Advertisement

Implementing forest landscape restoration under the Bonn Challenge: a systematic approach

  • John A. StanturfEmail author
  • Michael Kleine
  • Stephanie Mansourian
  • John Parrotta
  • Palle Madsen
  • Promode Kant
  • Janice Burns
  • Andreas Bolte
Opinion Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Forest Adaptation and Restoration under Global Change

Abstract

Key message

There is no one-size-fits-all way to successfully implement forest landscape restoration (FLR). Complex socio-ecological systems present challenges and opportunities that can best be met with a systematic framework for designing, planning, steering, and monitoring FLR projects to meet diverse needs. Project cycle management is an iterative, adaptive, hierarchical framework with recurring consultations among stakeholders that can enhance the likelihood of FLR success.

Keywords

Bonn Challenge Ecological integrity Livelihoods Governance Project cycle management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The article is an activity within the work of IUFTO Task Force 31 “Forest Adaptation and Restoration under Global Change.” Portions of the article are based on presentations made by the authors at the “International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under Global Change: Synthesizing and Sharing Globally Available Forest-Related Scientific Knowledge” that was held in San Juan, Puerto Rico, in June 2017, and the report “Implementing Forest Landscape Restoration, A Practitioner’s Guide” edited by Stanturf et al. 2017, published by the International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Special Programme for Development of Capacities (IUFRO-SPDC). We acknowledge the contributions of the participants at the conference in Puerto Rico and the support of the staff of the International Institute of Tropical Forestry, US Forest Service, and the Friends of the Karst.

Funding

Funding for the conference was provided by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety and the IUFRO Special Program on Developing Capacity.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Aitken SN, Yeaman S, Holliday JA, Wang T, Curtis-McLane S (2008) Adaptation, migration or extirpation: climate change outcomes for tree populations. Evol Appl 1:95–111PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Angelsen A et al (2014) Environmental income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. World Dev 64:S12–S28Google Scholar
  3. Battisti C (2017) Unifying the trans-disciplinary arsenal of project management tools in a single logical framework: further suggestion for IUCN project cycle development. J Nat Conserv 41:63–72Google Scholar
  4. Besseau P, Graham S, Christopherson T (eds) (2018) Restoring forests and landscapes: the key to a sustainable future. IUFRO and Global Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  5. Blay D, Appiah M, Damnyag L, Dwomoh FK, Luukkanen O, Pappinen A (2008) Involving local farmers in rehabilitation of degraded tropical forests: some lessons from Ghana. Environ Dev Sustain 10:503–518Google Scholar
  6. Botman E (2009) Forest rehabilitation in the Republic of Uzbekistan. In: Lee DK, Kleine M (eds) Keep Asia green, West and Central Asia, vol IV. IUFRO World Series, Vienna, pp 253–299Google Scholar
  7. Bradshaw RH (2004) Past anthropogenic influence on European forests and some possible genetic consequences. For Ecol Manag 197:203–212Google Scholar
  8. Brancalion PH, Chazdon RL (2017) Beyond hectares: four principles to guide reforestation in the context of tropical forest and landscape restoration. Restor Ecol 25:491–496Google Scholar
  9. Brancalion PH, Viani RA, Calmon M, Carrascosa H, Rodrigues RR (2013) How to organize a large-scale ecological restoration program? The framework developed by the Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact in Brazil. J Sustain For 32:728–744Google Scholar
  10. Breed MF et al (2018) Priority actions to improve provenance decision-making. Bioscience 68:510–516Google Scholar
  11. Brockerhoff EG, Jactel H, Parrotta JA, Quine CP, Sayer J (2008) Plantation forests and biodiversity: oxymoron or opportunity? Biodivers Conserv 17:925–951Google Scholar
  12. Brooks N, Adger WN, Kelly PM (2005) The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation. Glob Environ Chang 15:151–163Google Scholar
  13. Bucharova A, Durka W, Hölzel N, Kollmann J, Michalski S, Bossdorf O (2017) Are local plants the best for ecosystem restoration? It depends on how you analyze the data. Ecol Evol 7:10683–10689PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Buckingham K et al (2018) Mapping social landscapes: a guide to restoration opportunities mapping. World Resources Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. Charnley S (2017) Forest landscape restoration in West Africa through community forestry: keys to success. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27020/6474/Charnley_poster-1_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  16. Chazdon R (2015) Restoring tropical forests: a practical guide. Ecol Restor 33:118–119Google Scholar
  17. Chazdon RL et al (2016) When is a forest a forest? Forest concepts and definitions in the era of forest and landscape restoration. Ambio 45:538–550PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Cole RJ, Holl KD, Keene C, Zahawi RA (2011) Direct seeding of late-successional trees to restore tropical montane forest. For Ecol Manag 261:1590–1597Google Scholar
  19. Cordell S et al (2017) Remote sensing for restoration planning: how the big picture can inform stakeholders. Restor Ecol 25:S147–S154Google Scholar
  20. Crouzeilles R et al (2017) Ecological restoration success is higher for natural regeneration than for active restoration in tropical forests. Sci Adv 3:e1701345PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Damnyag L, Saastamoinen O, Appiah M, Pappinen A (2012) Role of tenure insecurity in deforestation in Ghana’s high forest zone. Forest Policy Econ 14:90–98Google Scholar
  22. Davis MA et al (2011) Don’t judge species on their origins. Nature 474:153–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. De Vreese R, Leys M, Fontaine C, Dendoncker N (2016) Social mapping of perceived ecosystem services supply—the role of social landscape metrics and social hotspots for integrated ecosystem services assessment, landscape planning and management. Ecol Indic 66:517–533Google Scholar
  24. DeFries RS, Rudel T, Uriarte M, Hansen M (2010) Deforestation driven by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the twenty-first century. Nat Geosci 3:178–181Google Scholar
  25. DeRose RJ, Long JN (2014) Resistance and resilience: a conceptual framework for silviculture. For Sci 60:1205–1212Google Scholar
  26. Dey DC, Gardiner ES, Schweitzer CJ, Kabrick JM, Jacobs DF (2012) Underplanting to sustain future stocking of oak (Quercus) in temperate deciduous forests. New For 43:955–978Google Scholar
  27. Doherty KD, Butterfield BJ, Wood TE (2017) Matching seed to site by climate similarity: techniques to prioritize plant materials development and use in restoration. Ecol Appl 27:1010–1023PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Donoso PJ, Soto DP, Coopman RE, Rodríguez-Bertos S (2013) Early performance of planted Nothofagus dombeyi and Nothofagus alpina in response to light availability and gap size in a high-graded forest in the south-central Andes of Chile. Bosque 34:23–32Google Scholar
  29. Donoso P, Soto D, Fuentes C (2015) Differential growth rates through the seedling and sapling stages of two Nothofagus species underplanted at low-light environments in an Andean high-graded forest. New For 46:885–895Google Scholar
  30. Downs A (1972) Up and down with ecology: the “issue-attention cycle”. Public Interest 28:38–50Google Scholar
  31. Dumroese RK, Williams MI, Stanturf JA, St Clair JB (2015) Considerations for restoring temperate forests of tomorrow: forest restoration, assisted migration, and bioengineering. New For 46:947–964Google Scholar
  32. Dumroese KR, Landis TD, Pinto JR, Haase DL, Wilkinson KW, Davis AS (2016) Meeting forest restoration challenges: using the target plant concept. Reforesta 1:37–52Google Scholar
  33. Elliott S (2016) The potential for automating assisted natural regeneration of tropical forest ecosystems. Biotropica 48:825–833Google Scholar
  34. Emer C, Galetti M, Pizo MA, Guimarães PR Jr, Moraes S, Piratelli A, Jordano P (2018) Seed-dispersal interactions in fragmented landscapes—a metanetwork approach. Ecol Lett 21:484–493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Engel VL, Parrotta JA (2001) An evaluation of direct seeding for reforestation of degraded lands in central Sao Paulo state, Brazil. For Ecol Manag 152:169–181Google Scholar
  36. Evans MC (2018) Effective incentives for reforestation: lessons from Australia’s carbon farming policies. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 32:38–45Google Scholar
  37. Evans K, Guariguata MR, Brancalion PH (2018) Participatory monitoring to connect local and global priorities for forest restoration. Conserv Biol 32:525–534PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. FAO (2011) Assessing forest degradation—towards the development of globally applicable guidelines. Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper 177. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  39. Foli E (2017) Land tenure and access to land for forest restoration in Ghana. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27699/6474/06_EF_Land_tenure_and_access_to_land-FOLI_v2_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  40. Freeman OE, Duguma LA, Minang PA (2015) Operationalizing the integrated landscape approach in practice. Ecol Soc 20(1):24  https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07175-200124
  41. García-Quijano JF, Deckmyn G, Ceulemans R, van Orshoven J, Muys B (2008) Scaling from stand to landscape scale of climate change mitigation by afforestation and forest management: a modeling approach. Clim Chang 86:397–424Google Scholar
  42. Gardiner ES, Yeiser JL (2006) Underplanting cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda Raf.) seedlings on a bottomland site in the Southern United States. New For 32:105–119Google Scholar
  43. Garibaldi LA, Gemmill-Herren B, D’Annolfo R, Graeub BE, Cunningham SA, Breeze TD (2017) Farming approaches for greater biodiversity, livelihoods, and food security. Trends Ecol Evol 32:68–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Gellie NJ, Breed MF, Mortimer PE, Harrison RD, Xu J, Lowe AJ (2018) Networked and embedded scientific experiments will improve restoration outcomes. Front Ecol Environ 16:288–294Google Scholar
  45. Giorgi AP et al (2014) Spatial conservation planning framework for assessing conservation opportunities in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Appl Geogr 53:369–376PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Grau HR, Aide M (2008) Globalization and land-use transitions in Latin America. Ecol Soc 13 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267952
  47. Grau HR, Aide TM, Zimmerman JK, Thomlinson JR, Helmer E, Zou X (2003) The ecological consequences of socioeconomic and land-use changes in postagriculture Puerto Rico. AIBS Bull 53:1159–1168Google Scholar
  48. Gutiérrez-Montes I (2017) Livelihoods and integrated planning for FLR. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27023/6474/Gutierrez_poster-1_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  49. Gutierrez-Montes I, Emery M, Fernandez-Baca E (2009) The sustainable livelihoods approach and the community capitals framework: the importance of system-level approaches to community change efforts. Community Develop 40:106–113Google Scholar
  50. Haase DL, Davis AS (2017) Developing and supporting quality nursery facilities and staff are necessary to meet global forest and landscape restoration needs. Reforesta 4:69–93Google Scholar
  51. Halofsky JE, Creutzburg MK, Hemstrom MA (2014) Integrating social, economic, and ecological values across large landscapes. Gen Tech Rep PNW-GTR-896 Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 206 p 896Google Scholar
  52. Hansen CP (2011) Forest law compliance and enforcement: the case of on-farm timber extraction in Ghana. J Environ Manag 92:575–586Google Scholar
  53. Hansen CP, Lund JF, Treue T (2009) Neither fast, nor easy: The prospect of reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) in Ghana. Int For Rev 11:439–455Google Scholar
  54. Harper R, Smettem K, Townsend P, Bartle J, McGrath J (2012) Broad-scale restoration of landscape function with timber, carbon and water investment. In: Stanturf J, Lamb D, Madsen P (eds) Forest landscape restoration: integrating social and natural sciences. Springer, New York, pp 275–292Google Scholar
  55. Harper RJ, Sochacki SJ, Smettem KR, Robinson N (2014) Managing water in agricultural landscapes with short-rotation biomass plantations. Glob Change Biol Bioenergy 6:544–555Google Scholar
  56. Harper RJ, Sochacki SJ, McGrath JF (2017) The development of reforestation options for dryland farmland in south-western Australia: a review. South Forests 79:185–196Google Scholar
  57. Hassan R, Scholes R, Ash N (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends, vol 1. Findings of the condition and trends working group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  58. Hermans-Neumann K, Priess J, Herold M (2017) Human migration, climate variability, and land degradation: hotspots of socio-ecological pressure in Ethiopia. Reg Environ Chang 17:1479–1492Google Scholar
  59. Hobbs RJ (2007) Setting effective and realistic restoration goals: key directions for research. Restor Ecol 15:354–357Google Scholar
  60. Hobbs RJ (2016) Degraded or just different? Perceptions and value judgments in restoration decisions. Restor Ecol 24:153–158Google Scholar
  61. Holden S, Otsuka K, Deininger K (2013) Land tenure reforms, poverty and natural resource management: conceptual framework. In: Holden S, Otsuka K, Deininger K (eds) Land tenure reform in Asia and Africa: assessing impacts on poverty and natural resource management. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  62. Holger F, Franka H, Ulrike H, Sven W (2015) Developing restoration strategies for temperate forests using natural regeneration processes. In: Stanturf JA (ed) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 103–164Google Scholar
  63. Hughes FMR, Colston A, Mountford JO (2005) Restoring riparian ecosystems: the challenge of accommodating variability and designing restoration trajectories. Ecol Soc 10 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267745
  64. Hutto RL, Belote R (2013) Distinguishing four types of monitoring based on the questions they address. For Ecol Manag 289:183–189Google Scholar
  65. IPBES (2018) Summary for policymakers of the thematic assessment report on land degradation and restoration of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat, BonnGoogle Scholar
  66. Iwasa M, Roslan A, Mangsor M (1994) The establishment of multi-storied forests in Peninsular Malaysia—underplanting of Dipterocarpaceae in Acacia mangium plantation. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop of BIO-REFOR. BIO-REFOR, Japan, pp. 66–68Google Scholar
  67. Jacobs DF, Dalgleish HJ, Nelson CD (2013) A conceptual framework for restoration of threatened plants: the effective model of American chestnut (Castanea dentata) reintroduction. New Phytol 197:378–393PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Jalonen R, Valette M, Boshier D, Duminil J, Thomas E (2017) Forest and landscape restoration severely constrained by a lack of attention to the quantity and quality of tree seed: Insights from a global survey Conservation Letters: e12424Google Scholar
  69. Jõgiste K et al. (2017) Hemiboreal forest: natural disturbances and the importance of ecosystem legacies to management Ecosphere 8 e01706Google Scholar
  70. Johnstone JF et al (2016) Changing disturbance regimes, ecological memory, and forest resilience. Front Ecol Environ 14:369–378Google Scholar
  71. Jump AS, Penuelas J (2005) Running to stand still: adaptation and the response of plants to rapid climate change. Ecol Lett 8:1010–1020Google Scholar
  72. Kain M, Battaglia L, Royo A, Carson WP (2011) Over-browsing in Pennsylvania creates a depauperate forest dominated by an understory tree: results from a 60-year-old deer exclosure. J Torrey Bot Soc 138:322–326Google Scholar
  73. Kant P, Burns J (2017) Restoring Indian landscapes for multiple purposes. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27026/6474/Kant_poster_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  74. Keenan RJ (2015) Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management: a review. Ann For Sci 72:145–167Google Scholar
  75. Keenleyside K, Dudley N, Cairns S, Hall C, Stolton S (2012) Ecological restoration for protected areas: principles guidelines and best practices. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
  76. Kegode HJ, Oduol J, Wario AR, Muriuki J, Mpanda M, Mowo J (2017) Households’ choices of fuelwood sources: implications for agroforestry interventions in the southern highlands of Tanzania. Small-Scale For 16:535–551Google Scholar
  77. Khadka SR, Schmidt-Vogt D (2008) Integrating biodiversity conservation and addressing economic needs: an experience with Nepal’s community forestry. Local Environ 13:1–13Google Scholar
  78. Khang DB, Moe TL (2008) Success criteria and factors for international development projects: a life-cycle-based framework. Proj Manag J 39:72–84Google Scholar
  79. Kolstad I, Søreide T (2009) Corruption in natural resource management: implications for policy makers. Resourc Policy 34:214–226Google Scholar
  80. Kusters K, Buck L, de Graaf M, Minang P, van Oosten C, Zagt R (2017) Participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation of multi-stakeholder platforms in integrated landscape initiatives. Environ Manag 62:170–181Google Scholar
  81. Laarmann D, Korjus H, Sims A, Kangur A, Kiviste A, Stanturf JA (2015) Evaluation of afforestation development and natural colonization on a reclaimed mine site. Restor Ecol 23:301–309Google Scholar
  82. Lamb D, Erskine PD, Parrotta JA (2005) Restoration of degraded tropical forest landscapes. Science 310:1628–1632PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Lamb D, Stanturf J, Madsen P (2012) What is forest landscape restoration? In: Stanturf J, Lamb D, Madsen P (eds) Forest landscape restoration. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 3–23Google Scholar
  84. Langston JD, Riggs RA, Kastanya A, Sayer J, Margules C, Boedhihartono AK (2019) Science embedded in local forest landscape management improves benefit flows to society. Front For Glob Change 19:2.  https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2019.00003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lee DK, Park PS, Park YD (2015) Forest restoration and rehabilitation in the Republic of Korea. In: Stanturf J (ed) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests, 2nd edn. CRC Lewis, Boca Raton, pp 217–231Google Scholar
  86. Liang S, Hurteau MD, Westerling AL (2018) Large-scale restoration increases carbon stability under projected climate and wildfire regimes. Front Ecol Environ 16:207–212Google Scholar
  87. Lillesø J-P et al (2011) Innovation in input supply systems in smallholder agroforestry: seed sources, supply chains and support systems. Agrofor Syst 83:347–359Google Scholar
  88. Louman B (2017) Factors that affect adoption of tree conservation and planting activities in farms in Costa Rica. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27051/6474/14_BL_adoption_factors_Bastiaan_Louman_pptx/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  89. Lugo AE (1997) The apparent paradox of reestablishing species richness on degraded lands with tree monocultures. For Ecol Manag 99:9–19Google Scholar
  90. Lugo AE (2000) Effects and outcomes of Caribbean hurricanes in a climate change scenario. Sci Total Environ 262:243–251PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Lugo AE (2018) Characterization of ten extreme disturbance events in the context of social and ecological systems. Biogeochemistry 141:385–400Google Scholar
  92. Lugo AE, Erickson HE (2017) Novelty and its ecological implications to dry forest functioning and conservation. Forests 8:161.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f8050161 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Lugo AE, Helmer E (2004) Emerging forests on abandoned land: Puerto Rico’s new forests. For Ecol Manag 190:145–161Google Scholar
  94. Macdonald SE et al (2015) Forest restoration following surface mining disturbance: challenges and solutions. New For 46:703–732Google Scholar
  95. MacKay F, Caruso E (2004) Indigenous lands or national parks? Cultural Survival Quarterly 28:14–16Google Scholar
  96. Madsen P, Jensen FA, Fodgaard S (2005) Afforestation in Denmark. In: Stanturf J, Madsen P (eds) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 211–224Google Scholar
  97. Mansourian S (2005) Overview of forest restoration strategies and terms. In: Forest restoration in landscapes. Springer, pp. 8–13Google Scholar
  98. Mansourian S (2016) Understanding the relationship between governance and forest landscape restoration. Conserv Soc 14:267–278Google Scholar
  99. Mansourian S (2017) Governance and forest landscape restoration: a framework to support decision-making. J Nat Conserv 37:21–30Google Scholar
  100. Mansourian S (2018) In the eye of the beholder: reconciling interpretations of forest landscape restoration. Land Degrad Dev 9:2888–2898Google Scholar
  101. Mansourian S, Parrotta J (eds) (2018) Forest landscape restoration: integrated approaches to support effective implementation. Routledge, Earthscan Forest LibraryGoogle Scholar
  102. Mansourian S, Stanturf JA, Derkyi MAA, Engel VL (2017) Forest landscape restoration: increasing the positive impacts of forest restoration or simply the area under tree cover? Restor Ecol 25:178–183Google Scholar
  103. MARN (2017) Strengthening the national restoration strategy Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, San Salvador, El Salvador. Available at https://www.iucnorg/sites/dev/files/content/documents/2017/strengthening_the_national_restoration_strategy_12-06-17_v3pdf; last accessed 10 July 2017
  104. Maron M et al (2012) Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies. Biol Conserv 155:141–148Google Scholar
  105. Martín-López B et al (2017) Delineating boundaries of social-ecological systems for landscape planning: a comprehensive spatial approach. Land Use Policy 66:90–104Google Scholar
  106. Martinuzzi S, Lugo AE, Brandeis TJ, Helmer EH (2013) Case study: geographic distribution and level of novelty of Puerto Rican forests. In: Hobbs RJ, Higgs ES, Hall, CM (eds) Novel ecosystems: intervening in the new ecological world order, Wiley pp. 81–87Google Scholar
  107. Meli P, Holl KD, Benayas JMR, Jones HP, Jones PC, Montoya D, Mateos DM (2017) A global review of past land use, climate, and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery. PLoS One 12:e0171368PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  108. Melo FP, Pinto SR, Brancalion PH, Castro PS, Rodrigues RR, Aronson J, Tabarelli M (2013) Priority setting for scaling-up tropical forest restoration projects: early lessons from the Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact. Environ Sci Pol 33:395–404Google Scholar
  109. Metcalf EC, Mohr JJ, Yung L, Metcalf P, Craig D (2015) The role of trust in restoration success: public engagement and temporal and spatial scale in a complex social-ecological system. Restor Ecol 23:315–324Google Scholar
  110. Micklin P (2010) The past, present, and future. Aral Sea Lakes Reserv 15:193–213Google Scholar
  111. MINIRENA (2014) Forest landscape restoration opportunity assessment for Rwanda Ministry Natural Resources Rwanda, IUCN, WRI. Available at http://cmsdata.iucn.org/ downloads/roar_web_version.pdf; last accessed 15 July 2018
  112. Ministry Water and Environment (2016) Forest restoration opportunity assessment report for Uganda Ministry Water and Environment Uganda and IUCN. Available at https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-076.pdf; last accessed 15 July 2018
  113. Minnemeyer S, Laestadius L, Sizer N, Saint-Laurent C, Potapov P (2011) A world of opportunity. World Resource Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  114. Mirzabaev A, Goedecke J, Dubovyk O, Djanibekov U, Le QB, Aw-Hassan A (2016) Economics of land degradation in Central Asia. In: Nkonya E, Mirzabaev A, Von Braun J (eds). Economics of land degradation and improvement—a global assessment for sustainable development, Springer, pp. 261–290Google Scholar
  115. Murdiyarso D, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin WD, Verchot L (2012) Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4:678–685Google Scholar
  116. Nyoka BI et al (2015) Tree seed and seedling supply systems: a review of the Asia, Africa and Latin America models. Small-Scale Forestry 14:171–191Google Scholar
  117. Oliver CD, Covey K, Hohl A, Larsen D, McCarter JB, Niccolai A, Wilson J (2012) Landscape management. In: Stanturf J, Lamb D, Madsen P (eds) Forest landscape restoration. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 39–65Google Scholar
  118. Osborne T, Shapiro-Garza E (2018) Embedding carbon markets: complicating commodification of ecosystem services in Mexico’s forests. Ann Am Assoc Geogr 108:88–105Google Scholar
  119. Pagiola S (2008) Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecol Econ 65:712–724Google Scholar
  120. Palma AC, Laurance SG (2015) A review of the use of direct seeding and seedling plantings in restoration: what do we know and where should we go? Appl Veg Sci 18:561–568Google Scholar
  121. Park MS, Youn Y-C (2017) Reforestation policy integration by the multiple sectors toward forest transition in the Republic of Korea. Forest Policy Econ 76:45–55Google Scholar
  122. Parker WC, Dey DC, Newmaster SG, Elliott KA, Boysen E (2001) Managing succession in conifer plantations: converting young red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) plantations to native forest types by thinning and underplanting. For Chron 77:721–734Google Scholar
  123. Parrott L, Meyer WS (2012) Future landscapes: managing within complexity. Front Ecol Environ 10:382–389Google Scholar
  124. Parrotta JA, Knowles OH (2001) Restoring tropical forests on lands mined for bauxite: examples from the Brazilian Amazon. Ecol Eng 17:219–239Google Scholar
  125. Parrotta JA, Turnbull JW, Jones N (1997) Catalyzing native forest regeneration on degraded tropical lands. For Ecol Manag 99:1–7Google Scholar
  126. Payn T et al (2015) Changes in planted forests and future global implications. For Ecol Manag 352:57–67Google Scholar
  127. Petrokofsky G, Holmgren P, Brown N (2011) Reliable forest carbon monitoring—systematic reviews as a tool for validating the knowledge base. Int For Rev 13:56–66Google Scholar
  128. Pistorius T, Freiberg H (2014) From target to implementation: perspectives for the international governance of forest landscape restoration. Forests 5:482.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f5030482 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Pistorius T, Carodenuto S, Wathum G (2017) Implementing forest landscape restoration in Ethiopia. Forests 8:61.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f8030061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Platteau JP (2004) Monitoring elite capture in community-driven development. Dev Chang 35:223–246Google Scholar
  131. Puettmann KJ (2014) Restoring the adaptive capacity of forest ecosystems. J Sustain For 33:S15–S27Google Scholar
  132. Putz FE, Redford KH (2010) The importance of defining ‘forest’: tropical forest degradation, deforestation, long-term phase shifts, and further transitions. Biotropica 42:10–20Google Scholar
  133. Raik DB, Wilson AL, Decker DJ (2008) Power in natural resources management: an application of theory. Soc Nat Resour 21:729–739Google Scholar
  134. Razhapbaev M (2017) Forest landscape restoration in Kyrgyzstan. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27035/6474/Razhapbaev_Kyrgyzstan_pptx/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  135. Reid JL, Wilson SJ, Bloomfield GS, Cattau ME, Fagan ME, Holl KD, Zahawi RA (2017) How long do restored ecosystems persist? Ann Mo Bot Gard 102:258–265Google Scholar
  136. Reid JL, Fagan ME, Zahawi RA (2018) Positive site selection bias in meta-analyses comparing natural regeneration to active forest restoration. Sci Adv 4:eaas9143PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  137. Reinecke S, Blum M (2018) Discourses across scales on forest landscape restoration. Sustainability 10:613.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030613 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Rerkasem K, Yimyam N, Rerkasem B (2009) Land use transformation in the mountainous mainland Southeast Asia region and the role of indigenous knowledge and skills in forest management. For Ecol Manag 257:2035–2043Google Scholar
  139. Robinson BE, Holland MB, Naughton-Treves L (2014a) Does secure land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure and tropical deforestation. Glob Environ Chang 29:281–293Google Scholar
  140. Robinson K, Bauer J, Lugo AE (2014b) Passing the baton from the Tainos to tomorrow: forest conservation in Puerto Rico, FS-862. US Forest Service, San JuanGoogle Scholar
  141. Rockström J et al (2017) Sustainable intensification of agriculture for human prosperity and global sustainability. Ambio 46:4–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. Rooney TP, Buttenschøn R, Madsen P, Olesen CR, Royo AA, Stout SL (2015) Integrating ungulate herbivory into forest landscape restoration. In: Stanturf JA (ed) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 69–84Google Scholar
  143. Sacande M, Berrahmouni N (2016) Community participation and ecological criteria for selecting species and restoring natural capital with native species in the Sahel. Restor Ecol 24:479–488Google Scholar
  144. Saha S, Kuehne C, Bauhus J (2016) Lessons learned from oak cluster planting trials in central Europe. Can J For Res 47:139–148Google Scholar
  145. Sayer J et al (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:8349–8356PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. Schwegler J (2017) Rehabilitation of degraded land with native species in Kalimantan. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27712/6474/25_JS_1706_IUFRO_FLR_Puerto_Rico_Faierventures_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  147. Silva LN, Freer-Smith P, Madsen P (2018) Production, restoration, mitigation: a new generation of plantations. New For:1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-018-9644-6 Google Scholar
  148. Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16:282–292Google Scholar
  149. Soto DP, Donoso PJ, Salas C, Puettmann KJ (2015) Light availability and soil compaction influence the growth of underplanted Nothofagus following partial shelterwood harvest and soil scarification. Can J For Res 45:998–1005Google Scholar
  150. Spathelf P, Stanturf J, Kleine M, Jandl R, Chiatante D, Bolte A (2018) Adaptive measures: integrating adaptive forest management and forest landscape restoration. Ann For Sci 75:55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0736-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Stanturf JA (2015) Future landscapes: opportunities and challenges. New For 46:615–644Google Scholar
  152. Stanturf JA (2016) Restoring boreal and temperate forests: a perspective. In: Stanturf JA (ed) Restoration of boreal and temperate forests, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 519–534Google Scholar
  153. Stanturf JA, Schoenholtz SH, Schweitzer CJ, Shepard JP (2001) Achieving restoration success: myths in bottomland hardwood forests. Restor Ecol 9:189–200Google Scholar
  154. Stanturf JA, Palik BJ, Dumroese RK (2014a) Contemporary forest restoration: a review emphasizing function. For Ecol Manag 331:292–323Google Scholar
  155. Stanturf JA, Palik BJ, Williams MI, Dumroese RK, Madsen P (2014b) Forest restoration paradigms. J Sustain For 33:S161–S194Google Scholar
  156. Stanturf JA, Mansourian S, Kleine M (2017) Implementing forest landscape restoration, a practitioner’s guide. International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Vienna, p 128Google Scholar
  157. Stanturf JA, Madsen P, Sagheb-Talebi K, Hansen OK (2018) Transformational restoration: novel ecosystems in Denmark. Plant Biosystems 152:536–546Google Scholar
  158. Strauss SH, Bradshaw HD (2004) The bioengineered forest: challenges for science and society. Resources for the future, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  159. Swamy L, Drazen E, Johnson WR, Bukoski JJ (2018) The future of tropical forests under the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. J Sustain For 37:221–256Google Scholar
  160. Tesfaye MA, Bravo-Oviedo A, Bravo F, Kidane B, Bekele K, Sertse D (2015) Selection of tree species and soil management for simultaneous fuelwood production and soil rehabilitation in the Ethiopian central highlands. Land Degrad Dev 26:665–679Google Scholar
  161. Thevs N, Aliev K (2017) 70 million trees for Kyrgyzstan. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27039/6474/Thevs_poster_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  162. Thomas E et al (2014) Genetic considerations in ecosystem restoration using native tree species. For Ecol Manag 333:66–75Google Scholar
  163. Tobón W et al (2017) Restoration planning to guide Aichi targets in a megadiverse country. Conserv Biol 31:1086–1097PubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. Tscharntke T et al (2012) Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biol Conserv 151:53–59Google Scholar
  165. UNCCD (ed) (2017) Global land outlook. UN Convention to Combat Desertification, BonnGoogle Scholar
  166. Uprety Y, Asselin H, Bergeron Y, Doyon F, Boucher J-F (2012) Contribution of traditional knowledge to ecological restoration: practices and applications. Ecoscience 19:225–237Google Scholar
  167. van Noordwijk M, Suyamto DA, Lusiana B, Ekadinata A, Hairiah K (2008) Facilitating agroforestation of landscapes for sustainable benefits: tradeoffs between carbon stocks and local development benefits in Indonesia according to the FALLOW model. Agric Ecosyst Environ 126:98–112Google Scholar
  168. van Oosten C (2013) Restoring landscapes—governing place: a learning approach to forest landscape restoration. J Sustain For 32:659–676Google Scholar
  169. Vargas RG (2017) Systematizing forest restoration through trials in South-Central Chile: two examples. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6-9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27040/6474/Vargas_poster_pdf/ (accessed on 13 July 2018)
  170. Veldman JW et al (2015) Tyranny of trees in global climate change mitigation. Science 347:484–485PubMedGoogle Scholar
  171. Verdone M, Seidl A (2017) Time, space, place, and the Bonn Challenge global forest restoration target. Restor Ecol 25:903–911Google Scholar
  172. Viani RA, Barreto TE, Farah FT, Rodrigues RR, Brancalion PH (2018) Monitoring young tropical forest restoration sites: how much to measure? Tropical Conservation Science.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082918780916 Google Scholar
  173. Vittek M, Brink A, Donnay F, Simonetti D, Desclée B (2014) Land cover change monitoring using Landsat MSS/TM satellite image data over West Africa between 1975 and 1990. Remote Sens 6:658–676Google Scholar
  174. Wardell DA, Lund C (2006) Governing access to forests in northern Ghana: micro-politics and the rents of non-enforcement. World Dev 34:1887–1906Google Scholar
  175. Wells MP, McShane TO (2004) Integrating protected area management with local needs and aspirations. AMBIO 33:513–519PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. Worbes M, Botman E, Khamzina A, Tupitsa A, Martius C, Lamers JPA (2006) Scope and constraints for tree planting in the irrigated landscapes of the Aral Sea Basin: case studies in Khorezm Region, Uzbekistan. ZEF Discussion Papers on Development Policy, No. 112, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF), BonnGoogle Scholar
  177. Wunder S, Engel S, Pagiola S (2008) Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecol Econ 65:834–852Google Scholar
  178. Wunderle JM Jr (1997) The role of animal seed dispersal in accelerating native forest regeneration on degraded tropical lands. For Ecol Manag 99:223–235Google Scholar
  179. Zhai D-L, Xu J-C, Dai Z-C, Cannon CH, Grumbine R (2014) Increasing tree cover while losing diverse natural forests in tropical Hainan, China. Reg Environ Chang 14:611–621Google Scholar
  180. Zomer RJ et al (2016) Global tree cover and biomass carbon on agricultural land: the contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Sci Rep 6:29987.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep29987 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  181. Zoveda F (2017) Towards harmonized and cost-effective monitoring frameworks for FLR: joining efforts through the collaborative roadmap. Input to IUFRO’s International Conference on Forest Landscape Restoration under “Global change—a contribution to the implementation of the Bonn Challenge” in Puerto Rico, 6–9 June 2017. Available online: https://www.iufroorg/download/file/27704/6474/10_FZ_Monitoring_Roadmap_IUFRO_20170605_pdf/ (last accessed 13 July 2018)

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Estonian University of Life SciencesTartuEstonia
  2. 2.International Union of Forest Research OrganizationsViennaAustria
  3. 3.Mansourian ConsultingGinginsSwitzerland
  4. 4.US Forest ServiceWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.Copenhagen UniversityCopenhagenDenmark
  6. 6.Institute of Green EconomyDelhiIndia
  7. 7.Thünen Institute for Forest EcosystemsEberswaldeGermany

Personalised recommendations