This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
implementation strategies, duration, and in how much they considered socio-economic and institutional aspects, which are essential for successful restoration (CIFOR, 2002). Forest restoration can restore many ecosystem functions and recover many components of the original biodiversity. Approaches to restoring functionality in forest ecosystems depend strongly on the initial state of forest or land degradation and the desired outcome, time frame, and financial constraints (Fig. 6).

In many deforested, degraded and fragmented forest habitats investments in restoration and rehabilitation forests can yield high biodiversity conservation and livelihood benefits (Sayer et al, 2003, Chazdon, 2008; TEEB, 2009; TEEB, 2009).

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS TO BIODIVERSITY/CONSERVATION FROM FOREST RESTORATION?

Restoration in densely settled tropical areas can have more im- pact on biodiversity than further extension of “paper parks” in remote, pristine forests and can also deliver important forest

goods and services to a wider range of stakeholders (Sayer et al, 2003). Retention of even small fragments of natural vegetation is justified by their great potential value in providing the build- ing blocks for future restoration programmes. Restored forests can improve ecosystem services and enhance biodiversity con- servation (Chazdon, 2008). Along the Mata Atlantica in Brazil a non-profit organization named Instituto Terra undertakes ac- tive restoration of degraded stands of Atlantic Forest by estab- lishing tree nurseries to replant denuded areas (Instituto Terra 2007). Benefits include biodiversity enhancement, water regu- lation, carbon storage and sequestration as well as preventing soil erosion. In Vietnam, forest restoration thorough planting indigenous tree species and fostering natural regeneration has lead to increased water supply as well as increased and higher quality habitats for animals and plants as shown in case study 2 (Poffenberger, 2006). Restoring eucalyptus woodlands and dry forests on land used for intensive cattle farming in south- east Australia was found to yield numerous benefits including reversing the loss of biodiversity, halting land degradation due to dryland salinisation and thereby increasing land productivity (Dorrough and Moxham, 2005).

CASE STUDY #2

Restoration of limestone forests in Phuc Sen in Northwestern Vietnam

In Son La District in Northwestern Vietnam, Tai and Hmong communities have managed upland forests for generations. Forests are classified according to function including old growth protected areas (Pa Dong), younger secondary forests that are part of long rotation swiddens (Pa Kai), early regenerating for- ests (Pa Loa) and bamboo forests (Pa). The lands are held un- der communal tenure and allow for a well-managed landscape that supports considerable biodiversity. In Cao Bang Province, to the North the Nung an ethnic community found that their lime- stone forests had degraded because of the growing fuelwood and timber extraction pressures from State Forest Enterprises and local villages. After biodiversity and hydrology began to de- teriorate in the 1960s and1970s, the communities in Phuc Sen organised to divide forest protection among the 12 villages. A combination of planting with indigenous pioneering tree species like mac, rac and more valuable timber species, combined with

26

natural regeneration, has led to the reforestation of many of the limestone hillocks in the area. The restoration of the limestone forests has facilitated the reestablishment of spring flows that provide water for the lowland rice fields. It has also allowed for the return of many indigenous mammal species, including five endemic and 26 rare species. The process is currently being rep- licated through a Community Forest Network operating at the district and provincial level (Dzung et al., 2004). In many parts of upland Southeast Asia, communities are organising to pro- tect threatened upland forests. Part of these initiatives deal with outside pressures from private sector timber enterprises as well as from the expansion and commercialisation of agriculture. The emergence of community forestry networks is apparent in up- land areas of Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia.

Source: Poffenberger, 2006 pg. 11 Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112
Produced with Yudu - www.yudu.com