Tropical-Forest Degradation–Restoration Interface: A Comprehensive Review

Tropical forests sustain exceptional biodiversity and regulate global carbon and water cycles, yet degradation and incomplete recovery increasingly compromise these functions. We integrated bibliometric mapping with structured systematic synthesis to characterize research at the tropical-forest degradation–restoration interface, identify its most influential contributors and publications, and evaluate evidence on drivers, interventions, monitoring, and knowledge gaps. This study addresses three guiding scientific questions: (i) How has the field developed over time and across geographic space? (ii) Which authors, institutions, journals and publications have been most influential? (iii) What does the evidence indicate about degradation drivers, restoration strategies, monitoring approaches and knowledge gaps? Scopus and Web of Science were searched for peer-reviewed articles and reviews published from 1980 to 2025. After deduplication and PRISMA-based screening, 1075 publications were analyzed bibliometrically, and the 400 most-cited studies were coded against twenty predefined questions. Scientific output increased by 10.68% annually, with 483 publications appearing during 2020–2025. The corpus comprised 318 journals and 4470 authors. Forest Ecology and Management was the leading source (141 publications; 13.1%), while the twenty most productive journals accounted for 44.3% of the corpus. Brancalion P.H.S. was the most productive author (23 publications), followed by Chazdon R.L. and Tabarelli M. (20 each). Citation influence was concentrated: the twenty most-cited documents received 25.7% of all citations, led by Ribeiro M.C. (3339 citations), whereas Hua F. achieved the highest publication-year-normalized citation score among this group. Agricultural expansion, pasture establishment, and logging were the most frequently reported degradation pressures, but interactions among logging, fire, drought, and fragmentation were rarely quantified. Restoration evidence supported a context-dependent continuum from natural regeneration to assisted and active interventions, although planting and enrichment were more visible than direct passive–active comparisons. Carbon, biomass, plant diversity, and forest structure dominated outcome assessment, whereas fauna, ecological interactions, governance, and socioeconomic dimensions received less attention. Monitoring relied mainly on satellite imagery and field inventories, with limited evaluation of tool performance. Long-term trajectories and evidence from Africa, Southeast Asia, seasonally dry forests, and montane systems remained scarce. Overall, the field is rapidly consolidating but remains geographically and thematically uneven. Future research should quantify interacting degradation processes, evaluate multidimensional and long-term recovery, connect remote sensing with ecologically meaningful field indicators, and integrate governance and social conditions into restoration planning. The synthesis supports preventing further degradation and treating restoration as a context-specific complement, rather than a substitute, for protecting remaining native forests.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Forests
Published
2026-08-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/f17080913
Primary Topic
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Tropical-Forest Degradation–Restoration Interface: A Comprehensive Review

Rodrigo Nogueira de Vasconcelos, Washington Franca-Rocha, Willian Moura de Aguiar, Eduardo Mariano‐Neto et al.
Forests
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
article

Tropical-Forest Degradation–Restoration Interface: A Comprehensive Review

Rodrigo Nogueira de Vasconcelos, Washington Franca-Rocha, Willian Moura de Aguiar, Eduardo Mariano‐Neto, Mariana Martins Medeiros de Santana, Luanna Maia Carneiro, Deorgia T. M. de Souza
article en

Abstract

Tropical forests sustain exceptional biodiversity and regulate global carbon and water cycles, yet degradation and incomplete recovery increasingly compromise these functions. We integrated bibliometric mapping with structured systematic synthesis to characterize research at the tropical-forest degradation–restoration interface, identify its most influential contributors and publications, and evaluate evidence on drivers, interventions, monitoring, and knowledge gaps. This study addresses three guiding scientific questions: (i) How has the field developed over time and across geographic space? (ii) Which authors, institutions, journals and publications have been most influential? (iii) What does the evidence indicate about degradation drivers, restoration strategies, monitoring approaches and knowledge gaps? Scopus and Web of Science were searched for peer-reviewed articles and reviews published from 1980 to 2025. After deduplication and PRISMA-based screening, 1075 publications were analyzed bibliometrically, and the 400 most-cited studies were coded against twenty predefined questions. Scientific output increased by 10.68% annually, with 483 publications appearing during 2020–2025. The corpus comprised 318 journals and 4470 authors. Forest Ecology and Management was the leading source (141 publications; 13.1%), while the twenty most productive journals accounted for 44.3% of the corpus. Brancalion P.H.S. was the most productive author (23 publications), followed by Chazdon R.L. and Tabarelli M. (20 each). Citation influence was concentrated: the twenty most-cited documents received 25.7% of all citations, led by Ribeiro M.C. (3339 citations), whereas Hua F. achieved the highest publication-year-normalized citation score among this group. Agricultural expansion, pasture establishment, and logging were the most frequently reported degradation pressures, but interactions among logging, fire, drought, and fragmentation were rarely quantified. Restoration evidence supported a context-dependent continuum from natural regeneration to assisted and active interventions, although planting and enrichment were more visible than direct passive–active comparisons. Carbon, biomass, plant diversity, and forest structure dominated outcome assessment, whereas fauna, ecological interactions, governance, and socioeconomic dimensions received less attention. Monitoring relied mainly on satellite imagery and field inventories, with limited evaluation of tool performance. Long-term trajectories and evidence from Africa, Southeast Asia, seasonally dry forests, and montane systems remained scarce. Overall, the field is rapidly consolidating but remains geographically and thematically uneven. Future research should quantify interacting degradation processes, evaluate multidimensional and long-term recovery, connect remote sensing with ecologically meaningful field indicators, and integrate governance and social conditions into restoration planning. The synthesis supports preventing further degradation and treating restoration as a context-specific complement, rather than a substitute, for protecting remaining native forests.

ForestsVol. 17(8)
Universidade Federal da Bahia (BR), Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana (BR), Universidade Estadual do Amapá (BR)
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.