IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v103y2019icp123-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A generalizable monitoring model to implement policies to promote forest restoration – A case study in São Paulo - Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Nobre, Silvana Ribeiro
  • Borges, José Guilherme
  • Diaz-Balteiro, Luis
  • Rodriguez, Luiz Carlos Estraviz
  • von Glehn, Helena Carrascosa
  • Zakia, Maria José

Abstract

Examples of large-scale restoration programs to recover ecosystem services are now common in many countries, and governments are assuming ambitious forest restoration targets. Given the increasing investment of time, effort, and money in restoration, there is an urgent need to develop monitoring programs to assess restoration effectiveness. Some countries are already conducting monitoring programs, but the effectiveness of the restoration programs remains mostly unknown. Restoration evaluation often entails significant difficulties, such as the lack of harmonized monitoring data and imprecise information available about project goals and implementation. With the intent of contributing to the development of effective and accountable restoration projects, the objective of our work is to create a conceptual model that provides the building blocks of a planning and monitoring system to support forest restoration programs. The aim is to develop a conceptual model that represents forest restoration monitoring processes that effectively attain and measure the desirable outcomes. The São Paulo Forest Restoration Program is the case study that provides variables and processes to illustrate the development of the conceptual model. This paper presents the conceptual model, emphasizing generalizable principles that extend its applicability to similar monitoring programs. Based on action learning principles and recommendations from a comprehensive literature review, the resulting Forest Management Decisions Support System (FMDSS) embeds adaptive management strategies and the existence of an auto-updatable knowledge base. The result is a conceptual model that can be generalizable and applicable beyond the realms of the FMDSS. The restoration of degraded areas in a case with >40,000 rural properties serves as the case study. Although the planning and the monitoring of the restoration programs differ, the generalizable principles used to develop the conceptual model presented in this paper result in continuous intelligent monitoring processes that transform the systems so that they are adaptable to apparently different situations. Additionally, conceptual models that integrate adaptive planning and monitoring processes, supported by an auto-updatable knowledge base, mitigate the risk of failures, mainly when the comprehensive gathering of well-established references for the initial knowledge base has been conducted well at the outset.

Suggested Citation

  • Nobre, Silvana Ribeiro & Borges, José Guilherme & Diaz-Balteiro, Luis & Rodriguez, Luiz Carlos Estraviz & von Glehn, Helena Carrascosa & Zakia, Maria José, 2019. "A generalizable monitoring model to implement policies to promote forest restoration – A case study in São Paulo - Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 123-135.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:103:y:2019:i:c:p:123-135
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2018.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116304038
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.03.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    2. Tyndale, Peter, 2002. "A taxonomy of knowledge management software tools: origins and applications," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 183-190, May.
    3. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Hujala, Teppo & Wolfslehner, Bernhard & Vacik, Harald, 2013. "Problem structuring in participatory forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Yvette Blount & Babak Abedin & Savanid Vatanasakdakul & Seyedezahra Erfani, 2016. "Integrating enterprise resource planning (SAP) in the accounting curriculum: a systematic literature review and case study," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 185-202, April.
    5. Dechow, Niels & Mouritsen, Jan, 2005. "Enterprise resource planning systems, management control and the quest for integration," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(7-8), pages 691-733.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    2. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    3. Warziniack, Travis & Sims, Charles & Haas, Jessica, 2019. "Fire and the joint production of ecosystem services: A spatial-dynamic optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Jack, Lisa & Kholeif, Ahmed, 2008. "Enterprise Resource Planning and a contest to limit the role of management accountants: A strong structuration perspective," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 30-45.
    5. Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Mertz, Ole & Christensen, Andreas E. & Danielsen, Finn & Dawson, Neil & Xaydongvanh, Pheang, 2016. "A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 75-86.
    6. Cátia da Silva & Ana Paula Barbosa‐Póvoa & Ana Carvalho, 2022. "Towards sustainable development: Green supply chain design and planning using monetization methods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1369-1394, May.
    7. Pong, Christopher K.M. & Mitchell, Falconer, 2012. "Inventory investment & control: How have UK companies been doing?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 173-188.
    8. How, Shi-Min & Alawattage, Chandana, 2012. "Accounting decoupled: A case study of accounting regime change in a Malaysian company," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 403-419.
    9. Francesca Maria Cesaroni & Domenico Consoli, 2015. "ICT e piccole imprese. Il Cubo della Predisposizione Tecnologica Aziendale," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(1), pages 73-100.
    10. You Zuo & Lin Zhang, 2023. "Research on Local Ecosystem Cultural Services in the Jiangnan Water Network Rural Areas: A Case Study of the Ecological Green Integration Demonstration Zone in the Yangtze River Delta, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, July.
    11. Chenhall, Robert H. & Moers, Frank, 2015. "The role of innovation in the evolution of management accounting and its integration into management control," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-13.
    12. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Panita Rachapaettayakom & Mongkolchai Wiriyapinit & Nagul Cooharojananone & Suparatana Tanthanongsakkun & Nuttirudee Charoenruk, 2020. "The need for financial knowledge acquisition tools and technology by small business entrepreneurs," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, December.
    14. Sameh Ammar & Ghassan H. Mardini, 2021. "Enterprise resource planning enabling segmental information reporting practices of UK‐FTSE 100," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(1), pages 1205-1237, March.
    15. Cabral, Pedro & Feger, Clément & Levrel, Harold & Chambolle, Mélodie & Basque, Damien, 2016. "Assessing the impact of land-cover changes on ecosystem services: A first step toward integrative planning in Bordeaux, France," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 318-327.
    16. Nicholas Berente & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo & John Leslie King, 2016. "Routines as Shock Absorbers During Organizational Transformation: Integration, Control, and NASA’s Enterprise Information System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 551-572, June.
    17. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    18. Gaglio, M. & Aschonitis, V. & Pieretti, L. & Santos, L. & Gissi, E. & Castaldelli, G. & Fano, E.A., 2019. "Modelling past, present and future Ecosystem Services supply in a protected floodplain under land use and climate changes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 403(C), pages 23-34.
    19. Alicja Krzemień & Juan José Álvarez Fernández & Pedro Riesgo Fernández & Gregorio Fidalgo Valverde & Silverio Garcia-Cortes, 2022. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services Based on EU Carbon Allowances—Optimal Recovery for a Coal Mining Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, December.
    20. McInnes, R.J. & Everard, M., 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Wetland Ecosystem Services (RAWES): An example from Colombo, Sri Lanka," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-105.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:103:y:2019:i:c:p:123-135. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.