The Chiang Mai Research Agenda for the Restoration of Degraded Forestlands for Wildlife Conservation in Southeast Asia

Back in 2000, forest restoration research was far from main stream. Deforestation was regarded as irreversible and the idea that ecologists could actually find a way to restore tropical forest ecosystems to original levels of biodiversity and complexity was often ridiculed. One of the most common objections was lack of technical knowledge: Which tree species to plant? When to collect seeds and how to produce planting stock? How much fertilizer to apply? etc. ... were all simple, but unanswered, questions. The research agenda, produced during the Chiang Mai workshop "Forest Restoration for Wildlife Conservation" (February, 2000) was an early attempt to legitimize restoration research, by prioritizing topics and outlining the basic experimental needs of each. In subsequent, years, the agenda was frequently used to guide graduate students when searching for thesis-project ideas. Consequently, many of the practical aspects of forest restoration have been well-researched. The agenda topics that have remained largely unresearched are those related to social and community issues (Section 5), especially those that require large-scale projects (e.g. paired watersheds), long-term funding and inter-institutional collaboration.

SUMMARY: One of the main objectives of the 2000, Chiang Mai workshop "Forest Restoration for Wildlife Conservation" was to prepare an agenda for the advancement of research on forest restoration for wildlife conservation in Southeast Asia’s seasonally dry tropical forests. This was achieved by dividing workshop participants into 3 small discussion groups (comprising 15-20 persons each), which simultaneously considered each main workshop topic, following presentation of keynote papers on each topic. The discussion groups were provided with guidance, in the form of lists of questions, to help them to i) identify gaps in knowledge concerning each of the main workshop topics, ii) prioritise the most important areas requiring urgent research and iii) suggest outline research ideas to fill those gaps in knowledge that were considered to be of highest priority. Discussion group chairpersons presented the research suggestions from each group to the whole assembly for feedback and for reaching a consensus by vote of all participant. A total of 136 topics were suggested for further research. Several of these were similar in nature and were merged in the final agenda.

Click here to go to the base page for this volume.