Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40974535›Full record

SynthesisAmbio2026

Community-led landscape regeneration: A review of and framework for engagement in restoration initiatives.

David Brown, Jennifer Gabrys

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Ambio, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David BrownDepartment of Sociology, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RF, UK. dgb40@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1256-4674
Jennifer GabrysDepartment of Sociology, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RF, UK.

Funding

Natural Environment Research Council NERC NE/W00495X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With growing calls for people-centred and equitable approaches to regeneration and restoration, this review paper contributes to enhancing understanding of the role of communities in restoring landscapes across the world. Addressing the lack of clarity around tangible pathways for equitable and inclusive forms of landscape regeneration, we focus on exploring the practices and forms through which communities engage with landscape regeneration and restoration. We undertake a systematic review of an international selection of community-based landscape regeneration initiatives worldwide to better understand how communities engage with, manage and lead regeneration practices. We map landscape regeneration and restoration initiatives across international contexts based on four themes around community organisation, land ownership, engagement and land values. Borne out of this review, we propose an analytical framework for community-based landscape regeneration in order to support and mobilise more democratic and socially just approaches to ecological regeneration initiatives.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansCommunitiesCommunity engagementLandscape regenerationNatural regenerationRestoration

Identifiers

PMID40974535
PMCPMC12779860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.