| Literature DB >> 30568285 |
Bernardo B N Strassburg1,2,3, Hawthorne L Beyer4, Renato Crouzeilles5,6,7, Alvaro Iribarrem5,6, Felipe Barros6, Marinez Ferreira de Siqueira8, Andrea Sánchez-Tapia8, Andrew Balmford9, Jerônimo Boelsums Barreto Sansevero10, Pedro Henrique Santin Brancalion11, Eben North Broadbent12, Robin L Chazdon6,13,14, Ary Oliveira Filho15, Toby A Gardner6,16, Ascelin Gordon17, Agnieszka Latawiec5,6,18,19, Rafael Loyola20, Jean Paul Metzger21, Morena Mills22, Hugh P Possingham23,24, Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues25, Carlos Alberto de Mattos Scaramuzza26, Fabio Rubio Scarano7,27, Leandro Tambosi28, Maria Uriarte29.
Abstract
International commitments for ecosystem restoration add up to one-quarter of the world's arable land. Fulfilling them would ease global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity decline but could displace food production and impose financial costs on farmers. Here, we present a restoration prioritization approach capable of revealing these synergies and trade-offs, incorporating ecological and economic efficiencies of scale and modelling specific policy options. Using an actual large-scale restoration target of the Atlantic Forest hotspot, we show that our approach can deliver an eightfold increase in cost-effectiveness for biodiversity conservation compared with a baseline of non-systematic restoration. A compromise solution avoids 26% of the biome's current extinction debt of 2,864 plant and animal species (an increase of 257% compared with the baseline). Moreover, this solution sequesters 1 billion tonnes of CO2-equivalent (a 105% increase) while reducing costs by US$28 billion (a 57% decrease). Seizing similar opportunities elsewhere would offer substantial contributions to some of the greatest challenges for humankind.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30568285 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-018-0743-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Ecol Evol ISSN: 2397-334X Impact factor: 15.460