Smallholders' perspectives, motivations, and incentives for restoring the Brazilian Atlantic Forest

IF 2.8 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Mayra F. Tavares, Patrícia Gallo, Nathália Nascimento, Jürgen Bauhus, Pedro H. S. Brancalion, Mélanie Feurer
{"title":"Smallholders' perspectives, motivations, and incentives for restoring the Brazilian Atlantic Forest","authors":"Mayra F. Tavares, Patrícia Gallo, Nathália Nascimento, Jürgen Bauhus, Pedro H. S. Brancalion, Mélanie Feurer","doi":"10.1111/rec.14270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ecosystem restoration, recognized as a critical strategy for climate change adaptation and mitigation, faces significant challenges in achieving widespread implementation. A particular facet of this challenge lies in the active involvement of rural landowners. Our study aimed to understand rural landowners' perspectives, motivations, and characteristics that influence their participation in restoration projects in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil. Qualitative content analysis was conducted on 68 semi‐structured interviews with two groups of landowners: 36 who received support and 32 who did not receive project support from a local non‐governmental organization to restore native forests on their landholdings. Approximately three‐quarters of the sample are classified as smallholders (&lt;80 ha). The main difference between the two groups is the dependence on agricultural production as the main source of income, with 22% of <jats:italic>farmers</jats:italic> in the supported group and 72% in the unsupported group. This socio‐economic characteristic appeared to influence the decision to restore native forest. <jats:italic>Farmers'</jats:italic> focus tends to be linked to rural production, and the main obstacle to restoration was the loss of productive land. They usually allow natural forest regeneration to establish on slopes. The other type of landowner (lifestylers) mainly restored land through planting of seedlings, with the main barrier being the cost of restoration. Both groups had water conservation as their main motivation for restoration. Our study shows that understanding the perspectives and motivations of the diversity of rural landowners is crucial to effectively engage them and address the socio‐economic feasibility of different restoration approaches.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14270","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ecosystem restoration, recognized as a critical strategy for climate change adaptation and mitigation, faces significant challenges in achieving widespread implementation. A particular facet of this challenge lies in the active involvement of rural landowners. Our study aimed to understand rural landowners' perspectives, motivations, and characteristics that influence their participation in restoration projects in the Atlantic Forest of southeastern Brazil. Qualitative content analysis was conducted on 68 semi‐structured interviews with two groups of landowners: 36 who received support and 32 who did not receive project support from a local non‐governmental organization to restore native forests on their landholdings. Approximately three‐quarters of the sample are classified as smallholders (<80 ha). The main difference between the two groups is the dependence on agricultural production as the main source of income, with 22% of farmers in the supported group and 72% in the unsupported group. This socio‐economic characteristic appeared to influence the decision to restore native forest. Farmers' focus tends to be linked to rural production, and the main obstacle to restoration was the loss of productive land. They usually allow natural forest regeneration to establish on slopes. The other type of landowner (lifestylers) mainly restored land through planting of seedlings, with the main barrier being the cost of restoration. Both groups had water conservation as their main motivation for restoration. Our study shows that understanding the perspectives and motivations of the diversity of rural landowners is crucial to effectively engage them and address the socio‐economic feasibility of different restoration approaches.
小农对恢复巴西大西洋森林的看法、动机和激励措施
生态系统恢复被认为是适应和减缓气候变化的关键战略,但在广泛实施方面却面临着巨大挑战。这一挑战的一个特殊方面在于农村土地所有者的积极参与。我们的研究旨在了解农村土地所有者的观点、动机以及影响其参与巴西东南部大西洋森林恢复项目的特征。我们对两组土地所有者进行了 68 次半结构化访谈,并对访谈内容进行了定性分析:其中 36 人得到了当地非政府组织的支持,32 人没有得到项目支持,以恢复其土地上的原始森林。大约四分之三的样本被归类为小农户(80 公顷)。两组农民的主要区别在于主要收入来源对农业生产的依赖性,在获得支持的组别中,22% 的农民依赖农业生产,而在未获得支持的组别中,72% 的农民依赖农业生产。这一社会经济特征似乎影响了恢复原始森林的决定。农民的关注点往往与农村生产有关,恢复的主要障碍是失去生产用地。他们通常允许自然森林在斜坡上再生。另一类土地所有者(生活者)主要通过种植树苗来恢复土地,主要障碍是恢复成本。这两类人的主要修复动机都是保护水资源。我们的研究表明,了解不同农村土地所有者的观点和动机对于有效吸引他们参与并解决不同恢复方法的社会经济可行性问题至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Restoration Ecology
Restoration Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
15.60%
发文量
226
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Restoration Ecology fosters the exchange of ideas among the many disciplines involved with ecological restoration. Addressing global concerns and communicating them to the international research community and restoration practitioners, the journal is at the forefront of a vital new direction in science, ecology, and policy. Original papers describe experimental, observational, and theoretical studies on terrestrial, marine, and freshwater systems, and are considered without taxonomic bias. Contributions span the natural sciences, including ecological and biological aspects, as well as the restoration of soil, air and water when set in an ecological context; and the social sciences, including cultural, philosophical, political, educational, economic and historical aspects. Edited by a distinguished panel, the journal continues to be a major conduit for researchers to publish their findings in the fight to not only halt ecological damage, but also to ultimately reverse it.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信