Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition

Autores
Wilson, Sarah Jane; Schelhas, John; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Nanni, Ana Sofía; Sloan, Sean
Año de publicación
2017
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
New forests are expanding around the world. In many regions, regrowth rates are surpassing deforestation rates, resulting in “forest transitions,” or net gains in forest cover. Typically measured only in terms of aggregate“’forest cover” change, these new forests are ecologically distinct from each other and from those originally cleared. We ask, what are the ecological attributes, goods, and services we might expect from different pathways of forest recovery? To address this question, we proposed a typology of forest transitions that reflects both their social drivers and ecological outcomes: tree plantation, spontaneous regeneration, and agroforestry transitions. Using case studies, we illustrate how the ecological outcomes of each transition type differ and change over time. We mapped the global distribution of forest-transition types to identify global epicenters of each, and found that spontaneous transitions are most common globally, especially in Latin America; agroforestry transitions predominate in Europe and Central America; and plantation transitions occur in parts of Europe and Asia. We proposed a conceptual framework to understand and compare the ecological services arising from different types of forest transitions over time: forest ecosystem-service transition curves. This framework illustrates that carbon sequestration tends to be comparatively lower in agroforestry transitions, and biodiversity recovery is lower in industrial plantations. Spontaneously regenerating forests tend to have relatively high biodiversity and biomass but provide fewer provisioning and economically valuable services. This framework captures the dynamism that we observe in forest transitions, thus illustrating that different social drivers produce different types of ecosystem-service transitions, and that as secondary forests grow, these services will change over time at rates that differ among transition types. Ultimately, this framework can guide future research, describe actual and potential changes in ecosystem services associated with different types of transitions, and promote management plans that incorporate forest cover changes with the services and benefits they provide.
Fil: Wilson, Sarah Jane. University of Michigan; Estados Unidos. Partners Reforestation Network; Estados Unidos
Fil: Schelhas, John. United States Forest Service, Southern Research Station; Estados Unidos
Fil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Nanni, Ana Sofía. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Sloan, Sean. James Cook University; Australia
Materia
BIODIVERSITY
CARBON
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FOREST CONSERVATION
FOREST COVER CHANGE
FOREST TRANSITION
LAND USE CHANGE
PLANTATIONS
SECONDARY FOREST
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/67453

id CONICETDig_04483d01c379ba7f440bd7169f457ef2
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/67453
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transitionWilson, Sarah JaneSchelhas, JohnGrau, Hector RicardoNanni, Ana SofíaSloan, SeanBIODIVERSITYCARBONECOSYSTEM SERVICESFOREST CONSERVATIONFOREST COVER CHANGEFOREST TRANSITIONLAND USE CHANGEPLANTATIONSSECONDARY FORESThttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1New forests are expanding around the world. In many regions, regrowth rates are surpassing deforestation rates, resulting in “forest transitions,” or net gains in forest cover. Typically measured only in terms of aggregate“’forest cover” change, these new forests are ecologically distinct from each other and from those originally cleared. We ask, what are the ecological attributes, goods, and services we might expect from different pathways of forest recovery? To address this question, we proposed a typology of forest transitions that reflects both their social drivers and ecological outcomes: tree plantation, spontaneous regeneration, and agroforestry transitions. Using case studies, we illustrate how the ecological outcomes of each transition type differ and change over time. We mapped the global distribution of forest-transition types to identify global epicenters of each, and found that spontaneous transitions are most common globally, especially in Latin America; agroforestry transitions predominate in Europe and Central America; and plantation transitions occur in parts of Europe and Asia. We proposed a conceptual framework to understand and compare the ecological services arising from different types of forest transitions over time: forest ecosystem-service transition curves. This framework illustrates that carbon sequestration tends to be comparatively lower in agroforestry transitions, and biodiversity recovery is lower in industrial plantations. Spontaneously regenerating forests tend to have relatively high biodiversity and biomass but provide fewer provisioning and economically valuable services. This framework captures the dynamism that we observe in forest transitions, thus illustrating that different social drivers produce different types of ecosystem-service transitions, and that as secondary forests grow, these services will change over time at rates that differ among transition types. Ultimately, this framework can guide future research, describe actual and potential changes in ecosystem services associated with different types of transitions, and promote management plans that incorporate forest cover changes with the services and benefits they provide.Fil: Wilson, Sarah Jane. University of Michigan; Estados Unidos. Partners Reforestation Network; Estados UnidosFil: Schelhas, John. United States Forest Service, Southern Research Station; Estados UnidosFil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; ArgentinaFil: Nanni, Ana Sofía. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; ArgentinaFil: Sloan, Sean. James Cook University; AustraliaResilience Alliance2017-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/67453Wilson, Sarah Jane; Schelhas, John; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Nanni, Ana Sofía; Sloan, Sean; Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition; Resilience Alliance; Ecology and Society; 22; 4; 12-2017; 381708-3087CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss4/art38/info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5751/ES-09615-220438info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:19:47Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/67453instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:19:47.348CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
title Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
spellingShingle Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
Wilson, Sarah Jane
BIODIVERSITY
CARBON
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FOREST CONSERVATION
FOREST COVER CHANGE
FOREST TRANSITION
LAND USE CHANGE
PLANTATIONS
SECONDARY FOREST
title_short Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
title_full Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
title_fullStr Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
title_full_unstemmed Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
title_sort Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Wilson, Sarah Jane
Schelhas, John
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Nanni, Ana Sofía
Sloan, Sean
author Wilson, Sarah Jane
author_facet Wilson, Sarah Jane
Schelhas, John
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Nanni, Ana Sofía
Sloan, Sean
author_role author
author2 Schelhas, John
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Nanni, Ana Sofía
Sloan, Sean
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv BIODIVERSITY
CARBON
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FOREST CONSERVATION
FOREST COVER CHANGE
FOREST TRANSITION
LAND USE CHANGE
PLANTATIONS
SECONDARY FOREST
topic BIODIVERSITY
CARBON
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FOREST CONSERVATION
FOREST COVER CHANGE
FOREST TRANSITION
LAND USE CHANGE
PLANTATIONS
SECONDARY FOREST
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv New forests are expanding around the world. In many regions, regrowth rates are surpassing deforestation rates, resulting in “forest transitions,” or net gains in forest cover. Typically measured only in terms of aggregate“’forest cover” change, these new forests are ecologically distinct from each other and from those originally cleared. We ask, what are the ecological attributes, goods, and services we might expect from different pathways of forest recovery? To address this question, we proposed a typology of forest transitions that reflects both their social drivers and ecological outcomes: tree plantation, spontaneous regeneration, and agroforestry transitions. Using case studies, we illustrate how the ecological outcomes of each transition type differ and change over time. We mapped the global distribution of forest-transition types to identify global epicenters of each, and found that spontaneous transitions are most common globally, especially in Latin America; agroforestry transitions predominate in Europe and Central America; and plantation transitions occur in parts of Europe and Asia. We proposed a conceptual framework to understand and compare the ecological services arising from different types of forest transitions over time: forest ecosystem-service transition curves. This framework illustrates that carbon sequestration tends to be comparatively lower in agroforestry transitions, and biodiversity recovery is lower in industrial plantations. Spontaneously regenerating forests tend to have relatively high biodiversity and biomass but provide fewer provisioning and economically valuable services. This framework captures the dynamism that we observe in forest transitions, thus illustrating that different social drivers produce different types of ecosystem-service transitions, and that as secondary forests grow, these services will change over time at rates that differ among transition types. Ultimately, this framework can guide future research, describe actual and potential changes in ecosystem services associated with different types of transitions, and promote management plans that incorporate forest cover changes with the services and benefits they provide.
Fil: Wilson, Sarah Jane. University of Michigan; Estados Unidos. Partners Reforestation Network; Estados Unidos
Fil: Schelhas, John. United States Forest Service, Southern Research Station; Estados Unidos
Fil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Nanni, Ana Sofía. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Sloan, Sean. James Cook University; Australia
description New forests are expanding around the world. In many regions, regrowth rates are surpassing deforestation rates, resulting in “forest transitions,” or net gains in forest cover. Typically measured only in terms of aggregate“’forest cover” change, these new forests are ecologically distinct from each other and from those originally cleared. We ask, what are the ecological attributes, goods, and services we might expect from different pathways of forest recovery? To address this question, we proposed a typology of forest transitions that reflects both their social drivers and ecological outcomes: tree plantation, spontaneous regeneration, and agroforestry transitions. Using case studies, we illustrate how the ecological outcomes of each transition type differ and change over time. We mapped the global distribution of forest-transition types to identify global epicenters of each, and found that spontaneous transitions are most common globally, especially in Latin America; agroforestry transitions predominate in Europe and Central America; and plantation transitions occur in parts of Europe and Asia. We proposed a conceptual framework to understand and compare the ecological services arising from different types of forest transitions over time: forest ecosystem-service transition curves. This framework illustrates that carbon sequestration tends to be comparatively lower in agroforestry transitions, and biodiversity recovery is lower in industrial plantations. Spontaneously regenerating forests tend to have relatively high biodiversity and biomass but provide fewer provisioning and economically valuable services. This framework captures the dynamism that we observe in forest transitions, thus illustrating that different social drivers produce different types of ecosystem-service transitions, and that as secondary forests grow, these services will change over time at rates that differ among transition types. Ultimately, this framework can guide future research, describe actual and potential changes in ecosystem services associated with different types of transitions, and promote management plans that incorporate forest cover changes with the services and benefits they provide.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-12
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/67453
Wilson, Sarah Jane; Schelhas, John; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Nanni, Ana Sofía; Sloan, Sean; Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition; Resilience Alliance; Ecology and Society; 22; 4; 12-2017; 38
1708-3087
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/67453
identifier_str_mv Wilson, Sarah Jane; Schelhas, John; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Nanni, Ana Sofía; Sloan, Sean; Forest ecosystem-service transitions: the ecological dimensions of the forest transition; Resilience Alliance; Ecology and Society; 22; 4; 12-2017; 38
1708-3087
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss4/art38/
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5751/ES-09615-220438
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Resilience Alliance
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Resilience Alliance
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844614172792324096
score 13.070432