4.4 Article

Weight-of-evidence approach for assessing agroforestry contributions to restore key ecosystem services in tropical dry forests

期刊

AGROFORESTRY SYSTEMS
卷 97, 期 2, 页码 151-161

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10457-022-00794-z

关键词

Intercropping systems; Multistrata systems; Silvopastoral and protective systems; Soil quality improvement; Production increase; Cultural importance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Worldwide deforestation and degradation are affecting the capacity of tropical dry forests (TDFs) to provide environmental services. Agroforestry systems (AFSs) can help restore key ecosystem services in TDFs by combining perennial elements with crops, although they may also have some negative impacts, such as yield reductions. Despite some knowledge gaps, our findings indicate that AFSs can contribute to the restoration of TDFs and the well-being of local communities by providing valuable ecosystem services.
Worldwide deforestation and degradation are limiting the capacity of tropical dry forests (TDFs) to provide environmental services. Agroforestry systems (AFSs) are agricultural land systems that combining perennial elements with crops, can provide important benefits to people (e.g. timber and non-timber products) and the environment (e.g. hosting biodiversity). Using a semi-quantitative methodology (i.e. weight of evidence), we assessed the role of the three main types of AFSs (intercropping, multistrata and silvopastoral and protective systems) in restoring key ecosystem services in TDFs. We found that each type of AFSs contributed differently to soil quality restoration, productivity, biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and culture preservation. Yet, AFSs can also deliver few disservices, such as yield reductions. Despite the identified knowledge gaps, such as the carbon sequestration capacity, our findings indicate that AFSs can contribute to restore TDFs by providing valuable ecosystem services to halt degradation and sustain people's livelihood.

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

4.4
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