Abstract
ABSTRACTEffective planning of a large-scale restoration project is challenging, because of the range of factors that need to be considered (e.g. restoration of multiple habitats with varying degradation levels, multiple restoration goals and limited conservation resources). Ecological restoration planning studies typically focus on biodiversity and ecosystem services, rather than employment and other co-benefits. Robust Offsetting (RobOff), a restoration planning tool, was used in a forest restoration project in Durban, South Africa, to plan forest restoration considering a mosaic of habitats with varying levels of degradation, diverse restoration actions, a limited budget and multiple (biodiversity, carbon stock and employment) goals. To achieve this, the restoration action currently being implemented (= current action) was compared to three restoration alternatives. The three restoration alternatives included (1) natural regeneration action; (2) carbon action; and (3) biodiversity action. The results supported biodiversity action as most beneficial in terms of maximizing biodiversity, carbon storage and job creation. Results showed that investing in biodiversity action is preferable to the status quo. RobOff ensured optimal allocation of limited resources to actions and habitats that have a potential to achieve higher biodiversity, carbon storage and job creation.
Highlights
Many cities around the world are highly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change (UN-Habitat 2011)
The overall results showed when budget is limited, biodiversity action should be employed to restore the ‘former sugarcane field’ in order to maximize biodiversity, carbon stock and employment benefits. Both biodiversity and employment goals prioritization achieved higher species richness, carbon stock and employment while carbon stock goal prioritization was at the expense of biodiversity
Natural regeneration action was selected for the ‘extant forest’, while biodiversity action was selected for the ‘former sugarcane fields’
Summary
Many cities around the world are highly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change (UN-Habitat 2011). The likely impacts include but not limited to species extinctions (Chapin III et al 2000), a decrease in human health quality due to heat waves, poor air and water quality (Patz et al 2005), an increase in frequency and intensity of floods, and an increase in erosion of coastal areas leading to infrastructure damage (Chapin III et al 2000). These impacts will be exacerbated by poor governance, limited service delivery and existing socio-economic challenges.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
