Forest restoration after climate-related disasters

Forest restoration projects in Europe typically involve a diverse range of actors, including government agencies (e.g., forest departments, local municipalities), NGOs (such as WWF or Rewilding Europe), research institutions, local communities, landowners, and private sector stakeholders. Stakeholder engagement often takes forms like co-management agreements, participatory workshops, and community-led initiatives. These processes emphasize collaboration, ensuring that scientific expertise, local knowledge, and socio-economic needs are integrated.

For instance, projects like Portugal’s wildfire resilience initiatives involve municipalities, NGOs, and residents in creating firebreaks. Another Portugese initiative is involving businesses and other stakeholders to help with post-wildfire  regeneration by planting trees  (Trees for all, Landscape restoration and reforestation in Faia Brava Reserve).  In Romania, the Danube floodplain restoration is re-establishing natural hydrological cycles by restoring wetlands and reforesting areas with native water-retaining species, they are involving fishermen, farmers, and conservation groups to ensure community buy-in.

Through participatory processes, potential conflicts can be identified and addressed early on, minimizing negative impacts and promoting collaborative solutions. Ultimately, stakeholder participation helps to create a more inclusive and sustainable future for restored forests, ensuring that they provide benefits for both people and ecosystems.

Forest restoration after extreme weather events is needed to preserve the continuity of the provision of important ecosystem services. Community engagement also underpins the success of initiatives like assisted natural regeneration, fire prevention, and soil rehabilitation, fostering local stewardship and sustainable land management practices. Additionally, low-cost methods, such as natural and assisted regeneration, make scaling feasible, especially in regions with limited resources.

Restoration successes in Europe demonstrate the potential of ecological restoration to address environmental challenges and provide various benefits. In Southern Europe, there has been a significant increase in forest areas since the 1990s due to afforestation and reforestation projects. Many of these projects have focused on restoring areas degraded by forest fires, land degradation, desertification, and the conversion of former agricultural land. Notably, Portugal and Spain have undertaken substantial post-fire restoration efforts after experiencing major fire events in recent decades. Additionally, restoration initiatives in southern Europe frequently focus on combating desertification and improving water conservation by using techniques to enhance seedling establishment and promote the adoption of water-saving agricultural methods.

Beyond southern Europe, Finland's METSO programme provides another example of a successful forest restoration initiative. This programme focuses on the conservation of forest biodiversity by offering financial incentives to forest owners who voluntarily protect valuable habitats and implement nature management projects. The program's success stems from its collaborative approach, engaging private landowners in conservation efforts and compensating them for their contributions. The diverse approaches and successes observed across Europe highlight the potential for ecological restoration to improve ecosystem health and contribute to both biodiversity conservation and human well-being.

However, these strategies also face limitations. A key challenge is their dependence on the health of the existing ecosystem. Natural regeneration and soil rehabilitation, for example, require intact seed banks and fertile soils, conditions that are often degraded in target areas. Time-intensiveness is another limitation; strategies like mixed planting, natural regeneration, and soil restoration require decades to achieve full ecological benefits, which can be a barrier for stakeholders seeking immediate outcomes. Moreover, all strategies, including fire and pest management and hydrological restoration, require long-term monitoring and investment to sustain their impact. Conflicting land-use priorities, such as agriculture or urban expansion, further constrain their implementation. Similarly, water scarcity affects both hydrological restoration and soil rehabilitation in arid regions like the Mediterranean, undermining vegetation recovery and soil stabilization efforts.

Many restoration strategies can benefit biodiversity. Approaches as natural regeneration, assisted regeneration, reforestation with native species, and mixed planting promote diverse habitats and ecosystem services like pollination and pest control by prioritizing native flora and fauna. Similarly, strategies such as hydrological restoration and fire management or soil rehabilitation collectively build resilience to climate change by stabilizing water cycles, reducing fire risks, and sequestering carbon.

Many factors influence the cost of restoration projects. Site-specific conditions, such as soil quality, topography, and the level of degradation, play a crucial role in determining the appropriate type and intensity of restoration efforts. For instance, sites with severely eroded soil might require costly soil amendments. "Low productivity" or "difficult access," such as steep slopes, can discourage private investment and increase restoration expenses. The choice of restoration methods also significantly affects costs. Active restoration, involving planting or seeding, is generally more expensive than passive restoration, which relies on natural regeneration. Active restoration provides greater control but necessitates expenses related to labour, materials, and maintenance. Certain planting techniques can help trees overcome harsh  dry conditions, such as furrow systems or  sub-surface planting, which increases costs of restoration (Stavi et al, 2021).

The scale and scope of restoration also matter, with larger projects often benefiting from economies of scale but demanding substantial upfront investments. Resource availability, including seeds, planting materials, and skilled labor, directly impacts costs (Leverkus et al, 2021). Sourcing native seeds can be particularly challenging and expensive (Agüero et al., 2023).

The European Union Horizon 2020 research project (SUPERB) focused on sustainable finance for forest restoration (Bull et al. 2024) and recognized various funding opportunities to support forest restoration initiatives. They include public funding, through government grants and investments and private sector investments,  driven by companies seeking sustainable resource supplies or enhanced asset values.  Grants and support are also available, for example through the European Forest Institute, often focusing on community-based initiatives and restoration.

Payment for Ecosystem Services schemes offer financial incentives for implementing practices that enhance ecosystem services like carbon sequestration or water quality improvement. Carbon offsetting programs allow individuals or companies to invest in carbon-sequestering projects like forest restoration to offset their emissions Biodiversity offsetting, though controversial, can fund restoration to compensate for development impacts. Blended finance approaches combine public and private funds to support larger-scale or more complex restoration initiatives (Bull et al., 2024). Forest certification schemes promote sustainable forest management, including restoration, providing a market-based incentive (Nichiforel et al., 2024).

 The EU Habitats Directive and Birds Directive provide a foundation for protecting and restoring forest ecosystems, particularly within the Natura 2000 network, which spans nearly a third of the EU’s forests. These directives mandate restoring habitats to a “favorable conservation status”. Activities like reforestation or hydrological adjustments must avoid harming existing protected ecosystems or introducing non-native species that could disrupt local biodiversity.

Recently, the Nature Restoration Law marked a significant milestone, aiming to restore at least 20% of degraded EU land and sea areas by 2030, increasing progressively to 90% by 2050. It emphasizes improving biodiversity and ecosystem resilience across all forests, whether protected or used for production. This law requires Member States to draft restoration plans that ensure habitats reach favorable conservation statuses, balancing ecological recovery with sustainable use.

EU legistlation also promotes sustainable forest management practices that prevent further degradation and encourage the recovery of degraded forest landscapes. This includes timber trade regulations and forest certification schemes like FSC. Regulations, such as the EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) and the EU Regulation on Deforestation-free Products, aim to ensure the legal and sustainable sourcing of timber products, thereby indirectly supporting restoration efforts in supplier countries.

Land ownership plays a critical role in forest restoration. In many European countries, a significant portion of forests is privately owned. Restoration efforts require legal agreements with landowners, ensuring their participation while respecting property rights. Governments often incentivize restoration through subsidies or tax breaks under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other national schemes.

Forest restoration is a long-term endeavor, often spanning years or even decades before significant positive changes become evident. Measurable progress in forest restoration often requires a prolonged commitment. The implementation time for forest restoration depends on several factors, including the extent and type of degradation, ecological conditions, and the method employed. For instance, areas with severe soil erosion, loss of seed banks, or invasive species require more intensive interventions, take more time. Reforestation with native species and diversification through mixed planting generally require 20 to 50 years to develop mature forest ecosystems. While tree planting can establish vegetation within a few years, it takes decades for biodiversity, ecological functions, and structural complexity to fully recover.

Ecological factors such as climate, precipitation, soil fertility, and the presence of nearby seed sources significantly influence recovery speed, with favorable conditions accelerating growth and ecosystem stabilization. The restoration approach also plays a critical role: passive methods like natural regeneration depend on natural processes and take longer, often taking 10 to 50 years or more to show significant progress. This method depends entirely on natural processes, such as seed dispersal and soil restoration, which are influenced by environmental conditions and may extend the timeline for recovery.

Active techniques, such as reforestation with native species or soil rehabilitation, can yield quicker initial results but still require decades to fully establish a mature forest ecosystem. Often results are noticable within 3 to 10 years. These efforts focus on improving soil health, water retention, and erosion control, providing a foundation for subsequent forest recovery. Initial improvements in forest structure and vegetation can be evident within 5 to 15 years with Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR); with interventions like removing invasive species and protecting young trees accelerating natural growth processes.

Social and economic considerations, such as funding, stakeholder engagement, and policy frameworks, can further impact the pace of implementation, either facilitating progress or introducing delays.

Sustainable and resilient forest restorations can last for decades or centuries if implemented correctly. Climate-change related extreme events may be the most important factor disturbing the progress of well implemented restoration efforts.