Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Call for Papers
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal
    • Native Plants Journal

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Ecological Restoration
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal
    • Native Plants Journal
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Ecological Restoration

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Call for Papers
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Visit uwp on Facebook
Restoration ArticleRestoration Notes
Open Access

A Stepwise Approach to Increasing Ecological Complexity in Forest Landscape Restoration

Nigel Dudley and Stewart Maginnis
Ecological Restoration, September 2018, 36 (3) 174-176; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/er.36.3.174
Nigel Dudley
corresponding author: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia; Equilibrium Research, 47 The Quays, Cumberland Road, Bristol BS1 6UQ, UK,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Stewart Maginnis
International Union for Conservation of Nature, 28 rue Mauverney, CH1196 Gland, Switzerland.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

References

  1. ↵
    1. Aronson J.,
    2. Alexander S.
    2013. Ecosystem restoration is now a global priority: Time to roll up our sleeves. Restoration Ecology 21:293–296.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. ↵
    1. Bullock J.M.,
    2. Aronson J.,
    3. Newton A.C.,
    4. Pywell R.F.,
    5. Rey-Benayas J.M.
    2011. Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 26:541–549.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    1. Díaz S.,
    2. Cabido M.
    2001. Vive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16:646–655.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    1. Doak D.F.,
    2. Bigger D.,
    3. Harding E.K.,
    4. Marvier M.A.,
    5. O’Malley R.E.,
    6. Thomson D.
    1998. The statistical inevitability of stability-diversity relationships in community ecology. The American Naturalist 151:264–276.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    1. Dudley N.,
    2. Schlaepfer R.,
    3. Jackson W.,
    4. Jeanrenaud J.P.,
    5. Stolton S.
    2006. Forest Quality: Assessing Forests at a Landscape Scale. London, UK: Earthscan.
  6. ↵
    1. Foden W.,
    2. Mace G.,
    3. Vié J.-C,
    4. Angulo A.,
    5. Butchart S.,
    6. DeVantier L.,
    7. et al.
    2008. Species susceptibility to climate change impacts. In: Vié J.-C., Hilton-Taylor C., Stuart S.N. (eds). The 2008 Review of The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN Gland, Switzerland.
  7. ↵
    1. Gilligan B.,
    2. Dudley N.,
    3. Fernandez de Tejada A.,
    4. Toivonen H.
    2005. Management Effectiveness Evaluation of Finland’s Protected Areas. Helsinki: Nature Protection Publications of Metsähällitus Series A 147.
  8. ↵
    1. Hanberry B.B.,
    2. Noss R.F.,
    3. Safford H.D.,
    4. Allison S.K.,
    5. Dey D.C.
    2015. Restoration is preparation for the future. Journal of Forestry 113:1–5.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Harris J.A.,
    2. Hobbs R.J.,
    3. Higgs E.,
    4. Aronson J.
    2006. Ecological restoration and climate change. Restoration Ecology 14:170–176.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    1. Heller N.E.,
    2. Hobbs R.J.
    2014. Development of a natural practice to adapt conservation goals to global change. Conservation Biology 28:696–704.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. IPCC TAR
    2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. IPCC Third Assessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  12. ↵
    1. Janzen D.H.
    2002. Tropical dry forest: area de conservacion Guanacaste, north-western Costa Rica. Pages 559–583 in Perrow M., Davy A.J. (eds), Handbook of Ecological Restoration, vol. II. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  13. ↵
    1. Keenan R.J.,
    2. Reams G.A.,
    3. Achard F.,
    4. de Freitas J.V.,
    5. Grainger A.,
    6. Lindquist E.
    2015. Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management 352:9–20.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Lasky J.R.,
    2. Uriate M.,
    3. Boukili V.K.,
    4. Erikson D.L.,
    5. Kress W.J.,
    6. Chazdon R.L.
    2014. The relationship between tree biodiversity and biomass dynamics changes with tropical forest succession. Ecology Letters 17:158–1167.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Lee S.K.,
    2. Park P.S.,
    3. Park Y.D.
    2015. Forest restoration and rehabilitation in the Republic of Korea. Pages 217–232 in Stanturf J.A. (ed), Restoration of Boreal and Temperate Forests, 2nd edition. London, UK: CRC Press.
  16. ↵
    1. Loreau M.,
    2. Naeem P.,
    3. Inchauti P.,
    4. Bengtsson J.,
    5. Grime J.P.,
    6. Hector A.,
    7. et al.
    2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:801–808.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Maginnis S.,
    2. Jackson W.
    2012. What is FLR and how does it differ from current approaches? Pages 5–20 in Maginnis S., Rietbergen-McCracken J., Sarre A. (eds), The Forest Landscape Restoration Handbook. London, UK: Earthscan.
  18. ↵
    1. Mansourian S.,
    2. Dudley N.,
    3. Vallauri D.
    2017. Forest Landscape Restoration: Progress in the last decade and remaining challenges. Ecological Restoration 35:281–288.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Montagnini F.,
    2. Nair P.K.R.
    2004. Carbon sequestration: An underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Systems 61:281–295.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Schroder A.,
    2. Persson L.,
    3. de Roos A.M.
    2005. Direct experimental evidence for alternative stable states: a review. Oikos 110:3–19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    1. Sloan S.,
    2. Sayer J.A.
    2015. Forest Resource Assessment of 2015 shows positive trends but forest loss and degradation persist in poor tropical countries. Forest Ecology and Management 352:134–145.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Stanturf J.A.,
    2. Palik B.J.,
    3. Dumroese R.K.
    2014. Contemporary forest restoration: a review emphasizing function. Forest Ecology and Management 331:292–323.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. ↵
    1. Timpane-Padgham B.L.,
    2. Beechie T.,
    3. Klinger T.
    2017. A systematic review of ecological attributes that confer resilience to climate change in environmental restoration. PLoS One 12: e0173812.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Walker B.,
    2. Holling C.S.,
    3. Carpenter S.R.,
    4. Kinzig A.
    2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society 9: www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ecological Restoration: 36 (3)
Ecological Restoration
Vol. 36, Issue 3
1 Sep 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ecological Restoration.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Stepwise Approach to Increasing Ecological Complexity in Forest Landscape Restoration
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ecological Restoration
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ecological Restoration web site.
Citation Tools
A Stepwise Approach to Increasing Ecological Complexity in Forest Landscape Restoration
Nigel Dudley, Stewart Maginnis
Ecological Restoration Sep 2018, 36 (3) 174-176; DOI: 10.3368/er.36.3.174

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
A Stepwise Approach to Increasing Ecological Complexity in Forest Landscape Restoration
Nigel Dudley, Stewart Maginnis
Ecological Restoration Sep 2018, 36 (3) 174-176; DOI: 10.3368/er.36.3.174
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • A Stepwise Approach to Increasing Ecological Complexity in Forest Landscape Restoration
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • When Less Is More
  • Change Happens at the Borders
  • The Role of Soil Seed Banks in Old Field Revegetation in Eastern Cape Province of South Africa
Show more Restoration Notes

Similar Articles

UW Press logo

© 2025 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Powered by HighWire