4.7 Article

Restoring degraded tropical forests for carbon and biodiversity

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 9, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/11/114020

Keywords

forest landscape restoration; restoration prioritization; degraded tropical forest; threatened species; carbon sequestration; trade-offs; REDD

Funding

  1. Australian Awards Scholarship
  2. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions
  3. Australian Research Council Future Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The extensive deforestation and degradation of tropical forests is a significant contributor to the loss of biodiversity and to global warming. Restoration could potentially mitigate the impacts of deforestation, yet knowledge on how to efficiently allocate funding for restoration is still in its infancy. We systematically prioritize investments in restoration in the tropical landscape of East Kalimantan, Indonesia, and through this application demonstrate the capacity to account for a diverse suite of restoration techniques and forests of varying condition. To achieve this we develop a map of forest degradation for the region, characterized on the basis of aboveground biomass and differentiated by broad forest types. We estimate the costs of restoration as well as the benefits in terms of carbon sequestration and improving the suitability of habitat for threatened mammals through time. When the objective is solely to enhance carbon stocks, then restoration of highly degraded lowland forest is the most cost-effective activity. However, if the objective is to improve the habitat of threatened species, multiple forest types should be restored and this reduces the accumulated carbon by up to 24%. Our analysis framework provides a transparent method for prioritizing where and how restoration should occur in heterogeneous landscapes in order to maximize the benefits for carbon and biodiversity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available