ReForMit

Forest-based climate change mitigation measures are being implemented worldwide across both public and private sectors. Their impacts, however, are complex. Depending on location, type of measure, and method of implementation, forests can either enhance or degrade water–climate–biodiversity functions. For instance, afforestation may reduce water yield in streams, leading to scarcity, but it can also reduce erosion and increase rainfall.

At the same time, ongoing climate change threatens the resilience of existing forest systems – their ability to prepare for risks, absorb adverse impacts, and adapt or recover from disruptions. Major knowledge gaps remain on how to strengthen the capacity of forest measures to remain effective under future hydroclimatic shifts and more frequent, severe, and prolonged ecological droughts. Research shows that forests can adapt, for example by altering water-use efficiency or rooting depth. Choosing species suited to future climate conditions in reforestation projects is one way to build resilience. Studies also reveal large differences in carbon uptake and resilience between natural regrowth, managed forests, and plantations.

The choice of forest measure also affects water–climate–biodiversity functions at local scales and more broadly through atmospheric feedbacks such as albedo changes, shifts in moisture transport, carbon sequestration, and fire regimes. Finally, these measures are embedded in social-ecological systems, meaning their long-term functioning also depends on social capacity to maintain and secure them in the face of change.

Project website: https://reformit.org/

Anamaghi, S.; Behboudian, M.; Emami-Skardi, M. J.; Kåresdotter, E.; Ferreira, C. S. S.; Destouni, G.; Wang-Erlandsson, L.; Tengberg, A.; Stenzel, F.; Fetzer, I.; Mahjouri, N.; Kerachian, R. & Kalantari, Z.
Research efforts and gaps in the assessment of forest system resilience: A scoping review
Ambio, 2025: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02243-4

This study examines how seven core resilience principles are used to assess the resilience of forests to both natural and human disturbances, drawing on concepts from engineering, ecology, and social–ecological research. A systematic search of the Web of Science database identified 1,828 studies, of which 330 met the selection criteria. The review found that the principle of diversity, under “diversity and redundancy,” was the most frequently applied, appearing in half of the studies. Many of these studies assessed resilience in relation to water-related disturbances, with drought and water scarcity highlighted as major threats to forest systems. Water-regulating ecosystem services, such as flood regulation and maintaining hydrological balance, were also frequently considered. In contrast, principles related to social and governance aspects were much less common: learning and experimentation appeared in only 7% of studies, participation in 11%, and polycentric governance in 9%. Importantly, none of the reviewed studies applied all seven principles together, and water-related aspects were often treated narrowly, with gaps in quantifying hydrological feedbacks, slow variables, and governance dimensions of water management. These results point to a major gap in current research and highlight the need for more comprehensive approaches. Incorporating all seven principles, along with greater attention to forest community dynamics, hydrological processes, and social factors, will be essential for strengthening the long-term resilience and sustainability of forest systems.