@article{fdi:010092701,
  title = {'{S}owing and harvesting water' : {R}evisiting forest restoration in the {P}eruvian {A}ndes through a multi-stakeholder analysis},
  author = {{C}hristmann, {T}. and {C}juno-{T}urpo, {I}. and {L}ópez-{A}randa, {M}. and {W}ilson, {S}. {J}. and {C}uni-{S}anchez, {A}. and {M}alhi, {Y}. and {R}amirez, {A}. and {R}ondán, {V}. and {C}astro, {F}. {M}. and {M}amani, {M}. and {R}echarte, {J}. and {A}renas, {M}. and {C}hutas, {C}. {A}. and {M}oreno, {O}. {A}. {C}. and {C}abello, {F}. {B}. {G}. and {O}liveras {M}enor, {I}mma},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{E}fforts to restore {P}eru's megadiverse {A}ndean {F}orests are rapidly growing. {W}hile ecological determinants for restoration success are well known, knowledge on the socio-economic and governance conditions that allow for the success of ecological restoration using native species is scarce. {U}sing a multi-stakeholder approach, this paper analyses the motivations, preferences, success factors and governance models for effective ecological restoration of {A}ndean {F}orests, through 75 semi-structured interviews with local community members, {NGO}s and government actors in 11 restoration sites in {P}eru. {W}e find that across sites and stakeholder groups, the primary motivations for {A}ndean {F}orest restoration were tied to restoring and improving hydrological resources. {S}takeholders valued {A}ndean {F}orests mostly for their provisioning ecosystem services-with water provision valued by all stakeholders and firewood provision predominantly by communities-followed by regulating services (water retention and climate regulation). {R}estoration success-the degree of perceived achievement of project objectives-was high at all sites and scored between 2.4 and 3 out of 3. {E}nabling factors for the restoration success were mostly social and institutional. {T}here was no 'silver bullet' to successful restoration; rather, enabling factors included high resource dependence of communities, support from {NGO}s, participatory management and governance, and the creation of communal conservation agreements. {C}ommunities emphasized primarily social and institutional limiting factors, while government stakeholders emphasized technical challenges. {W}e further identified three typologies of how projects engage and compensate communities: a 'payment model', a 'capacity model' and a 'mixed model' which differ in their rentability, longevity and socio-economic benefits provided. {A}ll stakeholder groups favoured active forest restoration and community members identified desirable native plant species with local use and hydrological value. {I}nterviewees also highlighted that restoration needs to go beyond forests, and combine native tree planting, agroforestry, restoration of mountain grasslands and peatlands to holistically improve water resources and long-term economic benefits at a landscape scale. {S}ynthesis and applications. {A}ndean {F}orest restoration projects need to consider hydrological ecosystem services in all key restoration stages. {C}ommunities need to be involved through participatory processes and receive long-lasting benefits-both ecosystem services and livelihood incentives-to guarantee long-term project success.},
  keywords = {{A}ndean {F}orest ; community participation ; ecological restoration ; ecosystem services ; forest governance ; local livelihoods ; {P}olylepis ; water provision ; {PEROU} ; {ANDES}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{P}eople and {N}ature},
  volume = {[{E}arly access]},
  numero = {},
  pages = {[22 p.]},
  year = {2025},
  DOI = {10.1002/pan3.10787},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010092701},
}