Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/207725 |
Resumo: | Considering that ecosystem restoration is a long-term process, the evaluation of each stage of its trajectory may allow us to predict the success of the restoration goals. Given that there are plenty of indicators in the scientific literature for measuring restoration success, and there are stakeholders which are the key actors of restoration, our aim was to determine a common and simple set of indicators ranked by stakeholders for evaluating the restoration trajectory. We selected 52 indicators for monitoring high-diversity forest restoration projects in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest and organized them into six categories: (1) physical and structural, (2) composition/biodiversity, (3) environmental services, (4) ecological processes, (5) economic and (6) social. We sent questionnaires to stakeholders from five Brazilian states, who evaluated these indicators (with rates ranging from 0 to 3, where 0 = not important or should not be considered; 1 = low importance; 2 = important; and 3 = very important, considering four time-stages throughout the process (2–3, 3–10, 10–50 and > 50 years). Based on this assessment, we ranked the indicators and tested whether the importance of the categories changed between them and over time. We present the “top ten” indicators (with the ten highest grades) for each stage, selected, and ranked by practitioners, that can be used to evaluate restoration projects and provide guidance for restoration policies. In the initial stage, from 2 to 3 years, social attributes were highly important, related to the degree of acceptance by the community. Economic indicators were also important at the initial stage, when the costs of developing, deploying, and maintaining restoration actions are high. Physical and structural indicators were more important in the short-term stage, from 3 to 10 years. Ecological indicators related to composition/biodiversity and ecological processes became relevant after 3 years and kept so onwards. Only in the long-term, addressing ecosystem services became an important indicator of the restoration success, to stakeholders. Overall, stakeholders care for forest structure and establishment of plants in all stages, while composition/biodiversity and richness gain importance in more advanced phases of restoration trajectory. |
id |
UNSP_680e8e160b266b318242d71653905547 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/207725 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic ForestAttributesForest restorationMonitoringRankingStakeholdersSuccessConsidering that ecosystem restoration is a long-term process, the evaluation of each stage of its trajectory may allow us to predict the success of the restoration goals. Given that there are plenty of indicators in the scientific literature for measuring restoration success, and there are stakeholders which are the key actors of restoration, our aim was to determine a common and simple set of indicators ranked by stakeholders for evaluating the restoration trajectory. We selected 52 indicators for monitoring high-diversity forest restoration projects in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest and organized them into six categories: (1) physical and structural, (2) composition/biodiversity, (3) environmental services, (4) ecological processes, (5) economic and (6) social. We sent questionnaires to stakeholders from five Brazilian states, who evaluated these indicators (with rates ranging from 0 to 3, where 0 = not important or should not be considered; 1 = low importance; 2 = important; and 3 = very important, considering four time-stages throughout the process (2–3, 3–10, 10–50 and > 50 years). Based on this assessment, we ranked the indicators and tested whether the importance of the categories changed between them and over time. We present the “top ten” indicators (with the ten highest grades) for each stage, selected, and ranked by practitioners, that can be used to evaluate restoration projects and provide guidance for restoration policies. In the initial stage, from 2 to 3 years, social attributes were highly important, related to the degree of acceptance by the community. Economic indicators were also important at the initial stage, when the costs of developing, deploying, and maintaining restoration actions are high. Physical and structural indicators were more important in the short-term stage, from 3 to 10 years. Ecological indicators related to composition/biodiversity and ecological processes became relevant after 3 years and kept so onwards. Only in the long-term, addressing ecosystem services became an important indicator of the restoration success, to stakeholders. Overall, stakeholders care for forest structure and establishment of plants in all stages, while composition/biodiversity and richness gain importance in more advanced phases of restoration trajectory.Federal University of São Carlos/UFSCar/CCA – Rural Development Department, PO Box 153, 13.600-970São Paulo State University/UNESP/FCA - Forest Science Department, PO Box 237, 18.610-970São Paulo State University/UNESP – Department of Biodiversity Phenology Lab, Rua 24 A, 1515Embrapa Agrobiologia, Rodovia BR 465 Km 7Federal Technological University of Paraná/UTFPR, Estrada para Boa Esperança Km 4São Paulo State University/UNESP/FCA - Forest Science Department, PO Box 237, 18.610-970São Paulo State University/UNESP – Department of Biodiversity Phenology Lab, Rua 24 A, 1515Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar)Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA)Federal Technological University of Paraná/UTFPREvangelista de Oliveira, RenataLex Engel, Vera [UNESP]de Paula Loiola, Priscilla [UNESP]Fernando Duarte de Moraes, Luizde Souza Vismara, Edgar2021-06-25T10:59:54Z2021-06-25T10:59:54Z2021-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652Ecological Indicators, v. 127.1470-160Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/20772510.1016/j.ecolind.2021.1076522-s2.0-85105694227Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengEcological Indicatorsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-04-30T13:11:03Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/207725Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-04-30T13:11:03Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
title |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
spellingShingle |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest Evangelista de Oliveira, Renata Attributes Forest restoration Monitoring Ranking Stakeholders Success |
title_short |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
title_full |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
title_fullStr |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
title_full_unstemmed |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
title_sort |
Top 10 indicators for evaluating restoration trajectories in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest |
author |
Evangelista de Oliveira, Renata |
author_facet |
Evangelista de Oliveira, Renata Lex Engel, Vera [UNESP] de Paula Loiola, Priscilla [UNESP] Fernando Duarte de Moraes, Luiz de Souza Vismara, Edgar |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lex Engel, Vera [UNESP] de Paula Loiola, Priscilla [UNESP] Fernando Duarte de Moraes, Luiz de Souza Vismara, Edgar |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar) Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA) Federal Technological University of Paraná/UTFPR |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Evangelista de Oliveira, Renata Lex Engel, Vera [UNESP] de Paula Loiola, Priscilla [UNESP] Fernando Duarte de Moraes, Luiz de Souza Vismara, Edgar |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Attributes Forest restoration Monitoring Ranking Stakeholders Success |
topic |
Attributes Forest restoration Monitoring Ranking Stakeholders Success |
description |
Considering that ecosystem restoration is a long-term process, the evaluation of each stage of its trajectory may allow us to predict the success of the restoration goals. Given that there are plenty of indicators in the scientific literature for measuring restoration success, and there are stakeholders which are the key actors of restoration, our aim was to determine a common and simple set of indicators ranked by stakeholders for evaluating the restoration trajectory. We selected 52 indicators for monitoring high-diversity forest restoration projects in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest and organized them into six categories: (1) physical and structural, (2) composition/biodiversity, (3) environmental services, (4) ecological processes, (5) economic and (6) social. We sent questionnaires to stakeholders from five Brazilian states, who evaluated these indicators (with rates ranging from 0 to 3, where 0 = not important or should not be considered; 1 = low importance; 2 = important; and 3 = very important, considering four time-stages throughout the process (2–3, 3–10, 10–50 and > 50 years). Based on this assessment, we ranked the indicators and tested whether the importance of the categories changed between them and over time. We present the “top ten” indicators (with the ten highest grades) for each stage, selected, and ranked by practitioners, that can be used to evaluate restoration projects and provide guidance for restoration policies. In the initial stage, from 2 to 3 years, social attributes were highly important, related to the degree of acceptance by the community. Economic indicators were also important at the initial stage, when the costs of developing, deploying, and maintaining restoration actions are high. Physical and structural indicators were more important in the short-term stage, from 3 to 10 years. Ecological indicators related to composition/biodiversity and ecological processes became relevant after 3 years and kept so onwards. Only in the long-term, addressing ecosystem services became an important indicator of the restoration success, to stakeholders. Overall, stakeholders care for forest structure and establishment of plants in all stages, while composition/biodiversity and richness gain importance in more advanced phases of restoration trajectory. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-06-25T10:59:54Z 2021-06-25T10:59:54Z 2021-08-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652 Ecological Indicators, v. 127. 1470-160X http://hdl.handle.net/11449/207725 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652 2-s2.0-85105694227 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/207725 |
identifier_str_mv |
Ecological Indicators, v. 127. 1470-160X 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107652 2-s2.0-85105694227 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Ecological Indicators |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1803649896922742784 |