Forest landscape restoration: building on the past for future success

Abstract

Living in a time of continuous crises, the effects of climate change, social unrest, and military conflicts are apparent at every turn. The loss and degradation of natural systems is an existential crisis for humanity; reversing the destruction is urgent international policy. The novel coronavirus pandemic and accompanying global economic recession have reversed recent gains in reducing poverty. The pandemic underscores the importance of nature: as a refuge from social isolation and a source of novel viruses. Viewed optimistically, this may be what the philosopher Gershom Scholem called "plastic hours," a fortuitous alignment of public opinion, political power, and events that overcomes the desire to return to the status quo. "Building back better" with nature-based solutions after COVID 19 complements the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Experience from implementing forest landscape restoration (FLR) under the Bonn Challenge points the way forward. Implementing FLR requires balancing competing interests and differing priorities for livelihoods versus biodiversity while aligning local with national goals. People live in degraded landscapes and unless local needs are addressed, restoration likely fails. Experience shows that multi-stakeholder processes require skilled facilitators to plan, moderate, and monitor FLR. Initial experience with training FLR facilitators suggests the most promising option is a series of workshops followed by a mentorship program.

Constraints to agroforestry diffusion under the Billion Trees Afforestation Project (BTAP), Pakistan: policy recommendations for 10-BTAP

“…Diffusion of agroforestry systems (a land-use system that integrates trees and crops) is increasingly common around the world (Maia et al 2021 ). Its adoption is particularly strong among smallholder farmers, while many countries consider it a vital strategy in implementing forest restoration activities (Stanturf et al 2019 ; Mahmood and Zubair 2020 ; Stanturf 2021 ). Not only does it have the potential to restore degraded lands and overcome water scarcity, but it can also foster climate change mitigation and adaptation (Sharma et al 2016 ; Favretto et al 2018 ).…”

A freshwater perspective on the United Nations decade for ecosystem restoration

“…The same can be said for restoration where science‐based freshwater ecological restoration is lagging. Early signals about the UN DER suggest that much of the thinking has been about terrestrial systems (Stanturf, 2021) and associated restoration actions (e.g., mass tree planting; Temperton et al, 2019; Duguma et al, 2020). Clearly freshwater systems can benefit from restoration of terrestrial systems (and tree planting; Brancalion & Holl, 2020) but they also demand and deserve targeted restoration efforts that incorporate diverse strategies that benefit biodiversity (Veldman et al, 2015) and help to create the conditions that enable long‐term sustainability rather than focusing solely on short‐term gains (Fleischman et al, 2020; Higgins et al, 2021).…”

Challenges in measuring multiple impacts hinder performance recognition in forest landscape restoration: experience from seven field projects

“…More generally, monitoring of forest restoration remains inadequate (e.g. Evans et al 2018; Stanturf 2021) with the emphasis being heavily weighted towards “simple” measures of numbers of trees and hectares. Although these measures are paramount to monitoring results in forest restoration, they are insufficient.…”