Balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in agricultural landscapes: the case of Brazil

Forest restoration requires strategies such as passive restoration to balance financial investments and ecological outcomes. However, the ecological outcomes of passive restoration are traditionally regarded as uncertain. We evaluated technical and legal strategies for balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive versus active restoration in agricultural landscapes. We focused in the case of Brazil, where we assessed the factors driving the proportion of land allocated to passive and active restoration in 42 programs covering 698,398 hectares of farms in the Atlantic Forest, Atlantic Forest/cerrado ecotone and Amazon; the ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in 2955 monitoring plots placed in six restoration programs; and the legal framework developed by some Brazilian states to balance the different restoration approaches and comply with legal commitments. Active restoration had the highest proportion of land allocated to it (78.4%), followed by passive (14.2%) and mixed restoration (7.4%). Passive restoration was higher in the Amazon, in silviculture, and when remaining forest cover was over 50 percent. Overall, both restoration approaches showed high levels of variation in the ecological outcomes; nevertheless, passively restored areas had a smaller percentage canopy cover, lower species density, and less shrubs and trees (dbh > 5 cm). The studied legal frameworks considered land abandonment for up to 4 years before deciding on a restoration approach, to favor the use of passive restoration. A better understanding of the biophysical and socioeconomic features of areas targeted for restoration is needed to take a better advantage of their natural regeneration potential.

[1]  Thomas Kitzberger,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of dryland forest restoration evaluated by spatial analysis of ecosystem services , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies , 2012 .

[3]  L. Fahrig,et al.  On the hope for biodiversity-friendly tropical landscapes. , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[4]  B. Soares-Filho,et al.  Cracking Brazil's Forest Code , 2014, Science.

[5]  James Aronson,et al.  Large-scale ecological restoration of high-diversity tropical forests in SE Brazil , 2011 .

[6]  Eric Armijo,et al.  Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains , 2014, Science.

[7]  L. Shoo,et al.  Slow recovery of tropical old‐field rainforest regrowth and the value and limitations of active restoration , 2016, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[8]  Frans Bongers,et al.  Loss of secondary‐forest resilience by land‐use intensification in the Amazon , 2015 .

[9]  Marcelino A. R. Pascoa,et al.  Establishment of tree seedlings in the understory of restoration plantations: natural regeneration and enrichment plantings , 2016 .

[10]  W. Magnusson.  The words population and community have outlived their usefulness in ecological publications , 2013 .

[11]  J. Benítez‐Malvido,et al.  Ecological disturbance regimes caused by agricultural land uses and their effects on tropical forest regeneration , 2015 .

[12]  P. Brancalion,et al.  A Policy‐Driven Knowledge Agenda for Global Forest and Landscape Restoration , 2017 .

[13]  M. Palmer,et al.  Aligning restoration science and the law to sustain ecological infrastructure for the future , 2015 .

[14]  Isabel M. D. Rosa,et al.  Modelling land cover change in the Brazilian Amazon: temporal changes in drivers and calibration issues , 2014, Regional Environmental Change.

[15]  F. Bongers,et al.  Multiple successional pathways in human‐modified tropical landscapes: new insights from forest succession, forest fragmentation and landscape ecology research , 2017, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[16]  Manuel R. Guariguata,et al.  Natural regeneration as a tool for large‐scale forest restoration in the tropics: prospects and challenges , 2016 .

[17]  Richard J Hobbs,et al.  Hurdles and Opportunities for Landscape-Scale Restoration , 2013, Science.

[18]  Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues,et al.  On the restoration of high diversity forests: 30 years of experience in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. , 2009 .

[19]  G. Holland,et al.  Conservation of tropical forest tree species in a native timber plantation landscape , 2015 .

[20]  A. Chao,et al.  Resilience of tropical rain forests: tree community reassembly in secondary forests. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[21]  T. Rudel,et al.  A re-emerging Atlantic forest? Urbanization, industrialization and the forest transition in Santa Catarina, southern Brazil , 2006, Environmental Conservation.

[22]  G. B. Williamson,et al.  Successional dynamics in Neotropical forests are as uncertain as they are predictable , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  J. Aronson,et al.  What Role Should Government Regulation Play in Ecological Restoration? Ongoing Debate in São Paulo State, Brazil , 2011 .

[24]  R. Hobbs,et al.  Restoration challenges and opportunities for increasing landscape connectivity under the new Brazilian Forest Act , 2013 .

[25]  D. Lamb.  Large-scale Forest Restoration , 2014 .

[26]  J. Barlow,et al.  How pervasive is biotic homogenization in human-modified tropical forest landscapes? , 2015, Ecology letters.

[27]  S. Sloan,et al.  Forest Resources Assessment of 2015 shows positive global trends but forest loss and degradation persist in poor tropical countries , 2015 .

[28]  J. B. Ruhl,et al.  Committing to ecological restoration , 2015, Science.

[29]  Jean Paul Metzger,et al.  Land-use and land-cover change in Atlantic Forest landscapes , 2012 .

[30]  Atlantic Forest spontaneous regeneration at landscape scale , 2015, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[31]  Susan G. Letcher,et al.  Biomass resilience of Neotropical secondary forests , 2016, Nature.

[32]  Susan G. Letcher,et al.  Recovery of floristic diversity and basal area in natural forest regeneration and planted plots in a Costa Rican wet forest , 2016 .

[33]  M. Clark,et al.  Deforestation and Reforestation of Latin America and the Caribbean (2001–2010) , 2013 .

[34]  G. Durigan,et al.  Indicators of restoration success in riparian tropical forests using multiple reference ecosystems , 2015 .

[35]  F. Bongers,et al.  Natural forest regeneration and ecological restoration in human‐modified tropical landscapes , 2016 .

[36]  Renato Crouzeilles,et al.  Natural regeneration and biodiversity: a global meta‐analysis and implications for spatial planning , 2016 .

[37]  P. Brancalion,et al.  How good are tropical forest patches for ecosystem services provisioning? , 2014, Landscape Ecology.

[38]  J. Aronson,et al.  Ecosystem Restoration is Now a Global Priority: Time to Roll up our Sleeves , 2013 .

[39]  T. Aide,et al.  Globalization, Migration, and Latin American Ecosystems , 2004, Science.

[40]  R. Chazdon.  Second growth : the promise of tropical forest regeneration in an age of deforestation , 2014 .

[41]  James Aronson,et al.  On the need of legal frameworks for assessing restoration projects success: new perspectives from São Paulo state (Brazil) , 2015 .

[42]  Karen D. Holl,et al.  When and where to actively restore ecosystems , 2011 .