Multidimensional training among Latin America's restoration professionals

Abstract

The ambitious restoration commitments made by Latin American countries have increased the demand for professionals having multidimensional training in ecological restoration; however, little is known about the kind of training that professionals are currently receiving. Through an online survey, we explored whether restoration professionals in Latin America have been trained on the ecological, socioeconomic, and management dimensions of ecological restoration, and their perceptions of training constraints and curricula needs. Half of the 411 respondents simultaneously work in academia, governments, and nongovernmental organizations, lessening the typical division between the science and practice of restoration, and suggesting the need for stronger multidimensional training to adequately respond to different needs and expectations. Over 80% received formal academic training in fields relevant for restoration and most respondents also reported attending interdisciplinary courses. Training was more focused on the ecological dimension of restoration compared to socioeconomic or management dimensions. Respondents have similar education levels (i.e. most respondents have postgraduate degrees), independently from the organization type in which respondents work, and multidimensionality among organization types was slight. Professionals expressed a need for training opportunities not demanding full-time dedication. Although increasing training opportunities in socioeconomic and management dimensions is needed, we highlight opportunities to reinforce multidimensional training on restoration through organizational and institutional training, and collaborations among organizations.

Challenges during the execution, results, and monitoring phases of ecological restoration: Learning from a country-wide assessment

“…This may be because individuals’ confidence in restoration activities is reinforced by the knowledge that others are also participating [ 102 ]. This positive interaction among community members increases cooperative spirit and reduces project costs; rather than hiring people outside the restoration areas, community participation along with adequate technical training could lead to improved restoration results [ 103 ]. Overall, social participation was adequate; however, this was limited to the field actions [ 86 ].…”

Narratives Across Scales on Barriers and Strategies for Upscaling Forest Restoration: A Brazilian Case Study

“…Therefore, rural extension can play a critical role in providing farmers with important technical support to increase forest cover. However, further training of extension agents on the multiple ecological, social and economic dimensions within the current FLR vision for upscaling may be needed [65]. Despite the presence of extension support in the landscapes assessed, national actors mentioned weak extension support in many other regions of Brazil.…”

A diagnostic for collaborative monitoring in forest landscape restoration

“…It is equally important to create “learning networks” for the “community of practice,” or the people, groups, and interests that are connected to FLR efforts at the local, subnational, national, and global levels (van Oosten et al ). However, government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and planners and implementers often lack experience in applying participatory and collaborative approaches in multi‐stakeholder settings (Sayer et al ; Colfer et al ; Meli et al ) and in initiating collaborative monitoring (Guijt ; Colfer et al ; Murcia et al ). Here we present a diagnostic tool to assess the conditions or success factors that need to be in place to launch collaborative monitoring and promote multi‐scalar thinking, and we discuss its potential applications and contributions for the global FLR effort.…”