Forest landscape restoration for livelihoods and well-being

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Volumn 32, Issue , 2018, Pages 76-83

  Erbaugh, James T ^a   Oldekop, Johan A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION; FOREST; INCENTIVE; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; LIVELIHOOD; SOCIAL IMPACT; SUSTAINABILITY;

EID: 85047407570     PISSN: 18773435     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.05.007     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. Chazdon, R.L., Beyond deforestation: restoring forests and ecosystem services on degraded lands. Science (80-) 320 (2008), 1458–1460.
2. Lewis, S.L., Edwards, D.P., Galbraith, D., Increasing human dominance of tropical forests. Science (80-) 349 (2015), 827–832.
3. Suding, K., Higgs, E., Palmer, M., Callicott, J.B., Anderson, C.B., Baker, M., Gutrich, J.J., Hondula, K.L., LaFevor, M.C., Larson, B.M.H., et al. Committing to ecological restoration. Science (80-) 348 (2015), 638–640 This article acknowledges the gap between international pledges and FLR that has been achieved. It advances four general principles to guide restoration project planning and implementation.
4. Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J.-L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E., Venter, M., Boedhihartono, A.K., Day, M., Garcia, C., et al. Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 (2013), 8349–8356.
5. Reed, J., Van Vianen, J., Deakin, E.L., Barlow, J., Sunderland, T., Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future. Glob Change Biol 22 (2016), 2540–2554.
6. Reed, J., van Vianen, J., Barlow, J., Sunderland, T., Have integrated landscape approaches reconciled societal and environmental issues in the tropics?. Land Use Policy 63 (2017), 481–492 This paper provides the most comprehensive review of landscape approach literature and outcomes.
7. Erbaugh, J., Agrawal, A., Clarifying the landscape approach: a letter to the Editor on “Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics.’’. Glob Change Biol 23 (2017), 4453–4454.
8. Reed, J., van Vianen, J., Barlow, J., Sunderland, T., Clarifying the landscape approach: a response to the Editor. Glob Change Biol, 2017, 10.1111/gcb.13917.
9. Maginnis, S., Jackson, W., What is FLR and how does it differ from current approaches?. Rietbergen-McCracken, J., Maginnis, S., Sarre, A., (eds.) The Forest Landscape Restoration Handbook, 2007, Routledge.
10. Chazdon, R.L., Brancalion, P.H.S., Lamb, D., Laestadius, L., Calmon, M., Kumar, C., A policy-driven knowledge agenda for global forest and landscape restoration. Conserv Lett 10 (2017), 125–132 This text identifies a knowledge creation agenda that aims to guide the implementation of FLR at the local level.
11. Meyfroidt, P., Approaches and terminology for causal analysis in land systems science. J Land Use Sci 11 (2016), 501–522 This contribution clearly defines the logical foundations of causal analysis for land systems science, and it advances a common terminology with which to discuss it.
12. Stanturf, J.A., Palik, B.J., Dumroese, R.K., Contemporary forest restoration: a review emphasizing function. For Ecol Manage 331 (2014), 292–323 This article defines, lists, and explicates types of forest restoration and the common methods used to restore forest landscapes.
13. Aronson, J., Blignaut, J.N., Milton, S.J., Le Maitre, D., Esler, K.J., Limouzin, A., Fontaine, C., de Wit, M.P., Mugido, W., Prinsloo, P., et al. Are socioeconomic benefits of restoration adequately quantified? A meta-analysis of recent papers (2000–2008) in restoration ecology and 12 other scientific journals. Restor Ecol 18 (2010), 143–154.
14. Adams, C., Rodrigues, S.T., Calmon, M., Kumar, C., Impacts of large-scale forest restoration on socioeconomic status and local livelihoods: what we know and do not know. Biotropica 48 (2016), 731–744.
15. Jack, B.K., Kousky, C., Sims, K.R.E., Designing payments for ecosystem services: lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105 (2008), 9465–9470.
16. Alix-Garcia, J., Wolff, H., Payment for ecosystem services from forests. Annu Rev Resour Econ 6 (2014), 361–380.
17. Jayachandran, S., de Laat, J., Lambin, E.F., Stanton, C.Y., Audy, R., Thomas, N.E., Cash for carbon: a randomized trial of payments for ecosystem services to reduce deforestation. Science (80-) 357 (2017), 267–273.
18. Zhou, S., Yin, Y., Xu, W., Ji, Z., Caldwell, I., Ren, J., The costs and benefits of reforestation in Liping County, Guizhou Province, China. J Environ Manage 85 (2007), 722–735.
19. Borgström, S., Zachrisson, A., Eckerberg, K., Funding ecological restoration policy in practice-patterns of short-termism and regional biases. Land Use Policy 52 (2016), 439–453.
20. Chazdon, R.L., Brancalion, P.H.S., Laestadius, L., Bennett-Curry, A., Buckingham, K., Kumar, C., Moll-Rocek, J., Vieira, I.C.G., Wilson, S.J., When is a forest a forest? Forest concepts and definitions in the era of forest and landscape restoration. Ambio 45 (2016), 538–550 This article provides an overview of forest definitions and connects them with contemporary issues of policy formation as well as forest management strategies.
21. Hansen, M.C., Potapov, P.V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S.A., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S.V., Goetz, S.J., Loveland, T.R., et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science (80-) 342 (2013), 850–853.
22. Blackman, A., Evaluating forest conservation policies in developing countries using remote sensing data: an introduction and practical guide. For Policy Econ 34 (2013), 1–16.
23. Zhai, D.L., Xu, J.C., Dai, Z.C., Cannon, C.H., Grumbine, R.E., Increasing tree cover while losing diverse natural forests in tropical Hainan, China. Reg Environ Chang 14 (2014), 611–621.
24. Mansourian, S., Stanturf, J.A., Derkyi, M.A.A., Engel, V.L., Forest landscape restoration: increasing the positive impacts of forest restoration or simply the area under tree cover?. Restor Ecol 25 (2017), 178–183.
25. Walpole, E.H., Toman, E., Wilson, R.S., Stidham, M., Shared visions, future challenges: a case study of three collaborative forest landscape restoration program locations. Ecol Soc, 22, 2017.
26. Chambers, R., Conway, G.R., Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st Century. 1991.
27. Anani, K., Sustainable Governance of Livelihoods in Rural Africa: A Place-based Response to Globalism in Africa. 1999.
28. Scoones, I., Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. J Peasant Stud 36 (2009), 171–196.
29. Alkire, S., Foster, J., Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. J Public Econ 95 (2011), 476–487.
30. Alkire, S., Roche, J.M., Vaz, A., Changes over time in multidimensional poverty: methodology and results for 34 countries. World Dev 94 (2017), 232–249 This research explains the operationalization of multidimensional poverty, and it compares multidimensional poverty using nationally representative surveys and the Alkire-Foster method.
31. van Noordwijk, M., Leimona, B., Jindal, R., Villamor, G.B., Vardhan, M., Namirembe, S., Catacutan, D., Kerr, J., Minang, P.A., Tomich, T.P., Payments for environmental services: evolution toward efficient and fair incentives for multifunctional landscapes. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37 (2012), 389–420.
32. Corbera, E., Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4 (2012), 612–619.
33. He, J., Sikor, T., Notions of justice in payments for ecosystem services: insights from China's sloping land conversion program in Yunnan Province. Land Use Policy 43 (2015), 207–216.
34. Weston, P., Hong, R., Kaboré C., Kull, C.A., Farmer-managed natural regeneration enhances rural livelihoods in dryland West Africa. Environ Manage 55 (2015), 1402–1417.
35. He, J., Lang, R., Limits of state-led programs of payment for ecosystem services: field evidence from the Sloping Land Conversion Program in southwest China. Hum Ecol 43 (2015), 749–758.
36. He, J., Xu, J., Is there decentralization in North Korea? Evidence and lessons from the sloping land management program 2004–2014. Land Use Policy 61 (2017), 113–125.
37. Sayer, J.A., Margules, C., Boedhihartono, A.K., Sunderland, T., Langston, J.D., Reed, J., Riggs, R., Buck, L.E., Campbell, B.M., Kusters, K., et al. Measuring the effectiveness of landscape approaches to conservation and development. Sustain Sci 12 (2017), 465–476 This article highlights the lack of documented, long-term effectiveness of landscape approaches, and it promotes a set of criteria to guide the monitoring and evaluation of landscape approach outcomes.
38. Hecht, S., Yang, A.L., Basnett, B.S., Padoch, C., Peluso, N.L., People in Motion, Forests in Transition: Trends in Migration, Urbanization, and Remittances and Their Effects on Tropical Forests. 2015, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia.
39. Bennett, M.T., China's sloping land conversion program: institutional innovation or business as usual?. Ecol Econ 65 (2008), 699–711.
40. Clement, F., Amezaga, J.M., Afforestation and forestry land allocation in northern Vietnam: analysing the gap between policy intentions and outcomes. Land Use Policy 26 (2009), 458–470.
41. Santika, T., Meijaard, E., Budiharta, S., Law, E.A., Kusworo, A., Hutabarat, J.A., Indrawan, T.P., Struebig, M., Raharjo, S., Huda, I., et al. Community forest management in Indonesia: avoided deforestation in the context of anthropogenic and climate complexities. Glob Environ Change 46 (2017), 60–71.
42. Wilson, S.J., Communal management as a strategy for restoring cloud forest landscapes in Andean Ecuador. World Dev Perspect 3 (2016), 47–49.
43. Haglund, E., Ndjeunga, J., Snook, L., Pasternak, D., Dry land tree management for improved household livelihoods: farmer managed natural regeneration in Niger. J Environ Manage 92 (2011), 1696–1705.
44. Pohnan, E., Ompusunggu, H., Webb, C., Does tree planting change minds? Assessing the use of community participation in reforestation to address illegal logging in West Kalimantan. Mongabay.com Open Access J – Trop Conserv Sci 888 (2015), 45–57.
45. Kramer, D., Vallarino, B., An association of rural villagers leading by example at the landscape scale in Honduras. World Dev Perspect 3 (2016), 12–14.
46. Wilson, S.J., Cagalanan, D., Governing restoration: strategies, adaptations and innovations for tomorrow's forest landscapes. World Dev Perspect 4 (2016), 11–15.
47. Jindal, R., Kerr, J.M., Carter, S., Reducing poverty through carbon forestry? Impacts of the N'hambita Community Carbon Project in Mozambique. World Dev 40 (2012), 2123–2135.
48. Liu, Z., Lan, J., The sloping land conversion program in China: effect on the livelihood diversification of rural households. World Dev 70 (2015), 147–161.
49. Sandewall, M., Kassa, H., Wu, S., Khoa, P.V., He, Y., Ohlsson, B., Policies to promote household based plantation forestry and their impacts on livelihoods and the environment: cases from Ethiopia, China, Vietnam and Sweden. Int For Rev 17 (2015), 98–111.
50. Börner, J., Baylis, K., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Honey-Rosés, J., Persson, U.M., Wunder, S., The effectiveness of payments for environmental services. World Dev 96 (2017), 359–374 This text provides current evidence on the effectiveness of payment for ecosystem services (PES) projects and advances a related theory of change PES projects.
51. Agrawal, A., Chhatre, A., Gerber, E.R., motivational crowding in sustainable development interventions. Am Polit Sci Rev 109 (2015), 470–487.
52. Reij, C., Garrity, D., Scaling up farmer-managed natural regeneration in Africa to restore degraded landscapes. Biotropica 48 (2016), 834–843.
53. Zhang, Z., Zinda, J.A., Li, W., Forest transitions in Chinese villages: explaining community-level variation under the returning forest to farmland program. Land Use Policy 64 (2017), 245–257 This unique research combines remotely sensed vegetation cover, household survey, focus group, and intensive interviews to examine variations in outcomes from China's Returning Farmland to Forest Program in northwest Yunaan.
54. Gray, C.L., Bilsborrow, R.E., Consequences of out-migration for land use in rural Ecuador. Land Use Policy 36 (2014), 182–191.
55. Qin, H., Rural-to-urban labor migration, household livelihoods, and the rural environment in Chongqing municipality, Southwest China. Hum Ecol 38 (2010), 675–690.
56. Aguilar-Støen, M., Taylor, M., Castellanos, E., agriculture, land tenure and international migration in rural Guatemala. J Agrar Change 16 (2016), 123–144.
57. Taylor, M.J., Aguilar-Støen, M., Castellanos, E., Moran-Taylor, M.J., Gerkin, K., International migration, land use change and the environment in Ixcán, Guatemala. Land Use Policy 54 (2016), 290–301.
58. Chen, R., Ye, C., Cai, Y., Xing, X., Chen, Q., The impact of rural out-migration on land use transition in China: past, present and trend. Land Use Policy 40 (2014), 101–110.
59. Jaquet, S., Schwilch, G., Hartung-Hofmann, F., Adhikari, A., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Shrestha, G., Liniger, H.P., Kohler, T., Does outmigration lead to land degradation? Labour shortage and land management in a western Nepal watershed. Appl Geogr 62 (2015), 157–170.
60. Meyfroidt, P., Lambin, E.F., Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad. Proc Natl Acad U S A 106 (2009), 16139–16144.
61. Galudra, G., van Noordwijk, M., Agung, P., Suyanto, S., Pradhan, U., Migrants, land markets and carbon emissions in Jambi, Indonesia: land tenure change and the prospect of emission reduction. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 19 (2014), 715–731.
62. Lazos-Chavero, E., Zinda, J., Bennett-Curry, A., Balvanera, P., Bloomfield, G., Lindell, C., Negra, C., Stakeholders and tropical reforestation: challenges, trade-offs, and strategies in dynamic environments. Biotropica 48 (2016), 900–914.
63. Sikor, T., He, J., Lestrelin, G., Property rights regimes and natural resources: a conceptual analysis revisited. World Dev 93 (2017), 337–349.
64. Zinda, J.A., Trac, C.J., Zhai, D., Harrell, S., Dual-function forests in the returning farmland to forest program and the flexibility of environmental policy in China. Geoforum 78 (2017), 119–132.
65. Zhang, K., Song, C., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Q., Natural disasters and economic development drive forest dynamics and transition in China. For Policy Econ 76 (2017), 56–64.
66. Frayer, J., Sun, Z., Müller, D., Munroe, D.K., Xu, J., Analyzing the drivers of tree planting in Yunnan, China, with Bayesian networks. Land Use Policy 36 (2014), 248–258.
67. Monroe, A.S., Butler, W.H., Responding to a policy mandate to collaborate: structuring collaboration in the collaborative forest landscape restoration program. J Environ Plan Manag 59 (2016), 1054–1072.
68. Hyman, J.B., A general framework for prioritizing land units for ecological protection and restoration. Environ Manage 25 (2000), 23–35.
69. Cipollini, K., Cipollini, K.A., Maruyama, A.L., Zimmerman, C.L., Planning for restoration: a decision analysis approach to prioritization planning for restoration: a decision analysis approach to prioritization. Restoration Ecol 13 (2005), 460–470.
70. Gourevitch, J.D., Hawthorne, P.L., Keeler, B.L., Beatty, C.R., Greve, M., Verdone, M.A., Optimizing investments in national-scale forest landscape restoration in Uganda to maximize multiple benefits. Environ Res Lett, 11, 2016, 114027.
71. Schulz, J.J., Schröder, B., Identifying suitable multifunctional restoration areas for forest landscape restoration in Central Chile. Ecosphere, 8, 2017.
72. Ager, A.A., Vogler, K.C., Day, M.A., Bailey, J.D., Economic opportunities and trade-offs in collaborative forest landscape restoration. Ecol Econ 136 (2017), 226–239 This article quantifies outcome trade-offs in a national forest restoration project using a spatially explicit, economic trade-off analysis.
73. Budiharta, S., Meijaard, E., Wells, J.A., Abram, N.K., Wilson, K.A., Enhancing feasibility: incorporating a socio-ecological systems framework into restoration planning. Environ Sci Policy 64 (2016), 83–92.
74. Mansourian, S., Dudley, N., Vallauri, D., Forest landscape restoration: progress in the last decade and remaining challenges. Ecol Restor 35 (2017), 281–288.
75. Januchowski-Hartley, S.R., Moon, K., Stoeckl, N., Gray, S., Social factors and private benefits influence landholders’ riverine restoration priorities in tropical Australia. J Environ Manage 110 (2012), 20–26.
76. Le, H.D., Smith, C., Herbohn, J., Harrison, S., More than just trees: assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries. J Rural Stud 28 (2012), 5–19.
77. Le, H.D., Smith, C., Herbohn, J., Identifying interactions among reforestation success drivers: a case study from the Philippines. Ecol Modell 316 (2015), 62–77 This article elucidates methods, pathways, and outcomes for forest landscape restoration projects.
78. Newton, P., Miller, D.C., Byenkya, M.A.A., Agrawal, A., Who are forest-dependent people? A taxonomy to aid livelihood and land use decision-making in forested regions. Land Use Policy 57 (2016), 388–395.
79. Roubík, H., Mazancová J., Phung, L.D., Banout, J., Current approach to manure management for small-scale Southeast Asian farmers — using Vietnamese biogas and non-biogas farms as an example. Renew Energy 115 (2018), 362–370.
80. IUCN, WRI: a guide to the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM): assessing forest landscape restoration opportunities at the national or sub-national level. 2014.
81. Richards, P., VanWey, L., Where deforestation leads to urbanization: how resource extraction is leading to urban growth in the Brazilian Amazon. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 105 (2015), 806–823.
82. Jaquet, S., Shrestha, G., Kohler, T., Schwilch, G., The effects of migration on livelihoods, land management, and vulnerability to natural disasters in the Harpan Watershed in Western Nepal. Mt Res Dev 36 (2016), 494–505.
83. Meyfroidt, P., Lambin, E.F., Forest transition in Vietnam and its environmental impacts. Glob Change Biol 14 (2008), 1319–1336.
84. Dao Minh, T., Yanagisawa, M., Kono, Y., Forest transition in Vietnam: a case study of Northern mountain region. For Policy Econ 76 (2017), 72–80.
85. Nagendra, H., Drivers of reforestation in human-dominated forests. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104 (2007), 15218–15223.
86. Chhatre, A., Agrawal, A., Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106 (2009), 17667–17670.
87. Brancalion, P.H.S., Pinto, S.R., Pugliese, L., Padovezi, A., Ribeiro Rodrigues, R., Calmon, M., Carrascosa, H., Castro, P., Mesquita, B., Governance innovations from a multi-stakeholder coalition to implement large-scale forest restoration in Brazil. World Dev Perspect 3 (2016), 15–17.
88. Murcia, C., Guariguata, M.R., Andrade, Á., Andrade, G.I., Aronson, J., Escobar, E.M., Etter, A., Moreno, F.H., Ramírez, W., Montes, E., Challenges and prospects for scaling-up ecological restoration to meet international commitments: Colombia as a case study. Conserv Lett 9 (2016), 213–220.
89. de Souza, S., Vidal, E., Chagas, G. de F., Elgar, A.T., Brancalion, P.H.S., Ecological outcomes and livelihood benefits of community-managed agroforests and second growth forests in Southeast Brazil. Biotropica 48 (2016), 868–881.
90. Uriarte, M., Chazdon, R.L., Incorporating natural regeneration in forest landscape restoration in tropical regions: synthesis and key research gaps. Biotropica 48 (2016), 915–924.
91. Chazdon, R.L., Guariguata, M.R., Natural regeneration as a tool for large-scale forest restoration in the tropics: prospects and challenges. Biotropica 48 (2016), 716–730.