Tropical Forest Gain and Interactions amongst Agents of Forest Change

Sloan, Sean

doi:10.3390/f7030055

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This creates both challenges and advantages in terms of both the ease of promoting forest recovery (through education, policies, and management), and in anticipating the suite of ecosystem services they ultimately produce (Sloan 2015(Sloan , 2016. However, new forests and forest transitions provide an important opportunity to partially reverse historical environmental degradation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Governments may subsidize plantations to produce forest goods and commodities (e.g., timber, palm oil) or to stabilize land in regions degraded by deforestation (Mather 1992, Sloan 2016), thereby potentially producing industrial plantation transitions. These forests differ from natural forests but are nevertheless included in many national and global estimates of tree and forest cover (FAO 2015.…”

Section: Forest Transition Typologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rudel et al (2005) and Lambin and Meyfroidt (2010) identified several pathways of socio-agrarian change that can lead to forest transitions. Different pathways and drivers of forest recovery can produce different types and distributions of forest cover, which possess different ecological characteristics (e.g., biodiversity, biomass, structure, and proportions of native and non-native species) (Holl et al 2000, Chazdon 2003, 2014, Dent and Wright 2009, Wilson and Rhemtulla 2016, geographic characteristics (e.g., regrowth on steep slopes or plantations near roads) (Dent and Wright 2009, Redo et al 2012, Nanni and Grau 2014, Angonese and Grau 2014, Sloan 2016, and landscape attributes (e.g., connectivity, spatial relationships among secondary and remnant primary forest, habitat corridors) (Thomlinson et al 1996, Hecht and Saatchi 2007, Angonese and Grau 2014 (Fig. 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition

Wilson¹,

Schelhas²,

Grau³

et al. 2017

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. New forests are expanding around the world. In many regions, regrowth rates are surpassing deforestation rates, resulting in "forest transitions," or net gains in forest cover. Typically measured only in terms of aggregate"'forest cover" change, these new forests are ecologically distinct from each other and from those originally cleared. We ask, what are the ecological attributes, goods, and services we might expect from different pathways of forest recovery? To address this question, we proposed a typology of forest transitions that reflects both their social drivers and ecological outcomes: tree plantation, spontaneous regeneration, and agroforestry transitions. Using case studies, we illustrate how the ecological outcomes of each transition type differ and change over time. We mapped the global distribution of forest-transition types to identify global epicenters of each, and found that spontaneous transitions are most common globally, especially in Latin America; agroforestry transitions predominate in Europe and Central America; and plantation transitions occur in parts of Europe and Asia. We proposed a conceptual framework to understand and compare the ecological services arising from different types of forest transitions over time: forest ecosystem-service transition curves. This framework illustrates that carbon sequestration tends to be comparatively lower in agroforestry transitions, and biodiversity recovery is lower in industrial plantations. Spontaneously regenerating forests tend to have relatively high biodiversity and biomass but provide fewer provisioning and economically valuable services. This framework captures the dynamism that we observe in forest transitions, thus illustrating that different social drivers produce different types of ecosystem-service transitions, and that as secondary forests grow, these services will change over time at rates that differ among transition types. Ultimately, this framework can guide future research, describe actual and potential changes in ecosystem services associated with different types of transitions, and promote management plans that incorporate forest cover changes with the services and benefits they provide.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Forest Transition Typologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition

Wilson¹,

Schelhas²,

Grau³

et al. 2017

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Three papers are from Asia [9,11,15], two from Africa [13,16], two from Central America [12,17], and two from the Amazon basin [10,14].…”

Section: Papers Of the Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Poffenberger [15], in turn, focuses on how villagers in Northeast India strive to adapt to standards that emerge from global efforts to align local forest management to wider goals of climate change mitigation. Etongo et al [16] examine the factors that incentivize tree planting among smallholder farmers in Burkina Faso, and Sloan [17] explores how communal forest management and reforestation contribute to forest cover and forest condition change, while interacting with corporate actors in the wider landscape. The list of papers can be found in Table 1.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incentives and Constraints of Community and Smallholder Forestry

Jong

Galloway

Katila

et al. 2016

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This editorial introduces the special issue: Incentives and constraints of community and smallholder forestry. The special issue contains nine papers, listed in a table in the main text. The editorial reviews briefly some key elements of our current understanding of community and smallholder forestry. The editorial also briefly introduces the nine papers of the special issue and points out how they link to the debate among academics and specialists on community and smallholder forestry. Finally, the editorial highlights the new elements that the nine papers contribute to our understanding of community and smallholder forestry, before it concludes at the end.

show abstract

Characteristic trajectories of ecosystem services in mountains

Locatelli

Lavorel

Sloan

et al. 2017

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

Self Cite

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensification of land use and management over recent decades has resulted in trade-offs between food or timber production and other ecosystem services (ES). Despite an increase in scholarly publications on ES, the temporal aspects of ES trade-offs have largely been neglected to date. Here we explore how past and future land-use trajectories (pathways of change) influence ES over time, using mountain landscapes as a model. Based on a synthesis of 51 cases of temporal changes in ES within mountain landscapes, we analyze how changes in land-use intensity influence the supply of ten key services and we describe six typical examples (archetypes) of ES change. Our analysis reveals that land-use intensity is an important factor shaping these archetypes. Land-use intensification often degrades ES (eg recreation and water regulation), with the exception of services targeted by intensification (food or timber) and with differences between forest and agricultural intensification. Service degradation following intensification is not always reversed by reductions in land-use intensity (termed "extensification"). A lthough human modifications of ecosystems affect the flow of ecosystem services (ES), policy and management interventions can be designed to at least partially restore ES and their contribution to human well-being (MA 2005). However, the management of multiple ES across landscapes can be challenging, given that tradeoffs between services often occur over space and time (Raudsepp-Hearne et al. 2010;Locatelli et al. 2014), for example, where increasing food production leads to decreases in regulating services. In contrast to the spatial dimension of ES, little attention has been paid to the temporal dimension of ES trade-offs (Holland et al. 2011;Bennett et al. 2015). Because critical land-use changes are anticipated in the future and competing demands on land imply trade-offs (Laurance et al. 2014), understanding the temporal changes in multiple ES caused by current and impending land-use is necessary to inform sound management decisions (Bennett et al. 2009), especially when these decisions are intended to re-establish complex services and restore biodiversity. Our aim is to contribute to this understanding by analyzing the temporal changes of multiple ES, using mountain landscapes as a model. The temporal trajectories (or pathways of changes) of ES are typically driven by human activities that modify land use and cover (Lautenbach et al. 2011;Renard et al. 2015). Changes in land use and land cover may lead to changes in ES, both qualitative (converting forests to agricultural lands replaces timber with food production) and quantitative (water-quality metrics are negatively affected by increased fertilizer use with agriculture) (Foley et al. 2005. Land intensification (ie increase in land-use intensity) has been a major motivation behind land-management changes in the past 50 years, and has resulted in rapid increases in agricultural yields but has also lead to biodiversity losses (Lambin et al. 2000). Conversely...

show abstract

Tropical Forest Gain and Interactions amongst Agents of Forest Change

Cited by 17 publications

References 56 publications

Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition

Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition

Incentives and Constraints of Community and Smallholder Forestry

Characteristic trajectories of ecosystem services in mountains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About