Forest Disturbance and Recovery in the Peruvian Amazon: Carbon Returns, Biodiversity Struggles

Redacción HC
11/09/2025

The Peruvian Amazon, one of the world’s richest biodiversity hotspots and a vital carbon sink, is under mounting pressure from deforestation, fires, selective logging, and land-use change. While these forests display remarkable resilience in regaining lost biomass, their biodiversity often lags behind — raising critical questions about how we measure “recovery.”

A recent study published in Global Change Biology by Requena Suárez et al. (2023) provides the first nationwide assessment of forest disturbance and recovery in the Peruvian Amazon. By combining decades of satellite data with detailed forest inventory plots, the researchers show that about 15% of Peru’s Amazonian forests have been disturbed since 1984. Their findings reveal important differences in how carbon and biodiversity bounce back, with significant implications for conservation and climate policy.

Understanding the Research Question

Amazonian forests act as global climate regulators and provide irreplaceable ecosystem services. Yet, their ecological stability is increasingly compromised by both natural and human-driven disturbances. The central question the researchers asked was:

To what extent have Peru’s Amazonian forests been disturbed since 1984, and how do disturbance intensity and elapsed recovery time affect above-ground biomass (AGB), species richness, and species composition?

This inquiry is critical because carbon-focused restoration projects often overlook biodiversity outcomes. The study highlights the need to evaluate both carbon stocks and ecological integrity.

How the Study Was Conducted

The study integrated 1,840 subplots from Peru’s National Forest and Wildlife Inventory (INFFS) with Landsat satellite data (1984–present). Researchers used the Normalized Difference Moisture Index (NDMI) to detect forest cover changes and disturbance events, which they then linked to field-based measurements of above-ground biomass and tree species richness.

Statistical models assessed how recovery varied according to:

• Disturbance intensity
• Time since disturbance
• Forest connectivity (presence of surrounding intact forest)
• Accessibility (proximity to roads and human infrastructure)

The authors also acknowledged limitations: small-scale disturbances are harder to detect via remote sensing, plot distribution may not capture every local variation, and it is not always possible to distinguish between causes (e.g., fire vs. selective logging).

Key Findings: Fast Carbon, Slow Biodiversity

The findings paint a nuanced picture of forest resilience:

• Extent of disturbance: Roughly 15% of the Peruvian Amazon has been disturbed since 1984.
• Biomass recovery: Disturbed forests regained biomass at an average rate of ~4.7 Mg ha⁻¹ per year during the first 20 years post-disturbance. This indicates strong potential for carbon sequestration.
• Biodiversity recovery: In contrast, species richness did not always follow the same trajectory. Disturbance intensity reduced species diversity, and in some cases, even decades later, richness and species composition had not fully recovered.
• Landscape context matters: Forest connectivity boosted both carbon and biodiversity recovery, while human accessibility slowed species composition recovery — likely due to ongoing anthropogenic pressures.

As the authors note, “forest resilience is multidimensional: biomass can return more quickly than biodiversity.” This means relying solely on carbon-based measures risks overlooking long-term ecological degradation.

Why These Findings Matter

Implications for Climate and Policy

The recovery of above-ground biomass supports Peru’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). However, the study warns against equating carbon recovery with full ecosystem restoration. Policymakers must integrate biodiversity metrics into monitoring systems and restoration targets.

Connectivity as a Conservation Strategy

The study highlights the importance of maintaining ecological corridors. Connected forests recover both carbon and species more effectively than isolated fragments. This finding strengthens the case for large-scale landscape approaches to conservation.

Social and Management Dimensions

Forests closer to roads and settlements recover more slowly in terms of biodiversity. This points to the need for:

• Community-led monitoring and protection
• Stronger enforcement against illegal extraction
• Incentives for sustainable forest management

Tailoring restoration strategies to regional realities — rather than applying one-size-fits-all solutions — is essential.

Conclusion

The Peruvian Amazon shows a paradox of resilience: it regains its carbon “muscle” relatively quickly but struggles to recover its biodiversity “soul.” This divergence underscores the importance of multidimensional restoration strategies that address both climate mitigation and ecological integrity.

As Requena Suárez et al. (2023) demonstrate, recovery is not just about how much forest grows back, but about what kind of forest returns. For policymakers, conservationists, and communities, the challenge is ensuring that future Amazonian forests are both carbon-rich and biodiversity-rich.

Future conservation strategies must integrate satellite monitoring, field inventories, and community participation to secure the ecological and climatic future of the Amazon.

Topics of interest

Biodiversity