English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A significant challenge in the assessment of forest management outcomes is the limited ability to compare forest conditions quantitatively across ecological zones. We propose an approach for comparing different forest types through the use of reference forests. We tested our idea by drawing a sample of 42 forests from the Midwest USA, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Bolivia, Uganda, and Nepal. We grouped these forests by shared characteristics and selected a reference forest to serve as a baseline for each forest type. We developed an index of disturbances using ratios of several forest measurements to assess differences between each study forest and its reference forest. None of the study forests was known to have been impacted by major natural disturbances during the past 50 years. Therefore, the disturbances in these forests appear to be largely related to human activities. The forests most similar to their reference forests have had limited human interventions. Our results indicate the potential of this approach to compare different forest conditions across biomes. We argue that development of this approach could facilitate analyses of forest management institutions, promote reliable indicators to compare management outcomes, and contribute to improved policies for conservation

An Approach to Assess Relative Degradation in Dissimilar Forests: Toward a Comparative Assessment of Institutional Outcomes