Forest and landscape restoration is a promising strategy for improving water, energy and food securities. We advocate that ‘forest security’ should form a fourth, foundational dimension of a novel water, energy, food and forest security nexus framework. Key principles of this new framework support an integrated role of forests in sustainable development, and engagement of local communities in nature-based solutions, particularly in the Global South. We believe that this new approach can help to accelerate the pace and magnitude of changes needed for achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Díaz, S. et al. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100 (2019).
At the human-forest interface. Nat. Commun. 9, 1153 (2018).
Melo, F. P. L., Arroyo-Rodríguez, V., Fahrig, L., Martínez-Ramos, M. & Tabarelli, M. On the hope for biodiversity-friendly tropical landscapes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 462–468 (2013).
Arroyo‐Rodríguez, V. et al. Designing optimal human-modified landscapes for forest biodiversity conservation. Ecol. Lett. 23, 1404–1420 (2020).
Castañeda, A. et al. A new profile of the global poor. World Dev. 101, 250–267 (2018).
DeFries, R. & Nagendra, H. Ecosystem management as a wicked problem. Science 356, 265–270 (2017).
Brancalion, P. H. S. et al. Global restoration opportunities in tropical rainforest landscapes. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav3223 (2019).
Meli, P. et al. Four approaches to guide ecological restoration in Latin America. Restor. Ecol. 25, 156–163 (2017).
Robertson, M., Nichols, P., Horwitz, P., Bradby, K. & MacKintosh, D. Environmental narratives and the need for multiple perspectives to restore degraded landscapes in Australia. Ecosyst. Health 6, 119–133 (2000).
Banks-Leite, C. et al. Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot. Science 345, 1041–1045 (2014).
Strassburg, B. B. N. et al. Strategic approaches to restoring ecosystems can triple conservation gains and halve costs. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 62–70 (2019).
Brancalion, P. H. S. et al. What makes ecosystem restoration expensive? A systematic cost assessment of projects in Brazil. Biol. Conserv. 240, 108274 (2019).
Simpson, G. B. & Jewitt, G. P. W. The development of the water-energy-food nexus as a framework for achieving resource security: a review. Front. Environ. Sci. 7, 8 (2019).
Biggs, E. M. et al. Sustainable development and the water–energy–food nexus: a perspective on livelihoods. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 389–397 (2015).
Hoff, H. Understanding the Nexus: Background Paper for the Bonn2011 Nexus Conference (Stockholm Environment Institute, 2011).
Bazilian, M. et al. Considering the energy, water and food nexus: towards an integrated modelling approach. Energy Policy 39, 7896–7906 (2011).
Liu, J. et al. Nexus approaches to global sustainable development. Nat. Sustain. 1, 466–476 (2018).
Ibisch, R. B., Bogardi, J. J. & Borchardt, D. in Integrated Water Resources Management: Concept, Research and Implementation (eds Borchardt, D. et al.) 3–32 (Springer, 2016).
Díaz, S. et al. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science 359, 270–272 (2018).
Ribot, J. C. & Peluso, N. L. A Theory of Access*. Rural Sociol. 68, 153–181 (2003).
Voluntary Guidelines for Agro-Environmental Policies in Latin Amrica and The Caribbean (FAO, 2018).
Pradhan, P., Costa, L., Rybski, D., Lucht, W. & Kropp, J. P. A systematic study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) interactions. Earth’s Future 5, 1169–1179 (2017).
Cole, L. E. S., Bhagwat, S. A. & Willis, K. J. Recovery and resilience of tropical forests after disturbance. Nat. Commun. 5, 3906 (2014).
Chazdon, R. & Brancalion, P. Restoring forests as a means to many ends. Science 365, 24–25 (2019).
Protecting and Restoring Forests: A Story of Large Commitments yet Limited Progress. New York Declaration on Forests Five-Year Assessment Report (NYDF Assessment Partners, 2019).
Holl, K. D. & Brancalion, P. H. S. Tree planting is not a simple solution. Science 368, 580–581 (2020).
Albrecht, T. R., Crootof, A. & Scott, C. A. The water-energy-food nexus: a systematic review of methods for nexus assessment. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 043002 (2018).
Townsend, P. V. et al. Multiple environmental services as an opportunity for watershed restoration. For. Policy Econ. 17, 45–58 (2012).
Vörösmarty, C. J. et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561 (2010).
van Noordwijk, M. Integrated natural resource management as pathway to poverty reduction: innovating practices, institutions and policies. Agric. Syst. 172, 60–71 (2019).
Moreno-Mateos, D. et al. Anthropogenic ecosystem disturbance and the recovery debt. Nat. Commun. 8, 14163 (2017).
Brancalion, P. H. S. et al. A critical analysis of the Native Vegetation Protection Law of Brazil (2012): updates and ongoing initiatives. Nat. Conserv. 14, 1–15 (2016).
Soares-Filho, B. et al. Cracking Brazil’s Forest Code. Science 344, 363–364 (2014).
Pires, A. P. F., Rezende, C. L., Assad, E. D., Loyola, R. & Scarano, F. R. Forest restoration can increase the Rio Doce watershed resilience. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 15, 187–193 (2017).
Filoso, S., Bezerra, M. O., Weiss, K. C. B. & Palmer, M. A. Impacts of forest restoration on water yield: a systematic review. PLoS ONE 12, e0183210 (2017).
Ellison, D. et al. Trees, forests and water: cool insights for a hot world. Glob. Environ. Change 43, 51–61 (2017).
van der Ent, R. J., Savenije, H. H. G., Schaefli, B. & Steele‐Dunne, S. C. Origin and fate of atmospheric moisture over continents. Water Resour. Res. 46, W09525 (2010).
Sheil, D. Forests, atmospheric water and an uncertain future: the new biology of the global water cycle. For. Ecosyst. 5, 19 (2018).
Karabulut, A. et al. Mapping water provisioning services to support the ecosystem-water-food-energy nexus in the Danube river basin. Ecosyst. Serv. 17, 278–292 (2016).
Richards, R. C. et al. Governing a pioneer program on payment for watershed services: stakeholder involvement, legal frameworks and early lessons from the Atlantic forest of Brazil. Ecosyst. Serv. 16, 23–32 (2015).
Vincent, J. R. et al. Valuing water purification by forests: an analysis of Malaysian panel data. Environ. Resour. Econ. 64, 59–80 (2016).
Brancalion, P., Viani, R., Strassburg, B. & Rodrigues, R. Finding the money for tropical forest restoration. Unasylva 239, 41–50 (2012).
Zemp, D. C. et al. On the importance of cascading moisture recycling in South America. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 14, 13337–13359 (2014).
Energy Access Outlook: From Poverty to Prosperity (International Energy Agency, 2017).
Specht, M. J., Pinto, S. R. R., Albuquerque, U. P., Tabarelli, M. & Melo, F. P. L. Burning biodiversity: fuelwood harvesting causes forest degradation in human-dominated tropical landscapes. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 3, 200–209 (2015).
The State of the World’s Forests 2018 - Forest Pathways to Sustainable Development (FAO, 2018).
Review of Woodfuel Biomass Production and Utilization in Africa: A Desk Study (United Nations Environment Programme, 2019).
Forests and Energy (FAO, 2017); https://go.nature.com/3aI4LYZ
Arias, M. E., Cochrane, T. A., Lawrence, K. S., Killeen, T. J. & Farrell, T. A. Paying the forest for electricity: a modelling framework to market forest conservation as payment for ecosystem services benefiting hydropower generation. Environ. Conserv. 38, 473–484 (2011).
Moomaw, W. R., Law, B. E. & Goetz, S. J. Focus on the role of forests and soils in meeting climate change mitigation goals: summary. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 045009 (2020).
Tesfaye, M. A. et al. Selection of tree species and soil management for simultaneous fuelwood production and soil rehabilitation in the Ethiopian Central highlands. Land Degrad. Dev. 26, 665–679 (2015).
Beddington, J. Food security: contributions from science to a new and greener revolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 61–71 (2010).
van Noordwijk, M. et al. SDG synergy between agriculture and forestry in the food, energy, water and income nexus: reinventing agroforestry? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 34, 33–42 (2018).
Vieira, D. L. M., Holl, K. D. & Peneireiro, F. M. Agro-successional restoration as a strategy to facilitate Tropical Forest recovery. Restor. Ecol 17, 451–459 (2009).
Dainese, M. et al. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0121 (2019).
Biggs, R. et al. Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 37, 421–448 (2012).
Munang, R. T., Thiaw, I. & Rivington, M. Ecosystem management: tomorrow’s approach to enhancing food security under a changing climate. Sustainability 3, 937–954 (2011).
de Souza, S. E. X. F., Vidal, E., Chagas, Gd. F., Elgar, A. T. & Brancalion, P. H. S. Ecological outcomes and livelihood benefits of community-managed agroforests and second growth forests in Southeast Brazil. Biotropica 48, 868–881 (2016).
Cawthorn, D. M. & Hoffman, L. C. The bushmeat and food security nexus: a global account of the contributions, conundrums and ethical collisions. Food Res. Int. 76, 906–925 (2015).
Parry, L., Barlow, J. & Peres, C. A. Hunting for sustainability in tropical secondary forests. Conserv. Biol. 23, 1270–1280 (2009).
Mbiba, M., Muvengwi, J. & Ndaimani, H. Environmental correlates of livestock depredation by spotted hyaenas and livestock herding practices in a semi-arid communal landscape. Afr. J. Ecol. 56, 984–992 (2018).
Calle, A. Partnering with cattle ranchers for forest landscape restoration. Ambio 49, 593–604 (2020).
Woolf, D., Solomon, D. & Lehmann, J. Land restoration in food security programmes: synergies with climate change mitigation. Clim. Policy 18, 1260–1270 (2018).
Miccolis, A., Peneireiro, F. M., Vieira, D. L. M., Marques, H. R. & Hoffmann, M. R. M. Restoration through agroforestry: options for reconciling livelihoods with onservation in the Cerrado and Caatinga biomes in Brazil. Exp. Agric. 55, 208–225 (2019).
Araujo, M. et al. The socio-ecological Nexus+ approach used by the Brazilian Research Network on Global Climate Change. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 39, 62–70 (2019).
Bastin, J.-F. et al. The global tree restoration potential. Science 365, 76–79 (2019).
Latawiec, A. E., Strassburg, B. B., Brancalion, P. H., Rodrigues, R. R. & Gardner, T. Creating space for large-scale restoration in tropical agricultural landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 13, 211–218 (2015).
Chazdon, R. L. et al. A policy-driven knowledge agenda for global forest and landscape restoration. Conserv. Lett. 10, 125–132 (2017).
Possingham, H. P., Bode, M. & Klein, C. J. Optimal conservation outcomes require both restoration and protection. PLoS Biol. 13, e1002052 (2015).
Suding, K. et al. Committing to ecological restoration. Science 348, 638–640 (2015).
Calmon, M. et al. Emerging threats and opportunities for large-scale ecological restoration in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Restor. Ecol. 19, 154–158 (2011).
Adams, C., Rodrigues, S. T., Calmon, M. & Kumar, C. Impacts of large-scale forest restoration on socioeconomic status and local livelihoods: what we know and do not know. Biotropica 48, 731–744 (2016).
Andersson, K. & Agrawal, A. Inequalities, institutions, and forest commons. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 866–875 (2011).
Galabuzi, C. et al. Strategies for empowering the local people to participate in forest restoration. Agrofor. Syst. 88, 719–734 (2014).
Terrapon-Pfaff, J., Ortiz, W., Dienst, C. & Groene, M.-C. Energising the WEF nexus to enhance sustainable development at local level It. J. Environ. Manag. 223, 409–416 (2018).
Van Laerhoven, F. Governing community forests and the challenge of solving two-level collective action dilemmas: a large-N perspective. Glob. Environ. Change 20, 539–546 (2010).
Rizvi, A. R. Nature Based Solutions for Human Resilience (IUCN, 2014).
Cohen-Shacham, E., Janzen, C., Maginnis, S. & Walters, G. Nature-Based Solutions to Address Global Societal Challenges (IUCN, 2016); https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13.en
Keesstra, S. et al. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Sci.Total Environ. 610–611, 997–1009 (2018).
Peluso, N. L. & Vandergeest, P. Writing political forests. Antipode 52, 1083–1103 (2020).
Chazdon, R. L., Gutierrez, V., Brancalion, P. H. S., Laestadius, L. & Guariguata, M. R. Co-creating conceptual and working frameworks for implementing forest and landscape restoration based on core principles. Forests 11, 706 (2020).
Barrow, E. 300,000 hectares restored in Shinyanga, Tanzania — but what did it really take to achieve this restoration? SAPIENS 7, 1–8 (2014).
Reij, C. & Garrity, D. Scaling up farmer-managed natural regeneration in Africa to restore degraded landscapes. Biotropica 48, 834–843 (2016).
Paudyal, K., Baral, H., Lowell, K. & Keenan, R. J. Ecosystem services from community-based forestry in Nepal: realising local and global benefits. Land Use Policy 63, 342–355 (2017).
Viani, R. A. G., Braga, D. P. P., Ribeiro, M. C., Pereira, P. H. & Brancalion, P. H. S. Synergism between payments for water-related ecosystem services, ecological restoration, and Landscape Connectivity Within the Atlantic Forest hotspot. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 11, https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082918790222 (2018).
We thank the research partners and students of our labs that made this possible. We also thank the following funding agencies: CNPq-Brazil (grant no. 441292/2017-8) and Fondecyt (grant no. 11191021).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Melo, F.P.L., Parry, L., Brancalion, P.H.S. et al. Adding forests to the water–energy–food nexus. Nat Sustain (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00608-z