Bringing the forest back: Restoration priorities in Colombia

• DOI: 10.1111/ddi.13821
• Publication Date: 2024-02-29T09:06:47Z
• Authors: Brooke A. Williams; Sofía López‐Cubillos; Jose Manuel Ochoa...; Renato Crouzeilles; Marcelo Villa‐Piñ...; Paola Johanna Isa...; Marina Schmoeller; Wilmer Marin; Anazelia Tedesco; Diego Bastos; Andrés Felipe Suá...; Luis Hernando Rom...; Eben N. Broadbent; Angelica M. Almey...; Jeffrey R. Vincent; Yuanyuan Yi; Robin L. Chazdon; James E. M. Watson; Elkin Alexi Nogue...; Cristian Alexande...; Hawthorne L. Beyer
• Keywords: 0106 biological sciences; 0301 basic medicine; Global and Planetary Change; Economics and Econometrics; 330; Geography; Ecology; Forest restoration; Discrete Choice Models in Economics and Health Care; Social Sciences; 333; Environmental science; Economics, Econometrics and Finance; FOS: Biological sciences; Environmental Science; Physical Sciences; Global Forest Transition; Agroforestry; Forest ecology; Drivers and Impacts of Tropical Deforestation; Environmental resource management; Biology; Ecosystem

AbstractAimColombia has committed to ambitious forest restoration targets which include a 1 million ha Bonn Challenge commitment and 6.47–8.31 million ha (rehabilitation and restoration, respectively) under the National Restoration Plan. Determining where and how to implement programs to achieve these targets remains a significant challenge.LocationColombia.MethodsWe adopt a multi‐objective optimisation framework for restoration planning and apply it to Colombia. We explore cost‐effective solutions that leverage the potential for assisted natural regeneration benefits while accounting for opportunity and establishment costs of restoration and maximising biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation benefits. We explore four politically relevant restoration area‐based targets (1, 6, 6.47 and 8.31 million ha) and identify minimum cost, and suites of maximum benefit and cost‐effective solutions.ResultsWe identify solutions that simultaneously perform well across biodiversity and carbon objectives, despite trade‐offs between these objectives. We find that cost‐effective solutions can achieve on average 91.1%, 90.8%, 90.5% and 90.1% of maximum carbon benefit and 100% of the maximum biodiversity benefit while significantly reducing costs. On average, the cost‐effective solutions reduce the cost by 87.5%, 56.8%, 59.6% and 46.2% compared to the maximum benefit solutions considering one, six, 6.47 and 8.31 million ha restoration targets, respectively.Main ConclusionsColombia has committed to bold restoration and conservation targets, such as those under the new 2030 Convention on Biological Diversity Global Biodiversity Framework. Strategic forest restoration planning will play an important role in achieving Colombia's biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation goals. We provide quantitative evidence to inform planning for environmentally and economically sensible restoration policy and practice in the country. Our framework and results can help guide Colombia towards meeting its ambitious forest restoration targets cost‐effectively.