A global meta-analysis on the ecological drivers of forest restoration success

Two billion ha have been identified globally for forest restoration. Our meta-analysis encompassing 221 study landscapes worldwide reveals forest restoration enhances biodiversity by 15–84% and vegetation structure by 36–77%, compared with degraded ecosystems. For the first time, we identify the main ecological drivers of forest restoration success (defined as a return to a reference condition, that is, old-growth forest) at both the local and landscape scale. These are as follows: the time elapsed since restoration began, disturbance type and landscape context. The time elapsed since restoration began strongly drives restoration success in secondary forests, but not in selectively logged forests (which are more ecologically similar to reference systems). Landscape restoration will be most successful when previous disturbance is less intensive and habitat is less fragmented in the landscape. Restoration does not result in full recovery of biodiversity and vegetation structure, but can complement old-growth forests if there is sufficient time for ecological succession.

[1]  Clive A. McAlpine,et al.  Regrowth forests on abandoned agricultural land: A review of their habitat values for recovering forest fauna , 2007 .

[2]  A. Lugo,et al.  The Potential for Species Conservation in Tropical Secondary Forests , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[3]  D. Dent,et al.  The future of tropical species in secondary forests: A quantitative review , 2009 .

[4]  J. Saldarriaga,et al.  LONG-TERM CHRONOSEQUENCE OF FOREST SUCCESSION IN THE UPPER RIO NEGRO OF COLOMBIA AND VENEZUELA , 1988 .

[5]  J. Aronson,et al.  Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities. , 2011, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  L. Hedges,et al.  Introduction to Meta‐Analysis , 2009, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[7]  G. Powell,et al.  Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth , 2001 .

[8]  Shinichi Nakagawa,et al.  Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis , 2012, Evolutionary Ecology.

[9]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  THE META‐ANALYSIS OF RESPONSE RATIOS IN EXPERIMENTAL ECOLOGY , 1999 .

[10]  Manuel R. Guariguata,et al.  Neotropical secondary forest succession : changes in structural and functional characteristics , 2001 .

[11]  R. Dunn.  Recovery of Faunal Communities During Tropical Forest Regeneration , 2004 .

[12]  Naomi S. Altman,et al.  Points of Significance: Visualizing samples with box plots , 2014, Nature Methods.

[13]  K. Suding.  Toward an Era of Restoration in Ecology: Successes, Failures, and Opportunities Ahead , 2011 .

[14]  A. Lugo,et al.  Tropical secondary forests , 1990, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[15]  Eileen H. Helmer,et al.  Factors influencing spatial pattern in tropical forest clearance and stand age : Implications for carbon storage and species diversity , 2008 .

[16]  Wolfgang Viechtbauer,et al.  Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package , 2010 .

[17]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[18]  Manuel R. Guariguata,et al.  Structure and floristics of secondary and old-growth forest stands in lowland Costa Rica , 1997, Plant Ecology.

[19]  J. Barlow,et al.  The Value of Primary, Secondary, and Plantation Forests for a Neotropical Herpetofauna , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[20]  A. R.,et al.  Review of literature , 1960, American Potato Journal.

[21]  Mao Ning Tuanmu,et al.  A global 1‐km consensus land‐cover product for biodiversity and ecosystem modelling , 2014 .

[22]  Naeem,et al.  Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis , 2005 .

[23]  K. Willis,et al.  Recovery and resilience of tropical forests after disturbance , 2014, Nature Communications.

[24]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  Uses and misuses of meta‐analysis in plant ecology , 2014 .

[25]  L. P. Koh,et al.  Land use and conservation value for forest birds in Central Sulawesi (Indonesia) , 2005 .

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

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

[28]  Benjamin M. Bolker,et al.  Ecological Models and Data in R , 2008 .

[29]  Oswald J. Schmitz,et al.  Rapid Recovery of Damaged Ecosystems , 2009, PloS one.

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

[31]  F. Q. Ribeiro.  The meta-analysis , 2017, Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology.

[32]  J. Barlow,et al.  Predicting the Uncertain Future of Tropical Forest Species in a Data Vacuum , 2007 .

[33]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Is there any empirical support for biodiversity offset policy? , 2014, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[34]  A. Newton,et al.  Enhancement of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by Ecological Restoration: A Meta-Analysis , 2009, Science.

[35]  C. Lindell,et al.  Active or Passive Forest Restoration? Assessing Restoration Alternatives with Avian Foraging Behavior , 2011 .

[36]  M. Curran,et al.  Which landscape size best predicts the influence of forest cover on restoration success? A global meta‐analysis on the scale of effect , 2016 .

[37]  J. Metzger,et al.  Beyond the Fragmentation Threshold Hypothesis: Regime Shifts in Biodiversity Across Fragmented Landscapes , 2010, PloS one.

[38]  Naomi S. Altman,et al.  Visualizing samples with box plots. , 2014, Nature methods.

[39]  The effects of the number, size and isolation of patches along a gradient of native vegetation cover: how can we increment habitat availability? , 2014, Landscape Ecology.

[40]  R. Chazdon.  Tropical forest recovery: legacies of human impact and natural disturbances , 2003 .

[41]  T. Mitchell Aide,et al.  Restoration Success: How Is It Being Measured? , 2005 .

[42]  P. Meli,et al.  Restoration Enhances Wetland Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service Supply, but Results Are Context-Dependent: A Meta-Analysis , 2014, PloS one.

[43]  S. Murphy.  Ecological Restoration: Principles, Values, and Structure of an Emerging Profession , 2013 .

[44]  L. Fahrig.  Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity , 2003 .

[45]  D. Liebsch,et al.  How long does the Atlantic Rain Forest take to recover after a disturbance? Changes in species composition and ecological features during secondary succession , 2008 .

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

[47]  Philip A. Martin,et al.  Carbon pools recover more quickly than plant biodiversity in tropical secondary forests , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[48]  Robert C. Wolpert,et al.  A Review of the , 1985 .

[49]  Acknowledgements , 1992, Experimental Gerontology.

[50]  Michael James Howes,et al.  Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature , 2013 .

[51]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[52]  C. Bradshaw,et al.  Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity , 2011, Nature.

[53]  H. L. Houérou,et al.  Restoration and rehabilitation of arid and semiarid Mediterranean ecosystems in North Africa and West Asia: a review. , 2000 .

[54]  Jean Paul Metzger,et al.  Landscape Ecology Perspective in Restoration Projects for Biodiversity Conservation: a Review , 2013 .

[55]  N. Nagelkerke,et al.  A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination , 1991 .