texto en 
Inglés (pdf)
Artículo en XML
Referencias del artículo
Traducción automática
Enviar artículo por email
Citado por SciELO 
Similares en
SciELO 
Permalink
Introduction
Since the emergence and implementation of the sustainable development model, conservation and management of ecosystems have taken a central place in public agenda debates and actions (Galicia et al., 2018). Consequently, several instruments such as public policy programs and projects have been created to achieve the objectives and principles of the development model. Examples of these are Natural Protected Areas (NPA) and Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) as mechanisms to promote conservation, and Community Forest Management (CFM) as a tool for managing collectively owned forests.
Due to their exceptional natural richness, diverse ecosystems are designated as NPA aimed at preservation. In Mexico, NPA under federal jurisdiction span more than 90 million hectares. Additionally, state and municipal bodies establish their own protected spaces, alongside Areas Voluntarily Destined for Conservation (AVC) created by local forest owners and proprietors (Maldonado et al., 2020). Payment for Ecosystem Services schemes offer economic incentives to forest ecosystem owners (Perevochtchikova et al., 2021) to maintain vegetation cover, prevent land use change, and sustain ecosystem services. Furthermore, CFM is based on collective action and management of forests, particularly since in Mexico, a significant portion of forests are socially owned-specifically, ejidos and agrarian and forest communities. According to Merino (2018), this approach to forest management is considered sustainable as it strengthens social, human, and cultural capital, thereby contributing to sustainability and conservation.
Temperate forests, which cover nearly 17 % of the national territory, are highly valued and exploited (Galicia et al., 2018). Among them, oak forests stand out, representing 5 % of the forested area (Comisión Nacional Forestal [CONAFOR], 2018). These forests are typically found in mountainous regions with a temperate climate, hosting over 160 species (Valencia-A., 2004), one-third of which are globally reported. The forest resources of these species are extensively used by local communities, especially for firewood and charcoal production. Additionally, oak wood production ranks second nationally (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales [SEMARNAT], 2021), following conifers.
Oak forests have undergone transformations due to natural and anthropogenic factors, primarily driven by activities such as agriculture, livestock farming, forest fires, and policies involving agricultural subsidies (Min-Venditti et al., 2017). These activities have led to soil degradation, loss of biodiversity, and pressures on ecological processes. According to Gutiérrez and Trejo (2014), climate change is expected to affect the distribution of some oak species in the coming decades.
In recent years, issues related to forest ecosystem conservation and harvesting policies have been studied through reviews covering various scales and approaches. At the national level, notable reviews on PES include the studies of Perevochtchikova et al. (2021), Yu et al. (2020), and Perevochtchikova and Oggioni (2014), which examine the effects and trends associated with this program. Additionally, Min-Venditti et al. (2017) address the impacts of PES, NPA, and CFM on deforestation in Mexico and Central America. Regarding CFM and forest utilization in Mexico, Zhao et al. (2014) make significant contributions by emphasizing the importance of long-term analysis and modeling of these ecosystems from interdisciplinary perspectives.
Understanding and analyzing policies for conserving and utilizing forest ecosystems requires substantial effort due to their high biodiversity, socio-environmental dynamics, and cultural characteristics. According to García-Peñalvo (2022), systematic literature review serves as a method to evaluate and interpret academic and professional contributions in a specific field, pinpointing gaps in knowledge and research needs. This context frames the research question: What are the predominant themes and trends in the generation of knowledge regarding the conservation and use of oak forests in Mexico, under the public policy instruments of NPA, PES, and CFM? Consequently, the objective of this review was to assess the current state of knowledge on research topics and themes concerning oak forests in Mexico associated with NPA, PES, and CFM.
Materials and Methods
This review employed the Search, Appraisal, Synthesis, and Analysis (SALSA) framework, a suitable method for systematic literature reviews in environmental sciences (Perevochtchikova et al., 2021). The search was conducted using Scopus, Scielo, and Redalyc search engines due to their flexibility, accessibility, and broad coverage of publications. Primary sources included scientific and review papers, books, and book chapters.
Each search engine underwent testing with various combinations of keywords in both Spanish and English until appropriate terms were identified and grouped into three sets. The first set focused on forest types: temperate forest, oak forest, Quercus forest. The second set indicated conservation or utilization policy mechanisms: natural protected areas or protected areas, pay or payment, followed by ecosystem services, environmental services, or hydrological services. The third set for CFM included terms such as community forest management, community forestry, and community-based management. To restrict searches to Mexico, the term “mexic*” was used, covering Mexico, Mexican, or Mexicans and their plurals. These terms were required to appear in the title, abstract, or keywords sections. A total of nine advanced searches were conducted on each platform. Next, the databases were downloaded in Microsoft Excel format, standardized, and exported to Microsoft Access for further processing.
As inclusion criteria, publications from the year 2000 onwards and only primary sources were considered. Grey literature (conference papers, reports, summaries, and scientific notes) and duplicate records were excluded, resulting in the removal of 339 records. Subsequently, abstracts and keywords were reviewed to exclude 120 documents that did not relate to the terms. This stage concluded with a quick reading of 204 downloaded documents, excluding 123 of them.
Subsequently, a detailed reading was conducted on the 81 preselected documents, and 44 were excluded due to a lack of relevant information related to oak forests or because the focus was on another type of forest. This final filter also limited the selection to studies focused on federally designated NPA. After this process, 37 studies were selected and classified into groups according to their objectives and study themes.
The information was synthesized based on the following points: 1) a timeline analysis from the year 2000 to October 2022, from which a bar graph was constructed; 2) creation of a corpus and selection of titles and keywords using VOYANT (Sinclair & Rockwell, 2024) for text analysis and mining; 3) thematic analysis using a matrix and a bar graph of the studies considered in the analysis.
These documents were classified based on thematic research areas. Finally, the review report was prepared following the guidelines for systematic reviews according to the PRISMA statement (Page et al., 2021).
Results
A total of 662 studies were identified. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and the evaluation and analysis process, 37 studies were selected, representing 5.6 % of the documents found. Of these, 13 focus on NPA, two on PES, 17 on CFM, and five include two or more of these instruments. According to Figure 1, from 2000 to 2010, seven documents were published, representing less than 20 %; in six years of this period, none were published. Meanwhile, in the period from 2011 to 2022, 30 documents were published (81 %), with an annual average of 2.5. Between 2014 and 2018, 19 documents were found, with 2015 and 2018 being the most productive years, each with five publications. In 2020, there was no scientific output on the topic.
Figure 1 Publications categorized by year and conservation and management scheme for oak forests in Mexico. NPA: Natural Protected Areas, PES: Payment for Ecosystem Services, and CFM: Community Forest Management
These studies were published in 28 journals (both national and international) and in two books. Four journals account for 30 % of the contributions, distributed in five, three, and two publications each, while 24 journals have a single publication. Regarding the nationality of the journals, 12 are from Mexico, with two standing out: 'Madera y Bosques' with five papers and 'Revista Mexicana de Sociología' with two. Among the international journals, 'Forest Ecology and Management' (Netherlands) and 'Journal of Sustainable Forestry' (United States) stand out with two each.
Figure 2 shows the six thematic areas or lines of research identified from the analysis. The first and most extensive addresses ecological aspects of flora and fauna with 13 studies focused on NPA. The second area focuses on the socio-ecological effects, social implications, and traditional knowledge with eight contributions associated with CFM. The remaining four themes each present four studies. The theme on changes in forest cover includes two studies on PES and two on the interaction between NPA and PES. The four studies on ecosystem services, particularly on carbon capture and storage, are related to CFM, as are those dealing with challenges and future scenarios. The theoretical-methodological approaches are related to the three instruments: NPA, PES, and CFM (Table 1).
Figure 2 Themes identified in the review on conservation and management schemes of oak forests in Mexico.
Table 1 References and Research Themes in Oak Forests Associated with Natural Protected Areas, Payment for Ecosystem Services, and Community Forest Management.
| Research Themes | References | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Ecology of Vegetation and Fungi | Vargas-Rueda et al. (2021), Olvera-Vargas and Figueroa-Rangel (2018), Silva et al. (2018), Ramírez-Toro et al. (2017 , Block and Meave (2015), Torres-Miranda et al. (2012), Álvarez-Zúñiga et al. (2010), Regil-García and Franco-Maass (2009), Figueroa-Rangel and Olvera-Vargas (2000), Piña-Páez et al. (2013). | Description and ecological analysis of plant communities and ecological successions. |
| Ecology of Fauna | Larios-Lozano et al. (2017), Ortiz-Pulido and Lara (2014), Urbina-Cardona and Flores-Villela (2010). | Distribution, diversity, and endemism of species and risk status. Birds and herpetofauna. |
| Changes in Vegetation and Soil Cover | Navarro et al. (2018), Ramírez-Reyes et al. (2018), López-García et al. (2014) and López-García and Alcántara-Ayala (2012). | Effects, evaluation, and changes measured over time using satellite imagery. |
| Ecosystem Service (carbon) | Leyva-Pablo et al. (2021), Álvarez and Rubio (2016); Álvarez and Rubio (2013) and de Jong et al. (2007). | Carbon cycle, capture, storage, and community involvement. |
| Socioecological Effects, Social Implications, and Traditional Knowledge | Santiago-García et al. (2022), Maya-Elizarrarás and Schondube (2015), Martin et al. (2011), Merino (2018), Merino and Martínez (2014), Vázquez García (2015), Andrade-Sánchez and Eaton-González (2019), Hernández et al. (2016). | Effects of exploitation. Characterization of forest communities and gender-focused approaches. Traditional knowledge in the use of forest resources. |
| Challenges and Future Scenarios | Martin et al. (2021), Wallace et al. (2015), Wrigth and Leighton (2002) and Ganz and Burkle (2002). | Challenges in community forestry attributed to high diversity and technological development. |
| Theoretical and Methodological Approaches | Galicia et al. (2015, 2018), Van Vleet et al. (2016), Monroy et al. (2015). | Integration of socio-ecological approaches and community vision for conservation and use. |
Regarding data mining, Figure 3 shows the corpus constructed from titles and keywords, where the most prominent terms are: Mexico, conservation, forests, oak, species, Sierra, carbon, forestry, temperate, pine, areas, reserve, and community. These are closely associated with the themes identified in this review.
Figure 3 Corpus from the most mentioned terms in titles and keywords of publications on conservation and management schemes of oak forests in Mexico.
Regarding the geographical location of these studies, six (16 %) focus on the national level, while the rest concentrate on regions encompassing one or more federal entities. The state of Oaxaca has the highest participation with 13 studies, followed by Hidalgo and Michoacán with three each. Since some NPA extend beyond state borders, some studies involve two or more entities, such as Jalisco-Colima (two studies) and Mexico-Michoacán (one study). Puebla and Hidalgo each have two studies, while nine states report only one study.
Discussion
Natural Protected Areas
Publications addressing topics related to oak forests associated with NPA primarily examine aspects of conservation biology and are grouped into two subcategories. The first includes seven studies focusing on ecological aspects and attributes of vegetation: description, composition, floristic inventories, biogeographic distribution, and species hotspots in risk categories (Álvarez-Zúñiga et al., 2010; Block & Meave 2015). These studies also analyze regeneration patterns, successional dynamics, and conservation based on ecological criteria (Olvera-Vargas & Figueroa-Rangel, 2018). The second category, comprising six studies, focuses on faunal ecology such as inventories, diversity, and distribution, particularly in specific taxonomic groups of birds (Larios-Lozano et al., 2017; Ortíz-Pulido, 2014) and herpetofauna (Urbina-Cardona & Flores-Villela, 2010). One study focuses on fungi (Piña-Páez et al., 2013) and two studies (López-García & Alcántara-Ayala, 2012; López-García et al., 2014) address successional evaluation, changes in forest cover, and fragmentation.
These studies show a certain bias towards natural sciences, particularly towards conservation biology topics. Their findings regarding the relevance of analyzed organism groups are used as justifications for the continuous establishment of protected areas, which are undoubtedly crucial in the fields of ecology and conservation. Some species, especially fauna (birds, amphibians, and herpetofauna), addressed in the mentioned works are classified at some level of risk, either in the Mexican Official Standard NOM-SEMARNAT-059 (SEMARNAT, 2010) or in the Red List of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2023). However, there is still a need to incorporate approaches that integrate social aspects and inter- and transdisciplinary perspectives, as these forest ecosystems are inhabited by human populations that depend on the resources provided by the forests.
Among the three mechanisms reviewed, NPA are the oldest as their implementation dates back to the first half of the last century. More than a third of the publications analyzed focus on this conservation scheme. In this regard, Maldonado et al. (2020) mention that among Latin American countries, Mexico is one of the leading producers of knowledge related to NPA, particularly in the early part of this century and increasing in the second decade. This coincides with the findings of this review, as 86 % of the studies were generated after the year 2010. However, given the biodiversity of Mexican terrestrial ecosystems and vegetation types, it is common for a significant number of studies to focus on characterizing components of biological diversity. Therefore, the scope of knowledge regarding these types of forests within NPA is still limited.
Payment for Ecosystem Services
According to Perevochtchikova et al. (2021), the primary sources for studying the effects of PES include Ecological Economics, Ecosystem Services, and Land Use Policy, a finding similarly observed by Yu et al. (2020). Both reviews encompassed international literature, whereas this study focuses exclusively on the Mexican context, indicating differences in publication sources.
Studies on PES have seen a significant increase since 2005 (Perevochtchikova et al., 2021), corresponding to the implementation of this program in Mexico in 2003. According to Yu et al. (2020), academic interest in Latin America, particularly in Brazil and Mexico, surged in the second decade of this century, primarily concerning forests and carbon-related topics. Additionally, Perevochtchikova and Oggioni (2014) argue that globally, research on ecosystem services centers around socioeconomic analysis, biodiversity's ecosystem function, hydrological issues, and carbon dynamics. However, in Mexico, the first study related to PES associated with oak forests was published in 2015. This suggests that the wide diversity of vegetation types in the country, as well as the various study approaches, may be limiting the scope of research despite the significant growth of this conservation model.
In this review, among the studies related to PES schemes and oak forests, those analyzing and evaluating changes in vegetation cover and forest fragmentation using satellite imagery and specialized tools predominate. According to Ramírez-Reyes et al. (2018), forest cover loss in temperate forests is estimated to range between 1.16 % and 2 %. This contrasts with rates observed in the second half of the 20th century, which were estimated to be as high as 30 % in southeastern Mexico. These studies suggest that since the year 2000, the trend has reversed, including oak forests that in some cases show slight recovery (Navarro et al., 2018). The decrease in forest cover loss is attributed to a series of factors, including social aspects and public policies such as PES and NPA, as well as community forest management (López-García et al., 2012; Navarro et al., 2018). Although the potential positive impacts of PES are not uniform across all vegetation types, these contributions suggest continuous monitoring of long-term changes.
Community Forest Management
Research on CFM and oak forests relates to three thematic categories: 1) social effects, environmental implications, social implications, and traditional knowledge, 2) challenges and future scenarios, and 3) ecosystem services.
Research indicates that the impacts of forest management in Mexico have received limited analysis, with studies highlighting negative effects on biodiversity and certain ecosystem services such as soil formation and water supply. These impacts are particularly pronounced under intensive management practices (Monárrez-González et al., 2018). For example, Maya-Elizarrarás and Schondube (2015) indicate that the decrease in bird diversity in oak forests in west-central Mexico is attributed to charcoal production.
From a social perspective, Merino (2018) and Merino y Martínez (2014) describe the characteristics of ejidos and forest communities that possess forested areas of temperate ecosystems, including oak forests. Their studies emphasize that these community forests are primarily used to obtain forest resources for domestic needs such as firewood collection and livestock grazing. In contrast, Vázquez García's (2015) research, from a gender perspective, analyzes the exclusion of women from decision-making and other activities in community forest management. Residents in these communities possess extensive knowledge of both timber and non-timber forest resources provided by the forests. For instance, according to Hernández et al. (2016), edible mushrooms harvested from oak forests constitute a source of biocultural wealth and traditional knowledge.
Community utilization of forest resources achieves several key sustainability objectives such as job creation, economic income, sustainable management, and biodiversity conservation. However, balancing the conservation of biological diversity with social and economic development remains a significant challenge.
The high species diversity of oak and their landscape-level variability in Mexican forests pose challenges for small-scale forestry (Wallace et al., 2015; Martin et al., 2021). Additionally, the lack of technological capabilities hinders value addition to products derived from these species, which, according to Delgado-Serrano et al. (2015), negatively impacts socio-ecological resilience.
Regarding CFM and its relationship with ecosystem services, notable studies focus on exploring the storage of organic carbon, which is seen as a potential source of economic income for local communities (Álvarez & Rubio 2016; de Jong et al., 2007).
An important point to highlight is the region where a significant amount of oak forest research has been conducted: the state of Oaxaca. These studies indicate considerable academic interest in this area, likely due to its status as one of the most biodiverse states, particularly with its wide variety of oak species. Despite the lack of federal and state NPA, voluntary community conservation areas have been successfully implemented (Monroy et al., 2015). The local population in these regions has a strong tradition of ecosystem resource management and profound traditional knowledge.
Interaction of Natural Protected Areas, Payment for Ecosystem Services, and Community Forest Management
Studies that relate two or all three of the instruments under review and encompass oak forests have gained prominence since the second decade of this century. Studies such as those by Van Vleet et al. (2016) highlight that despite the lack of protected areas in the state of Oaxaca, programs like PES and CFM, along with other social factors, have managed to maintain a conserved forest cover. Meanwhile, López-García and Alcántara-Ayala (2012) suggest that PES helps reduce deforestation in NPA such as the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve.
Regarding theoretical and methodological proposals, the reviewed studies predominantly adopt monodisciplinary approaches, mostly from the natural sciences. Consequently, some authors suggest analyzing forest ecosystems subject to public conservation and utilization policies in conjunction with social processes and ecological and economic dynamics. In this context, such socio-environmental issues can be categorized as complex problems. Therefore, authors like Galicia et al. (2018) recommend addressing these issues from the perspective of socio-ecological systems, or as Andrade-Sánchez and Eaton-González (2019) propose, through transdisciplinary approaches known as the dialogue of knowledge, which includes participatory methodologies with local stakeholders.
Conclusions
The study of oak forests linked to conservation and usage policies has experienced a significant increase in recent decades. These studies have been published in both Mexican and international journals; more than half focus on Natural Protected Areas, especially on conservation biology topics. Studies on Payment for Ecosystem Services often analyze and evaluate its socio-environmental effects. Regarding Community Forest Management, research highlights the limitations of social capital and the lack of technology in community forestry. Overall, the studies indicate that these policies help reduce the risk of adverse changes in these forests. However, specific studies on oak forests are still insufficient, revealing gaps in knowledge. Consequently, understanding the social and ecological interactions in these forests remains an outstanding task.
