meeting both economic and fire protection goals. Understanding the nature of tradeoffs between restoration objectives and communicating them to forest stakeholders will allow forest managers to more effectively design and implement economically feasible restoration projects.

We modeled forest restoration scenarios to examine economic and ecological trade-offs associated with alternative prioritization scenarios. The study examined four US national forests designated as priorities for investments to restore fire resiliency and generate economic opportunities to support local industry. We were particularly interested in trade-offs between generating revenue from forest restoration activities versus addressing ecological departure from fire resiliency, and wildfire risk to the urban interface. The results showed strong trade-offs and scale effects on production possibility frontiers, and substantial variation among planning areas and national forests. The results pointed to spatially explicit priorities and opportunities to achieve restoration goals within the study area. However, optimizing revenue to help finance restoration projects led to a sharp reduction in the attainment of other socioecological objectives, especially reducing ecological departure from historic conditions. The analytical framework and results can inform ongoing collaborative restoration planning programs to help stakeholders

No abstract

No abstract