Search

Extensive forest restoration is a key strategy to meet nature-based sustainable development goals and provide multiple social and environmental benefits 1 . Yet achieving forest restoration at scale requires cost-effective methods 2 . Tree planting in degraded landscapes is a popular but costly forest restoration method that often results in less biodiverse forests when compared to natural regeneration techniques under similar conditions 3 . Here we assess the current spatial distribution of pantropical natural forest (from 2000 to 2016) and use this to present a model of the potential for natural regeneration across tropical forested countries and biomes at a spatial resolution of 30 m. We estimate that an area of 215 million hectares-an area greater than the entire country of Mexico-has potential for natural forest regeneration, representing an above-ground carbon sequestration potential of 23.4 Gt C (range, 21.1-25.7 Gt) over 30 years. Five countries (Brazil, Indonesia, China, Mexico and Colombia) account for 52% of this estimated potential, showcasing the need for targeting restoration initiatives that leverage natural regeneration potential. Our results facilitate broader equitable decision-making processes that capitalize on the widespread opportunity for natural regeneration to help achieve national and global environmental agendas., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Secondary forests are increasingly important components of human-modified landscapes in the tropics. Successional pathways, however, can vary enormously across and within landscapes, with divergent regrowth rates, vegetation structure and species composition. While climatic and edaphic conditions drive variations across regions, land-use history plays a central role in driving alternative successional pathways within human-modified landscapes. How land use affects succession depends on its intensity, spatial extent, frequency, duration and management practices, and is mediated by a complex combination of mechanisms acting on different ecosystem components and at different spatial and temporal scales. We review the literature aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying the long-lasting effects of land use on tropical forest succession and to discuss its implications for forest restoration. We organize it following a framework based on the hierarchical model of succession and ecological filtering theory. This review shows that our knowledge is mostly derived from studies in Neotropical forests regenerating after abandonment of shifting cultivation or pasture systems. Vegetation is the ecological component assessed most often. Little is known regarding how the recovery of belowground processes and microbiota communities is affected by previous land-use history. In published studies, land-use history has been mostly characterized by type, without discrimination of intensity, extent, duration or frequency. We compile and discuss the metrics used to describe land-use history, aiming to facilitate future studies. The literature shows that (i) species availability to succession is affected by transformations in the landscape that affect dispersal, and by management practices and seed predation, which affect the composition and diversity of propagules on site. Once a species successfully reaches an abandoned field, its establishment and performance are dependent on resistance to management practices, tolerance to (modified) soil conditions, herbivory, competition with weeds and invasive species, and facilitation by remnant trees. (ii) Structural and compositional divergences at early stages of succession remain for decades, suggesting that early communities play an important role in governing further ecosystem functioning and processes during succession. Management interventions at early stages could help enhance recovery rates and manipulate successional pathways. (iii) The combination of local and landscape conditions defines the limitations to succession and therefore the potential for natural regeneration to restore ecosystem properties effectively. The knowledge summarized here could enable the identification of conditions in which natural regeneration could efficiently promote forest restoration, and where specific management practices are required to foster succession. Finally, characterization of the landscape context and previous land-use history is essential to understand the limitations to succession and therefore to define cost-effective restoration strategies. Advancing knowledge on these two aspects is key for finding generalizable relations that will increase the predictability of succession and the efficiency of forest restoration under different landscape contexts., (© 2021 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society.)

Is active restoration the best approach to achieve ecological restoration success (the return to a reference condition, that is, old-growth forest) when compared to natural regeneration in tropical forests? Our meta-analysis of 133 studies demonstrated that natural regeneration surpasses active restoration in achieving tropical forest restoration success for all three biodiversity groups (plants, birds, and invertebrates) and five measures of vegetation structure (cover, density, litter, biomass, and height) tested. Restoration success for biodiversity and vegetation structure was 34 to 56% and 19 to 56% higher in natural regeneration than in active restoration systems, respectively, after controlling for key biotic and abiotic factors (forest cover, precipitation, time elapsed since restoration started, and past disturbance). Biodiversity responses were based primarily on ecological metrics of abundance and species richness (74%), both of which take far less time to achieve restoration success than similarity and composition. This finding challenges the widely held notion that natural forest regeneration has limited conservation value and that active restoration should be the default ecological restoration strategy. The proposition that active restoration achieves greater restoration success than natural regeneration may have arisen because previous comparisons lacked controls for biotic and abiotic factors; we also did not find any difference between active restoration and natural regeneration outcomes for vegetation structure when we did not control for these factors. Future policy priorities should align the identified patterns of biophysical and ecological conditions where each or both restoration approaches are more successful, cost-effective, and compatible with socioeconomic incentives for tropical forest restoration.

Restoration initiatives are becoming increasingly applied around the world. Billions of dollars have been spent on ecological restoration research and initiatives, but restoration outcomes differ widely among these initiatives in part due to variable socioeconomic and ecological contexts. Here, we present the most comprehensive dataset gathered to date on forest restoration. It encompasses 269 primary studies across 221 study landscapes in 53 countries and contains 4,645 quantitative comparisons between reference ecosystems (e.g., old-growth forest) and degraded or restored ecosystems for five taxonomic groups (mammals, birds, invertebrates, herpetofauna, and plants) and five measures of vegetation structure reflecting different ecological processes (cover, density, height, biomass, and litter). We selected studies that (1) were conducted in forest ecosystems; (2) had multiple replicate sampling sites to measure indicators of biodiversity and/or vegetation structure in reference and restored and/or degraded ecosystems; and (3) used less-disturbed forests as a reference to the ecosystem under study. We recorded (1) latitude and longitude; (2) study year; (3) country; (4) biogeographic realm; (5) past disturbance type; (6) current disturbance type; (7) forest conversion class; (8) restoration activity; (9) time that a system has been disturbed; (10) time elapsed since restoration started; (11) ecological metric used to assess biodiversity; and (12) quantitative value of the ecological metric of biodiversity and/or vegetation structure for reference and restored and/or degraded ecosystems. These were the most common data available in the selected studies. We also estimated forest cover and configuration in each study landscape using a recently developed 1 km consensus land cover dataset. We measured forest configuration as the (1) mean size of all forest patches; (2) size of the largest forest patch; and (3) edge:area ratio of forest patches. Global analyses of the factors influencing ecological restoration success at both the local and landscape scale are urgently needed to guide restoration initiatives and to further develop restoration knowledge in a topic area of much contemporary interest., (© 2016 by the Ecological Society of America.)

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.