Search

Background: Forest disturbances are projected to increase in intensity and frequency in the upcoming decades. The projected change in disturbance regimes is expected to alter the provision of ecosystem services and affect biodiversity. Both are critical for forest ecosystems to provide livelihoods for human societies. Forest management after natural disturbances shapes successional pathways of forest ecosystems. Therefore, the management of post-disturbance sites deserves critical attention to avoid negative effects of management interventions on ecosystem services and biodiversity. The two most common management interventions after natural disturbances are salvage logging (comparator: no salvage logging) and tree planting (comparator: natural regeneration). This planned systematic map of reviews aims to aggregate the existing evidence syntheses on the implications of common forest management interventions after natural disturbances on successional trajectories with regard to selected ecosystem services and biodiversity. Evidence-based post-disturbance management is highly relevant for protected area management as well as for the management of commercial forests. Methods: We will systematically search the databases Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection and the Forest Science Collection of the CABI Digital Library for reviews and meta-analyses (after 2003). We will apply eligibility criteria for review selection and assess the evidence synthesis validity of selected reviews using the most recent version of CEESAT (Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Synthesis Assessment Tool). The results will be displayed in topic subgroups in summary of scope and summary of findings tables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Evidence reviews are a key mechanism for incorporating extensive, complex and specialised evidence into policy and practice, and in guiding future research. However, evidence reviews vary in scope and methodological rigour, creating several risks for decision-makers: decisions may be informed by less reliable reviews; apparently conflicting interpretations of evidence may obfuscate decisions; and low quality reviews may create the perception that a topic has been adequately addressed, deterring new syntheses (cryptic evidence gaps). We present a new approach, evidence review mapping, designed to produce a visual representation and critical assessment of the review landscape for a particular environmental topic or question. By systematically selecting and describing the scope and rigour of each review, this helps guide non-specialists to the most relevant and methodologically reliable reviews. The map can also direct future research through the identification of evidence gaps (whether cryptic or otherwise) and redundancy (multiple reviews on similar questions). We consider evidence review mapping a complementary approach to systematic reviews and systematic maps of primary literature and an important tool for facilitating evidence-based decision-making and research efficiency.