4.7 Article

Reforestation reversals and forest transitions

期刊

LAND USE POLICY
卷 112, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105800

关键词

reforestation reversal; forest transition; forest restoration; land use; forest change; Latin America

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Forest transitions in Latin America have experienced "reversals", marked by significant declines in forest cover following reforestation. These reversals challenge traditional forest transition theories and are predominant in regional forest transition epicenters. Systematic historical case studies are crucial for a comprehensive understanding of forest transitions and reversals.
Forest transitions in Latin America have long been presumed to be characterized by progressively stable, expansive reforestation. Numerous studies note a dynamism surrounding reforestation, however, including associations with forest loss. Such apparent contradictions were recently underscored by descriptions of Latin American 'reforestation reversals' - marked declines in forest cover following net reforestation. Reversals arguably challenge classical perspectives on forest transitions while predominating within regional foresttransition epicenters. Potential reversal dynamics, still subject to speculation, bring into focus the shortcoming of recent forest-transition scholarship, particularly its reliance on generic satellite observation and neglect of land-use transitions shaping, and sustaining, reforestation. To catalyze research in this domain, I explore reversals in relation to land-change dynamics commonly linked to reforestation. I further frame reversals as inherent features of emergent tropical forest transitions, advancing a 'pulsed' forest-transition model and emphasizing that apparent reversals may not entail waning reforestation trajectories. A greater embrace of systematic, historical case studies parsing reforestation between land use and disuse is key to a fuller understanding of both forest transitions and reversals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据