2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long-term approaches to native woodland restoration: Palaeoecological and stakeholder perspectives on Atlantic forests of Northern Europe

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 106 publications
(119 reference statements)
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…; Sayer et al . ; Davies ; Birks ), particularly where data bases are available to help test new cross‐scale methods more widely (Polly et al . ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…; Sayer et al . ; Davies ; Birks ), particularly where data bases are available to help test new cross‐scale methods more widely (Polly et al . ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, linking LTE with the multidecadal trends that are emerging from established monitoring networks could help identify delayed responses that can prevent timely management adaptation (Monteith & Evans 2005;Morecroft et al 2009;Youngblood & Palik 2011;Hughes et al 2012). This would also provide opportunities to develop new methods of data comparison and integration (Froyd & Willis 2008;Hanley et al 2008;Sayer et al 2010;Davies 2011;Birks 2012), particularly where data bases are available to help test new cross-scale methods more widely (Polly et al 2011). Undoubtedly this will require compromise as no sites or data sets will be perfect where multiple interests are involved (Birks 2012).…”
Section: B U I L D I N G a N I N T E G R A T I V E A P P R O A C Hmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of studies used various economic techniques to value future restoration projects including contingent value methods (Macmillan & Duff ; Desaigues & Ami ; Mitani et al ; Johnston et al ), opportunity cost (Dorrough et al ), and cost‐benefit analysis including ecosystem services (Currie et al ; Birch et al ; Suding ). Other studies looked at community attitudes to the environment and restoration to prioritize and guide the direction of future projects (Ostergren et al ; Davies ) and their willingness to participate in programs (Januchowski‐Hartley et al ). Although clearly useful for planning restoration projects, these types of a priori evaluations are not a substitute for determining the realized socioeconomic outcomes or impacts of restoration.…”
Section: Ecological Attributesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This underscores the sensitivity of these oceanic woods to growth stress. However, instances of rapid pine spread in response to drier climate (Gear & Huntley 1991) and of pine and birch expansion following changes in grazing pressure (Shaw & Tipping 2006; Davies 2011) indicate the capacity for expansion. Huntley et al .…”
Section: Biodiversity and Conservationmentioning
confidence: 99%