Carbon stocks in central African forests enhanced by elephant disturbance

Berzaghi, Fabio; Longo, Marcos; Ciais, Philippe; Blake, Stephen; Bretagnolle, François; Vieira, Simone A.; Scaranello, M. A.; Scarascia‐Mugnozza, Giuseppe; Doughty, Christopher E.

doi:10.1038/s41561-019-0395-6

Cited by 79 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While not the sole dispersers for most tropical seeds, the distance and quantity of seeds moved by forest elephants supersedes most other species (Bunney et al, 2017). Loss of elephant dispersal from poaching or habitat loss (Poulsen et al, 2017) could lead to reduced forest diversity, inability of forests to colonize new or deforested areas, and potentially reduced carbon stocks (Nathan, 2006;Jordano et al, 2007;Poulsen et al, 2018;Berzaghi et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climatic and Resource Determinants of Forest Elephant Movements

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climatic and Resource Determinants of Forest Elephant Movements

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…γ is set to 0.15 to ensure that the long-range effects conservatively contribute no more than 5% to the final index in the same scenario, based on expert opinion and supported e.g. Berzaghi et al ( 64 ) regarding the approximate level of impact on values that would be affected by severe defaunation and other long-range effects.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modification of forests by people means only 40% of remaining forests have high ecosystem integrity

Grantham

Duncan

Evans

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many global environmental agendas, including halting biodiversity loss, reversing land 45 degradation, and limiting climate change, depend upon retaining forests with high ecological 46 integrity, yet the scale and degree of forest modification remains poorly quantified and mapped. 47 Page 3 of 54By integrating data on direct and indirect forest pressures and lost forest connectivity, we generate 48 the first globally-consistent, continuous index of forest condition as determined by degree of 49 anthropogenic modification, which we term 'forest health'. Globally, only 17.4 million km 2 of 50 forest (40.5%) can be considered in high health (mostly found in Canada, Russia, the Amazon, 51Central Africa and New Guinea) and only 27% of this area is found in nationally-designated 52 protected areas. Of all the world's forests found within protected areas, only 56% can be 53 considered in high health. Ambitious policies that prioritize the retention of forest health are now 54 urgently needed alongside current efforts aimed at restoring the health of forests globally. 55 56 MAIN TEXT 57 58 65bodies (e.g. 5), and it is now essential that the scientific community develop improved tools and 66 data to facilitate the consideration of the degree of forest modification in decision-making. 67Mapping and monitoring this globally will provide essential information for coordinated global, 68 national and local policy-making, planning and action, to help nations and other stakeholders 69 achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and implement other shared commitments 70 such as the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Convention to Combat Ecosystem integrity is foundational to all three of the Rio Conventions (UNFCCC, UNCCD, 74 CBD ). As defined by Parrish et al. ( 6), it is essentially the degree to which a system is free from 75 anthropogenic modification of its structure, composition and function. Such modification causes 76 the degradation of many ecosystem benefits, and is often also a precursor to outright deforestation 77 (7, 8). Forests largely free of significant forest modification (i.e. forests having high ecosystem 78 integrity), typically provide higher levels of many forest benefits than modified forests of the 79 same type (9), including; carbon sequestration and storage (10), healthy watersheds (11), 80 traditional homelands for imperiled cultures (12), contribution to local and regional climate 81 processes (13), and forest-dependent biodiversity (14-17). Industrial-scale logging, fragmentation 82 by infrastructure, farming (including cropping and ranching) and urbanization, as well as less 83 visible forms of modification such as over-hunting, wood fuel extraction and changed fire or 84 hydrological regimes (18, 19), all degrade the degree to which forests still support these benefits, 85 as well as their long-term resilience to climate change (9). There can be trade-offs however, 86 between the benefits provided by less-modified forests (e.g., carbon sequestration) and those 8...

show abstract

“…Further, there is an opportunity cost since the resources of the health system which are devoted to fighting the pandemic could have been used to treat the people with other diseases. Attributing a monetary value to wildlife and wildlife disease losses is more complicated since market valuation information remains scattered and does not capture all of the benefits associated with wildlife, such as contemplating benefits, seed dispersal, and even enhancing the carbon storage capacity of forests (Chardonnet et al 2002 ; Berzaghi et al 2019 ). Non-market approaches have been adopted to address this challenge but there exists a longstanding debate around its appropriateness (Stevens et al 1991 ).…”

Section: The Costs Of Infectious Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infectious Diseases and Meat Production

Espinosa

Tago

Treich

2020

Environ Resource Econ

184

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most infectious diseases in humans originate from animals. In this paper, we explore the role of animal farming and meat consumption in the emergence and amplification of infectious diseases. First, we discuss how meat production increases epidemic risks, either directly through increased contact with wild and farmed animals or indirectly through its impact on the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, water use, climate change). Traditional food systems such as bushmeat and backyard farming increase the risks of disease transmission from wild animals, while intensive farming amplifies the impact of the disease due to the high density, genetic proximity, increased immunodeficiency, and live transport of farmed animals. Second, we describe the various direct and indirect costs of animal-based infectious diseases, and in particular, how these diseases can negatively impact the economy and the environment. Last, we discuss policies to reduce the social costs of infectious diseases. While existing regulatory frameworks such as the "One Health" approach focus on increasing farms' biosecurity and emergency preparedness, we emphasize the need to better align stakeholders' incentives and to reduce meat consumption. We discuss in particular the implementation of a "zoonotic" Pigouvian tax, and innovations such as insectbased food or cultured meat.

show abstract

Carbon stocks in central African forests enhanced by elephant disturbance

Cited by 79 publications

References 46 publications

Climatic and Resource Determinants of Forest Elephant Movements

Climatic and Resource Determinants of Forest Elephant Movements

Modification of forests by people means only 40% of remaining forests have high ecosystem integrity

Infectious Diseases and Meat Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About