Do drivers of nature visitation vary spatially? The importance of context for understanding visitation of nature areas in Europe and North America.

Nature visitation is important, both culturally and economically. Given the contribution of nature recreation to multiple societal goals, comprehending determinants of nature visitation is essential to understand the drivers associated with the popularity of nature areas, for example, to inform land-use planning or site management strategies to maximise benefits. Understanding the factors related to nature, tourism and recreation can support the management of nature areas and thereby, also conservation efforts and biodiversity protection. This study applied a Multiscale Geographically Weighted Regression (MGWR) to quantify the spatially varying influence of different factors associated with nature visitation in Europe and North America. Results indicated that some explanatory variables were stationary for all sites (age 15 to 65, population density (within 25 km), GDP, area, built-up areas, plateaus, and mountains). In contrast, others exhibited significant spatial non-stationarity (locally variable): needle-leaf trees (conifers), trails, travel time, roads, and Red List birds and amphibians. Needle-leaf trees and travel time were found to be negatively significant in Europe. Roads were found to have a significant positive effect in North America. Trails and Red List bird species were found to have a positive effect in both North America and North Europe, with a greater effect in Europe. Red List amphibians was the only spatially variable predictor to have both a positive and negative impact, with selected sites in North America and northern Europe being positive, whereas Iceland and central and southern Europe were negative. The scale of the response-predictor relationship (bandwidth) of these locally variable predictors was smallest for Red List amphibians at 1033 km, with all other spatially variable predictors between 9558 and 12,285 km. The study demonstrates the contribution that MGWR, a spatially explicit model, can make to support a deeper understanding of processes associated with nature visitation in different geographic contexts.

Scale dependency of conservation outcomes in a forest-offsetting scheme.

Offset schemes help avoid or revert habitat loss through protection of existing habitat (avoided deforestation), through the restoration of degraded areas (natural regrowth), or both. The spatial scale of an offset scheme may influence which of these 2 outcomes is favored and is an important aspect of the scheme's design. However, how spatial scale influences the trade-offs between the preservation of existing habitat and restoration of degraded areas is poorly understood. We used the largest forest offset scheme in the world, which is part of the Brazilian Forest Code, to explore how implementation at different spatial scales may affect the outcome in terms of the area of avoided deforestation and area of regrowth. We employed a numerical simulation of trade between buyers (i.e., those who need to offset past deforestation) and sellers (i.e., landowners with exceeding native vegetation) in the Brazilian Amazon to estimate potential avoided deforestation and regrowth at different spatial scales of implementation. Allowing offsets over large spatial scales led to an area of avoided deforestation 12 times greater than regrowth, whereas restricting offsets to small spatial scales led to an area of regrowth twice as large as avoided deforestation. The greatest total area (avoided deforestation and regrowth combined) was conserved when the spatial scale of the scheme was small, especially in locations that were highly deforested. To maximize conservation gains from avoided deforestation and regrowth, the design of the Brazilian forest-offset scheme should focus on restricting the spatial scale in which offsets occur. Such a strategy could help ensure conservation benefits are localized and promote the recovery of degraded areas in the most threatened forest landscapes.

Los esquemas de compensación ayudan a evitar o revertir la pérdida de hábitat mediante la protección del hábitat existente (deforestación evitada), mediante la restauración de áreas degradadas (recrecimiento natural) o ambos. La escala espacial de una mitigación puede influir en cuál de ellos es seleccionado y es un aspecto importante del diseño de esquema. Sin embargo, no se entiende bien cómo influye la escala espacial en las compensaciones entre la preservación del hábitat existente y la restauración de áreas degradadas. Utilizamos el esquema de compensación forestal más grande del mundo, que forma parte del Código Forestal Brasileño, para explorar cómo la implementación a diferentes escalas espaciales puede afectar el resultado en términos de la superficie de deforestación evitada y el área de recrecimiento. Empleamos una simulación numérica del comercio entre compradores (i. e., aquellos que necesitan compensar la deforestación pasada) y vendedores (i. e., propietarios con exceso de vegetación nativa) en la Amazonía brasileña para estimar deforestación evitada y el recrecimiento a diferentes escalas espaciales de implementación. Permitir compensaciones en grandes escalas espaciales dio lugar a una superficie de deforestación evitada 12 veces mayor que de recrecimiento, mientras que restringir compensaciones a pequeñas escalas espaciales dio lugar a una superficie de recrecimiento dos veces mayor que la deforestación evitada. La mayor superficie total (deforestación evitada y recrecimiento combinados) se conservó cuando la escala espacial del esquema era pequeña, especialmente en localidades muy deforestadas. Para maximizar los beneficios de conservación derivados de la deforestación evitada y el recrecimiento, el diseño del esquema brasileño de compensaciones debe centrarse en restringir la escala espacial en la que se producen las compensaciones. Esta estrategia ayudaría a garantizar que los beneficios de la conservación sean localizados y promuevan la recuperación de zonas degradadas en los paisajes forestales más amenazados.