A call for practical spatially patterned forest restoration methods
Applied nucleation and other spatially patterned restoration methods are promising approaches for scaling up projects to meet ambitious international restoration commitments in an ecologically and economically sound manner. Much of the corresponding literature to date, however, has centered around theoretical discussions and small‐scale studies that are largely divorced from constraints faced by restoration practitioners. We briefly review recent academic literature about applied nucleation and other spatially patterned restoration methods and discuss practical challenges to their implementation. We offer several recommendations to move spatially patterned restoration from an academic conversation to scalable application, including: (1) comparing different planting designs and natural regeneration within the same system at an appropriate scale; (2) monitoring ecological outcomes throughout the restored area over sufficient time to evaluate recovery; (3) quantifying costs and documenting other logistical constraints to implementation; and (4) exploring methods for using unplanted areas to provide benefits to landholders until planted vegetation establishes.
Authors
- Ludmila Pugliese de Siqueira (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0856-2417)
- J. Leighton Reid (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7390-2094)
- Rakan A. Zahawi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5678-2967)
- Pedro H. S. Brancalion (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8245-4062)
- Karen D. Holl (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2893-6161)
Institutions
- University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
- Charles Darwin Foundation (EC)
- Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- Forest Science and Research Institute (BR)
- Virginia Tech (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Restoration Ecology
- Published
- 2024-09-05
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14266
- Citations
- 7
- Primary Topic
- Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 3.78