The Restoration of Forest Biodiversity and Ecological Values

The Restoration of Forest Biodiversity and Ecological Values


Throughout Asia there has been significant push to restore degraded lands yet many of these initiatives lack clear objectives. This paper explores the failures that have emerged from this trend, paying close attention to restoration schemes that were politically driven and unsuccessful in yielding the economic and environmental benefits due to the lack of clarity in defining the precise restoration objectives.

Conclusions & Takeaways

The authors emphasize the need to involve stakeholders, particularly rural community, in defining the objective and in identifying local needs and value systems for successful rehabilitation program and they reasone that the existence of trade-offs between social welfare considerations and complete restoration of native biodiversity and ecological functions. The paper aruges only direct economic or indirect incentives to the local communities will ensure the sustainability of their involvement and the viability of the restoration programs can be maintained. Moreover, ecosystem restoration approach should not only focus on single species but recognize managing the land for multiple goods and services to meet the needs of diverse legitimate stakeholders. These needs should be based on the views and interests of local community and identified through their participation and involvement. Authors concluded the paper by providing six principles for successful restoration programs: 1) involve stakeholders in the definition of objectives, 2) define objectives in measureable ways, 3) ensure that causes of degradation are understood and addressed and not just symptoms, 4) invest in people and local institutions and not just in physical infrastructure, 5) encourage learning and adaptation in the management of programs, and 6) apply ecosystem and common property management principles.


Sayer J, Chokkalingam U, Poulsen J. The restoration of forest biodiversity and ecological values. Forest Ecology and Management. 2004;201:3–11. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.06.008.


  • Forest for Life, WWF Av. Du Mont Blanc, Switzerland