Ruida Li

The restoration of ecosystems provides an important opportunity to improve the provision of ecosystem services. Achieving the maximum possible benefits from restoration with a limited budget requires knowing which places if restored would produce the best combination of improved ecosystem services. Using an ecosystem services assessment and optimization algorithm, we find choices that generate maximum benefits from ecosystem restoration. We applied a set of weights to integrate multiple services into a unified approach and find the optimal land restoration option given those weights. We then systematically vary the weights to find a Pareto frontier that shows potentially optimal choices and illustrates trade-offs among services. We applied this process to evaluate optimal restoration on Hainan Island, China, a tropical island characterized by multiple ecosystem service hotspots and conditions of poverty. We analyzed restoration opportunities with the goal of increasing a provisioning service, plantation revenue, and several water-related ecosystem services that contribute to improved water quality and flood mitigation. We found obvious spatial inconsistencies in the optimal location for maximizing separate services and tradeoffs in the provision of these services. Optimized land-use patterns greatly out-performed the non-target restoration scheme. When explicit consideration of the importance of poverty alleviation was taken into account, the location of the prioritized areas shifted and trade-offs among services varied. Our study emphasizes the importance of integrating social concerns into land-use planning to mitigate conflicts and improve equity, especially in the areas where poverty and hotspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services are highly geographically coincident.

Specific forest restoration aims to maximum ecosystem services (ESs); however, the complex trade-offs among ecosystem services pose considerable challenges for fulfilling such goals. Based on forest restoration on Hainan Island, China, we integrated spatially explicit models of ecosystem services and spatial prioritization techniques based on the efficiency frontier between habitat quality and plantation revenue to analyze the impacts of decision-makers’ preferences on optimal configurations of forest restoration. We then investigated the effects of different optimal restoration schemes on water purification, soil retention, carbon sequestration, and coastal hazard mitigation. Based on our results, plantation revenue and habitat quality exhibited an obvious trade-off during the process of restoration. Forest restoration patterns also varied with the degree of preference for plantation yield or habitat quality, indicating that understanding ecosystem service tradeoffs can support the optimal selection of forest restoration schemes under different preferences. However, when the values of multiple ecosystem services associated with forest restoration were considered (e.g., water purification, soil retention, carbon sequestration, and coastal hazard mitigation), the optimal solution choice varied. Our results suggest the application of the efficiency frontier can deepen quantitative understanding of ecosystem service trade-offs, and the addition of multi-benefit evaluation based on optimal solutions can provide a more detailed and broader picture of forest restoration plans. Integrated efficiency frontier assessment with the valuation of ecosystem services associated with forest restoration provides a quantitative approach for optimal forest restoration, which can be applied in broad forest restoration programs.

Plantations support local economies and rural livelihoods in many mountainous regions, where poverty and a fragile environment are often interlinked. Managing plantations sustainably and alleviating poverty is a major challenge. This study reports on the findings of a household livelihood survey in the central mountainous region of Hainan Island, a global biodiversity hotspot. The survey aimed to identify rural household livelihoods, strategies to lift rural households out of poverty and potential environmental consequences of different livelihood strategies. Households were divided into five groups based on their main source of income: plantations, crops, livestock, local off-farm income and remittances. Plantations were the main source of income for 74% of households and provided 46% of the total income. Plantation land area, planting diverse tree species and intercropping were significantly associated with higher income. Reallocating land by family size could increase the proportion of households above the poverty line in the plantation group from 51.3% to 85.3%, while making only 3.3% of households worse off. Lower income households tended to apply more chemicals to plantations, which suggests that they create more strain on the environment. Improving household income through dynamically allocating plantation land and diversifying planted species could therefore be beneficial both socially and environmentally. Our results emphasize the importance of dynamic plantation land allocation and diverse plantation planting in poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability.