Reaction Web

Search REACTION projects Search REACTION projects

Map REACTION projects Map REACTION projects

Project

VII. SUMMARY

VII.1. ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT GOALS
1. Have the defined success criteria (if any) been attained? (see section III.4.6 and sections V &VI)
YES Yes 
- No
- There were not defined success criteria
- Only for some restored units.Describe:  
- Only for some criteria. Describe:  
2. Have the structural goal(s) been attained? (see III.1.3 and V.1 & V.2)
- Yes
- No
YES Partly
Only for some units. Describe:  
3. Have the functional goal(s) been attained? (see III.1.4 and V.3)
- Yes
- No
YES Partly
Description:  
4. Have the landscape goal(s) been attained? (see III.1.5 and VI.1)
YES Yes
- No
- Partly
Description: The landscape of the area has improved. 
5. Have socio-economic goals been attained? (see III.1.6-8 and VI.2)
YES Yes
- No
- Partly
Description: Tourism of the area has increased. 
6. According to survival and growth of planted/seeded species, the plantation/seeding success was:
(see V.1.4, V.1.5, V.1.6.a-g)
YES Very high
- High
- Medium
- Low
- Very low

VII.2. STRUCTURAL QUALITY
1. How natural is the composition of the restored ecosystem(s)?
(see V.2.5, V.2.6 & V.2.7)
YES Fully
- Partly. Explain: The forest of the area is consisted by conifers and broadleaves. 
- Depend on the restored unit. Explain:  
2. How natural/mature is the structure and pattern of the restored ecosystem(s)?
(see V.2.1, V.2.2, V.2.3, V.2.4 & V.2.12)
YES Fully
- Partly. Explain:  
- Depend on the restored unit. Explain:  
3. Presence of important biodiversity
(according to species richness, and the presence of indicator, rare, endemic,endangered, protected species; see V.2.9, V.2.10, V.2.11, V.2.12 & V.2.13):
YES Yes
- Medium
- No
4. In the restored area, the project has:
(according to species richness, and the presence of indicator, rare, endemic,endangered, protected species;see V.2.9)
YES Increased biodiversity
- Decreased biodiversity
- Conserved biodiversity

VII.3. FUNCTIONAL QUALITY
1. Ecosystem dynamics:
Does the restored ecosystem regenerate naturally? (see V.1.6.h,i,j & V.3.6):
YES   Yes
- Not fully. Explain:  
Do natural successional dynamics occur? (see V.3.6):
YES Yes
- No
- Partly. Explain:  
2. Overall functioning:
How are the soil characteristics? (see V.3.3, V.3.4 & V.3.5):
YES Stable
- Slightly degraded
- Seriously degraded
How is the potential for nutrient cycling? (see V.3.1, V.3.2 & V.3.3):
- High
YES Medium
- Low
How is the ecosystem productivity? (see V.1.6.g, i, V.3.10, VI.2.2, VI.2.3 & VI.2.4):
- High
YES Medium
- Low
3. How is the overall ecosystem health? (see V.4)
- Good (No relevant pests, diseases, invasive species, or dead/damaged plants by abiotic factors.)
YES Medium (Some individuals affected; low severity level)
- Poor (Relevant pests, diseases, invasive species, or dead/damaged plants by abiotic factors.)
What are the pollution levels?
- High
- Medium
YES Low
4. The project significantly increases
Resistance (e.g., to grazing, pests, fire, drought, see II.6. and V.3.7 & V.3.8):
YES Yes
- No
- Partly
Resilience (e.g., to fire, pests, drought, etc., see II.6.2 and V.3.9 & V.4 ): 
- Yes
- No
YES Partly
Erosion control (see II. 6.1 and IV.2.14, V.3.4, V.3.5 & VI.1.8 )
YES Yes
- No
- Partly
Flood control (see II. 6.1 and VI.1.7):
YES Yes
- No
- Partly

VII.4. LANDSCAPE QUALITY
1. The project significantly increases:
Forest surface (see VI.1.2): 
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly
Connectivity among patches of formerly isolated populations (see VI.1.4.c,d & VI.1.5):
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly
Integration among forests and other habitats (see VI.1.2 & VI.1.5d,e):
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly
Habitat diversity (see VI.1.2):
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly
The protected surface (see VI.1.4): 
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly
2. Aesthetic value (see VI.1.5, VI.1.6,VI.2.7 & VI.2.8):
YES Very high
- High
- Medium
- Low

VII.5. SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS
1. Cultural value (see VI.1.3, VI.2.7 & VI.2.8):
Does the project area have particular cultural significance to local inhabitants?
Yes
The project has...
YES increased
- decreased
- preserved
- created
- damaged
...the cultural value of the site.
Degree of local participation (see VI.2.9):
YES High
- Medium
- Low
2. Has the project generated ecosystem goods for the local population?
(see VI.2.1, VI.2.2, VI. 2.3 & VI.2.4):
Yes
Amount of timber and non-timber goods provided :
- Very high
YES High
- Medium
- Low
3. Has the project enhanced ecosystem services?
(see III.1.4 and V.3, VI.1.7 & VI.1.8):
Yes
Description: Protecting soil from erosion, improving diversity, aesthetics, culture. 
4. Does the project contribute to fix/support/increase rural population by increasing tourist and recreational value, by direct employment, or by providing homeland?
(See VI.2.5, VI.2.6, VI.2.7):
YES Yes
- No
- Slightly

REACTION: This research is supported by the "Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development" programme, under contract EVK2-2002-80025