Katie Pita, Sara B. Wickham, Emma L. Davis, Patrick Lauriault, Alexandra Johnson, Nhu Q. Le, Siobhan Mullally, Kyle Schang, Michaela M. A. Smitas‐Kraas, Elizabeth Wittmann, Andrew J. Trant
{"title":"How does restoration ecology consider climate change uncertainties in forested ecosystems?","authors":"Katie Pita, Sara B. Wickham, Emma L. Davis, Patrick Lauriault, Alexandra Johnson, Nhu Q. Le, Siobhan Mullally, Kyle Schang, Michaela M. A. Smitas‐Kraas, Elizabeth Wittmann, Andrew J. Trant","doi":"10.1111/rec.14265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Forest restoration is a powerful tool that combats forest loss and mitigates climate change. Our review asks how climate change considerations are integrated into forest restoration. We asked: (1) How many articles about forest restoration practices discuss climate change; (2) has this changed over time; and (3) when climate change is mentioned, how is it considered? We used the framework created by Simonson et al. in 2021, which describes seven unique areas where practitioners can consider climate change impacts in their projects. These areas include adjusting species and location for projected changes to fitness, mitigating risks, and aligning practice with policy. We reviewed the literature through Web of Science and evaluated publications for inclusion of these considerations. We found that the number of publications about forest restoration projects has increased significantly since the early 2000s, exceeding 200 in 2021. The proportion of these including the terms “climate change” or “global warming,” has also increased (35% in 2021). Climate change concepts were only considered in what we defined as an “in‐depth” context in 83 of the 186 publications we reviewed (45%). However, the majority of publications (115 of 186, 61%) did incorporate at least one of the seven considerations, even if they did not satisfy our definition for in‐depth climate change consideration. Several articles discussed other considerations not described by Simonson et al. (2021), leading us to recommend adding an eighth criterion to their framework: consider place‐based communities and Indigenous Knowledge Holders' responses to climate change in forest restoration.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","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.14265","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
Forest restoration is a powerful tool that combats forest loss and mitigates climate change. Our review asks how climate change considerations are integrated into forest restoration. We asked: (1) How many articles about forest restoration practices discuss climate change; (2) has this changed over time; and (3) when climate change is mentioned, how is it considered? We used the framework created by Simonson et al. in 2021, which describes seven unique areas where practitioners can consider climate change impacts in their projects. These areas include adjusting species and location for projected changes to fitness, mitigating risks, and aligning practice with policy. We reviewed the literature through Web of Science and evaluated publications for inclusion of these considerations. We found that the number of publications about forest restoration projects has increased significantly since the early 2000s, exceeding 200 in 2021. The proportion of these including the terms “climate change” or “global warming,” has also increased (35% in 2021). Climate change concepts were only considered in what we defined as an “in‐depth” context in 83 of the 186 publications we reviewed (45%). However, the majority of publications (115 of 186, 61%) did incorporate at least one of the seven considerations, even if they did not satisfy our definition for in‐depth climate change consideration. Several articles discussed other considerations not described by Simonson et al. (2021), leading us to recommend adding an eighth criterion to their framework: consider place‐based communities and Indigenous Knowledge Holders' responses to climate change in forest restoration.
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.