Trade-offs among forest value components in community forests of southwestern Amazonia

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Contemporary conservation interventions must balance potential trade-offs between multiple ecosystem services. In tropical forests, much attention has focused on the extent to which carbon-based conservation provided by REDD+ policies can also mitigate biodiversity conservation. In the nearly one-third of tropical forests that are community owned or managed, conservation strategies must also balance the multiple uses of forest products that support local livelihoods. Although much discussion has focused on policy options, little empirical evidence exists to evaluate the potential for trade-offs among different tropical forest value components.We assessed multiple components of forest value, including tree diversity, carbon stocks, and both timber and nontimber forest product resources, in forest communities across the trinational frontier of Brazil, Peru, and Bolivia. We installed 69 0.5-ha vegetation plots in local communities, and we characterized 15 components of forest value for each plot. Principal components analyses revealed two major axes of forest value, the first of which defined a trade-off between diversity of woody plant communities (taxonomic and functional) versus aboveground biomass and standing timber volume. The second axis described abundance of commercial species, with strong positive loadings for density of timber and nontimber forest products, including Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) and copaiba oil (Copaifera spp.). The observed trade-off between different components of forest value suggests a potential for management conflicts prioritizing biodiversity conservation versus carbon stocks in the region. We discuss the potential for integrative indices of forest value for tropical forest conservation.

Nut Production in Bertholletia excelsa across a Logged Forest Mosaic: Implications for Multiple Forest Use

“…Evidence suggests that the species’ basin-wide distribution is the product of deliberate anthropogenic intervention [ 77 ], although short-distance nut dispersal by caviomorph rodents also plays a role [ 78 ]. Most estimates of the species’ density [diameter at breast height (DBH) ≥ 10 cm] range from 1–3 stems ha -1 (e.g., [ 31 , 76 , 79 – 80 ]), although some estimates are as high as 23 individuals ha -1 [ 71 ].…”

Carbon stocks and biodiversity of coastal lowland forests in South Africa: implications for aligning sustainable development and carbon mitigation initiatives

“…as dominant canopy and subcanopy trees, storing large C stocks with high potential sequestration value. In addition, given that functional diversity can be even more important than functional dominance in driving carbon sequestration potential [61], consideration of both biodiversity and carbon storage, alongside a broader understanding of tradeoffs and synergies among ecosystem services, will be important for guiding sustainable carbon management activities that align sustainable development initiatives [61][62][63].…”

Rasgos Funcionales De Especies Arbóreas Raras Y Abundantes en Bosques De Montaña Del Sur De México

“…Los rasgos morfológicos y funcionales descritos para las especies raras, permiten tener un acercamiento de las posibles consecuencias de la transformación del paisaje sobre estos grupos de especies. La configuración actual de los bosques de montaña de Chiapas se puede entender a través de los intercambios (trade-offs) en las respuestas de los dos grupos de especies raras vs. abundantes y se reflejan en las diferencias interespecíficas que contribuyen a la estructuración comunitaria vegetal (Baraloto et al, 2014;Violle et al, 2017). Dado que las especies raras parecen depender de ambientes ecológicamente más estructurados que las especies abundantes, se anticipa que la dominancia de especies abundantes, de rápido crecimiento y facilidad de dispersión anemócora promueven su expansión sobre los hábitats más restringidos de las especies poco comunes, por lo que es probable que no sobrevivan si la velocidad de cambio de las condiciones ecológicas asociadas es más rápida que su ciclo de vida (Engler et al, 2009).…”