Coordinated approaches to quantify long‐term ecosystem dynamics in response to global change

Many serious ecosystem consequences of climate change will take decades or even centuries to emerge. Long‐term ecological responses to global change are strongly regulated by slow processes, such as changes in species composition, carbon dynamics in soil and by long‐lived plants, and accumulation of nutrient capitals. Understanding and predicting these processes require experiments on decadal time scales. But decadal experiments by themselves may not be adequate because many of the slow processes have characteristic time scales much longer than experiments can be maintained. This article promotes a coordinated approach that combines long‐term, large‐scale global change experiments with process studies and modeling. Long‐term global change manipulative experiments, especially in high‐priority ecosystems such as tropical forests and high‐latitude regions, are essential to maximize information gain concerning future states of the earth system. The long‐term experiments should be conducted in tandem with complementary process studies, such as those using model ecosystems, species replacements, laboratory incubations, isotope tracers, and greenhouse facilities. Models are essential to assimilate data from long‐term experiments and process studies together with information from long‐term observations, surveys, and space‐for‐time studies along environmental and biological gradients. Future research programs with coordinated long‐term experiments, process studies, and modeling have the potential to be the most effective strategy to gain the best information on long‐term ecosystem dynamics in response to global change.     

Predicting restoration outcomes based on organizational and ecological factors

For restoration to be an effective strategy to reverse large‐scale habitat loss and land degradation, funding programs need policies that promote selection of and commitment to projects that can reasonably be expected to succeed. Programmatic project selection practices have received minimal formal evaluation, despite their importance. In this study, we considered the extent to which a program needs to consider both ecological and organizational factors during project selection in order to minimize the incidence of project failure. Our assessment of a long‐term program that funds ecological restoration efforts across Minnesota (U.S.A.), based on project records, manager surveys, and field surveys, yielded several broadly relevant insights. First, factors well understood to confer ecological resilience (level of landscape alteration and starting condition) were clearly associated with restoration outcomes, regardless of time‐since‐initiation of restoration. Second, restoration of low‐resilience ecosystems is typically a labor‐ and skill‐intensive enterprise for organizations that undertake them. Our analysis revealed four organizational limitations, in addition to insufficient funds, that hindered capacity to keep projects on‐track: lack of planning and goal‐setting, inadequate staffing, leadership change, and incomplete records. Third, to reduce risk, programs do not necessarily need to avoid challenging projects, but do need to consider whether organizations proposing restorations have adequate internal capacity to competently plan and to sustain actions for a duration sufficient to restore ecological resilience. If a restoration is degraded enough to require human intervention to recover, the outcome of a project is as likely to reflect its organizational reality as much as its ecological circumstances.     

Value of long‐term ecological studies

Long‐term ecological studies are critical for providing key insights in ecology, environmental change, natural resource management and biodiversity conservation. In this paper, we briefly discuss five key values of such studies. These are: (1) quantifying ecological responses to drivers of ecosystem change; (2) understanding complex ecosystem processes that occur over prolonged periods; (3) providing core ecological data that may be used to develop theoretical ecological models and to parameterize and validate simulation models; (4) acting as platforms for collaborative studies, thus promoting multidisciplinary research; and (5) providing data and understanding at scales relevant to management, and hence critically supporting evidence‐based policy, decision making and the management of ecosystems. We suggest that the ecological research community needs to put higher priority on communicating the benefits of long‐term ecological studies to resource managers, policy makers and the general public. Long‐term research will be especially important for tackling large‐scale emerging problems confronting humanity such as resource management for a rapidly increasing human population, mass species extinction, and climate change detection, mitigation and adaptation. While some ecologically relevant, long‐term data sets are now becoming more generally available, these are exceptions. This deficiency occurs because ecological studies can be difficult to maintain for long periods as they exceed the length of government administrations and funding cycles. We argue that the ecological research community will need to coordinate ongoing efforts in an open and collaborative way, to ensure that discoverable long‐term ecological studies do not become a long‐term deficiency. It is important to maintain publishing outlets for empirical field‐based ecology, while simultaneously developing new systems of recognition that reward ecologists for the use and collaborative sharing of their long‐term data sets. Funding schemes must be re‐crafted to emphasize collaborative partnerships between field‐based ecologists, theoreticians and modellers, and to provide financial support that is committed over commensurate time frames.     

Toward a social–ecological approach to ecological restoration: a look back at three decades of maritime clifftop restoration

The sharp increase in the touristic use of the maritime clifftops in western France after WWII resulted in a concentration of activities that generated ecosystem degradation in many sites (e.g. touristic infrastructure, human trampling). Consideration of the ecological value of these sites over the past three decades has led to a shift in maritime clifftop management and consequently to numerous planning and restoration projects. Using inventories of maritime clifftop restoration projects conducted in 2007 and 2016, we identified 76 restoration projects, which allowed us to study the active and passive restoration methods used. In addition, we collected and analyzed 465 vegetation monitoring plots with an average duration of 5.6 years to understand how they were used by both scientists and nonscientists. First, we describe the social–ecological systems of these restoration projects through an analysis of their social contexts, ecological stakes, and restoration goals based on 19 semistructured interviews with restoration stakeholders. Comparing our research with similar studies in the literature reveals that the main strength of maritime clifftop restorations is a strong network between scientist and nonscientist stakeholders combined with high‐level monitoring. Finally, we underline the main challenges for the future of maritime clifftop ecological restoration: (1) the need for further study of this ecological database (e.g. to study the medium‐term effect of active restoration, continue current monitoring); and (2) the need to develop sociological studies of human uses and perceptions to improve the long‐term management of restored ecosystems.     

Transient population dynamics impede restoration and may promote ecosystem transformation after disturbance

The apparent failure of ecosystems to recover from increasingly widespread disturbance is a global concern. Despite growing focus on factors inhibiting resilience and restoration, we still know very little about how demographic and population processes influence recovery. Using inverse and forward demographic modelling of 531 post‐fire sagebrush populations across the western US, we show that demographic processes during recovery from seeds do not initially lead to population growth but rather to years of population decline, low density, and risk of extirpation after disturbance and restoration, even at sites with potential to support long‐term, stable populations. Changes in population structure, and resulting transient population dynamics, lead to a > 50% decline in population growth rate after disturbance and significant reductions in population density. Our results indicate that demographic processes influence the recovery of ecosystems from disturbance and that demographic analyses can be used by resource managers to anticipate ecological transformation risk.     

Are Socioeconomic Benefits of Restoration Adequately Quantified? A Meta‐analysis of Recent Papers (2000–2008) in Restoration Ecology and 12 Other Scientific Journals

Many ecosystems have been transformed, or degraded by human use, and restoration offers an opportunity to recover services and benefits, not to mention intrinsic values. We assessed whether restoration scientists and practitioners use their projects to demonstrate the benefits restoration can provide in their peer‐reviewed publications. We evaluated a sample of the academic literature to determine whether links are made explicit between ecological restoration, society, and public policy related to natural capital. We analyzed 1,582 peer‐reviewed papers dealing with ecological restoration published between 1 January 2000 and 30 September 2008 in 13 leading scientific journals. As selection criterion, we considered papers that contained either “restoration” or “rehabilitation” in their title, abstract, or keywords. Furthermore, as one‐third of the papers were published in Restoration Ecology, we used that journal as a reference for comparison with all the other journals. We readily acknowledge that aquatic ecosystems are under‐represented, and that the largely inaccessible gray literature was ignored. Within these constraints, we found clear evidence that restoration practitioners are failing to signal links between ecological restoration, society, and policy, and are underselling the evidence of benefits of restoration as a worthwhile investment for society. We discuss this assertion and illustrate it with samples of our findings—with regards to (1) the geographical and institutional affiliations of authors; (2) the choice of ecosystems studied, methods employed, monitoring schemes applied, and the spatial scale of studies; and (3) weak links to payments for ecosystem service setups, agriculture, and ramifications for public policy.     

Eco‐evolutionary dynamics in restored communities and ecosystems

Recent ecological studies have revealed that rapid evolution within populations can have significant impacts on the ecological dynamics of communities and ecosystems. These eco‐evolutionary dynamics (EED) are likely to have substantial and quantifiable effects in restored habitats over timescales that are relevant for the conservation and restoration of small populations and threatened communities. Restored habitats may serve as “hotspots” for EED due to mismatches between transplanted genotypes and the restored environment, and novel interactions among lineages that do not share a coevolutionary history, both of which can generate strong selection for rapid evolutionary change that has immediate demographic consequences. Rapid evolution that influences population dynamics and community processes is likely to have particularly large effects during the establishment phase of restoration efforts. Finally, restoration activities and their associated long‐term monitoring programs provide outstanding opportunities for using eco‐evolutionary experimental approaches. Results from such studies will address questions about the effects of rapid evolutionary change on the ecological dynamics of populations and interacting species, while simultaneously providing critical, but currently overlooked, information for conservation practices.     

Integrating trait‐based empirical and modeling research to improve ecological restoration

A global ecological restoration agenda has led to ambitious programs in environmental policy to mitigate declines in biodiversity and ecosystem services. Current restoration programs can incompletely return desired ecosystem service levels, while resilience of restored ecosystems to future threats is unknown. It is therefore essential to advance understanding and better utilize knowledge from ecological literature in restoration approaches. We identified an incomplete linkage between global change ecology, ecosystem function research, and restoration ecology. This gap impedes a full understanding of the interactive effects of changing environmental factors on the long‐term provision of ecosystem functions and a quantification of trade‐offs and synergies among multiple services. Approaches that account for the effects of multiple changing factors on the composition of plant traits and their direct and indirect impact on the provision of ecosystem functions and services can close this gap. However, studies on this multilayered relationship are currently missing. We therefore propose an integrated restoration agenda complementing trait‐based empirical studies with simulation modeling. We introduce an ongoing case study to demonstrate how this framework could allow systematic assessment of the impacts of interacting environmental factors on long‐term service provisioning. Our proposed agenda will benefit restoration programs by suggesting plant species compositions with specific traits that maximize the supply of multiple ecosystem services in the long term. Once the suggested compositions have been implemented in actual restoration projects, these assemblages should be monitored to assess whether they are resilient as well as to improve model parameterization. Additionally, the integration of empirical and simulation modeling research can improve global outcomes by raising the awareness of which restoration goals can be achieved, due to the quantification of trade‐offs and synergies among ecosystem services under a wide range of environmental conditions.     

An Evaluation of the Short‐Term Progress of Restoration Combining Ecological Assessment and Public Perception

Ecological restoration centers on the reestablishment of ecological processes and the integrity of degraded ecosystems, but its success also depends on public acceptance and support. In this study, we evaluated the short‐term ecological effects of different restoration treatments in Iceland. Furthermore, we tested the public perception of aesthetic and recreational values of these revegetated areas. Predefined soil and vegetation indicators were measured, and a survey, based on a questionnaire and photographs of the different areas, was used for gauging public perception. Our results indicate that different restoration treatments triggered different succession trajectories. The vegetation composition of areas seeded with grasses seemed to be on a trajectory toward relatively undisturbed reference ecosystems, whereas areas seeded with nonnative lupine seemed to be developing a novel ecosystem. Results of the survey demonstrated that people valued the appearance of revegetated areas higher than that of the eroded control areas, with the exception of areas seeded with lupine. The visual perception of each restoration treatment corresponded well with the ecological factors and revealed both a social and an ecological rationale against the use of lupine in land restoration. The results indicate that the design of restoration projects should be based on both an analysis of sociocultural priorities and an understanding of possible trajectories of ecosystem development associated with the available restoration methods to avoid results that are neither socially acceptable nor ecologically feasible.     

Ecological processes: A key element in strategies for nature conservation

Summary A common approach to nature conservation is to identify and protect natural ‘assets’ such as ecosystems and threatened species. While such actions are essential, protection of assets will not be effective unless the ecological processes that sustain them are maintained. Here, we consider the role of ecological processes and the complementary perspective for conservation arising from an emphasis on process. Many kinds of ecological processes sustain biodiversity: including climatic processes, primary productivity, hydrological processes, formation of biophysical habitats, interactions between species, movements of organisms and natural disturbance regimes. Anthropogenic threats to conservation exert their influence by modifying or disrupting these processes. Such threats extend across tenures, they frequently occur offsite, they commonly induce non‐linear responses, changes may be irreversible and the full consequences may not be experienced for lengthy periods. While many managers acknowledge these considerations in principle, there is much scope for greater recognition of ecological processes in nature conservation and greater emphasis on long time‐frames and large spatial scales in conservation planning. Practical measures that promote ecological processes include: monitoring to determine the trajectory and rate of processes; incorporating surrogates for processes in conservation and restoration projects; specific interventions to manipulate and restore processes; and planning for the ecological future before options are foreclosed. The long‐term conservation of biodiversity and the well‐being of human society depend upon both the protection of natural assets and maintaining the integrity of the ecological processes that sustain them.     

Looking to the future: key points for sustainable management of northern Great Plains grasslands

The grasslands of the northern Great Plains (NGP) region of North America are considered endangered ecosystems and priority conservation areas yet have great ecological and economic importance. Grasslands in the NGP are no longer self‐regulating adaptive systems. The challenges to these grasslands are widespread and serious (e.g. climate change, invasive species, fragmentation, altered disturbance regimes, and anthropogenic chemical loads). Because the challenges facing the region are dynamic, complex, and persistent, a paradigm shift in how we approach restoration and management of the grasslands in the NGP is imperative. The goal of this article is to highlight four key points for land managers and restoration practitioners to consider when planning management or restoration actions. First, we discuss the appropriateness of using historical fidelity as a restoration or management target because of changing climate, widespread pervasiveness of invasive species, the high level of fragmentation, and altered disturbance regimes. Second, we highlight ecosystem resilience and long‐term population persistence as alternative targets. Third, because the NGP is so heavily impacted with anthropogenic chemical loading, we discuss the risks of ecological traps and extinction debt. Finally, we highlight the importance of using adaptive management and having patience during restoration and management. Consideration of these four points will help management and restoration of grasslands move toward a more successful and sustainable future. Although we specifically focus on the NGP of North America, these same issues and considerations apply to grasslands and many other ecosystems globally.     

Stretch Goals and Backcasting: Approaches for Overcoming Barriers to Large-Scale Ecological Restoration

The destruction and transformation of ecosystems by humans threatens biodiversity, ecosystem function, and vital ecosystem services. Ecological repair of ecosystems will be a major challenge over the next century and beyond. Restoration efforts to date have frequently been ad hoc, and site or situation specific. Although such small‐scale efforts are vitally important, without large‐scale visions and coordination, it is unlikely that large functioning ecosystems will ever be constructed by chance through the cumulative effects of small‐scale projects. Although the problems of human‐induced environmental degradation and the need for a solution are widely recognized, these issues have rarely been addressed on a sufficiently large‐scale basis. There are numerous barriers that prevent large‐scale ecological restoration projects from being proposed, initiated, or carried through. Common barriers include the “shifting baseline syndrome,” the scale and complexity of restoration, the long‐term and open‐ended nature of restoration, funding challenges, and preemptive constraint of vision. Two potentially useful approaches that could help overcome these barriers are stretch goals and backcasting. Stretch goals are ambitious long‐term goals used to inspire creativity and innovation to achieve outcomes that currently seem impossible. Backcasting is a technique where a desired end point is visualized, and then a pathway to that end point is worked out retrospectively. A case study from the Scottish Highlands is used to illustrate how stretch goals and backcasting could facilitate large‐scale restoration. The combination of these approaches offers ways to evaluate and shape options for the future of ecosystems, rather than accepting that future ecosystems are victims of past and present political realities.     

热带亚热带退化生态系统的恢复与复合农林业

我国热带亚热带是人口和环境压力最大的区域之一。原有自然生态系统遭到很大的破坏,退化生态系统大面积增加,这是严重制约农业生产发展的重要因素。长期的恢复生态学定点研究表明,通过综合整治,使退化生态系统得以恢复与重建,具有重大的生态效益、经济效益和社会效益。在丘陵山区进行退化生态系统的恢复与重建实践中所构建的“林果草(牧)鱼”复合生态系统,是高产、高质、高效的复合农林业模式,是促进地方农业经济发展的有效途径。     

Developing a vision for improved monitoring and reporting of riparian restoration projects

Representatives from agencies involved in natural resource management in the Murray‐Darling Basin gathered for a workshop in November 2010 to develop a vision for improved monitoring and reporting of riparian restoration projects. The resounding message from this workshop was that the effectiveness of riparian restoration depends on having sound, documented and agreed evidence on the ecological responses to restoration efforts. Improving our capacity to manage and restore riparian ecosystems is constrained by (i) a lack of ecological evidence on the effects of restoration efforts, and (ii) short‐termism in commitment to restoration efforts, in funding of monitoring and in expected time spans for ecosystem recovery. Restoration at the effective spatial scope will invariably require a long‐term commitment by researchers, funding agencies, management agencies and landholders. To address the knowledge gaps that constrain riparian restoration in the Basin, participants endorsed four major fields for future research: the importance of landscape context to restoration outcomes; spatio‐temporal scaling of restoration outcomes; functional effects of restoration efforts; and developing informative and effective indicators of restoration. To improve the monitoring and restoration of riparian zones throughout the Basin, participants advocated an integrated approach: a hierarchical adaptive management framework that incorporates long‐term ecological research.     

On the teaching of ecological restoration in Brazil: an analysis of postgraduate courses

Several ambitious restoration targets have been set for recovering degraded ecosystems in Brazil (21 million hectares with a legal deficit of native vegetation). The development of scientific knowledge and skilled professionals is necessary to meet this demand and is fundamental for achieving success in medium‐ and long‐term restoration. In this study, we describe the availability and profile of postgraduate courses on ecological restoration in Brazil. We surveyed 272 postgraduate programs, comprising six specific areas of concentration (forestry, soil sciences, botany, environmental engineering, ecology, and environmental science). We analyzed all selected courses in terms of location, approach (economic, social, and legal), and restoration techniques. Only 27% of the postgraduate programs analyzed offer ecological restoration courses, and 49% of these are offered in the southeast region of the country. Regions covered by nonforest ecosystems, such as Pampas, Caatinga, and Pantanal, were poorly represented. Legal aspects were considered in 51% of the courses, whereas social and economic approaches were only considered in 2.7 and 11% of the courses, respectively. Seedling planting (85%) and nucleation (68%) were the most frequently cited techniques of active restoration, and passive restoration was mentioned in 63% of the courses. Our findings highlight the need for increasing postgraduate courses in areas with nonforest ecosystems, especially due to a lack of knowledge about restoration of these areas. The incorporation of economic and social approaches is highly recommended, considering the importance of these attributes in achieving success in large‐scale restoration initiatives.     

Restoration for multiple use

Management of restored ecosystems for multiple use is a modern necessity given a growing human population and dwindling supplies of ecosystem goods and services. Multiple use management refers to managing resources simultaneously for sustainable output of many goods and services. Within any restoration, thoughtful planning and early stakeholder engagement can help harmonize seemingly competing multiple uses. Although the field of ecological restoration is young and there are few long‐term lessons to draw from, we can infer from ecological theory that maximization of native biodiversity can impart resilience in the restored ecosystem and can buffer against the stress of multiple use management. Restoration for multiple use should be accompanied with an acknowledgment that humility is required and monitoring is needed to keep the restored ecosystem on an acceptable trajectory. The field of ecological restoration was founded upon the notion that ecosystems would be restored for ethical reasons, but modern realities have necessitated a more utilitarian approach to restoration that requires restoring ecosystems for multiple uses. This reality represents a grand challenge for the next generation of restoration ecologists.     

Monitoring attributes for ecological restoration in Latin America and the Caribbean region

Ecological restoration is becoming mainstreamed worldwide but target ecosystems' responses to restorative interventions are not sufficiently monitored, in terms of the wide range of ecological, social, and economic attributes available. In order to highlight and better understand this problem, we conducted a literature review of the ecological, social, and economic attributes cited in the scientific literature used for monitoring the success of ecological restoration projects in Latin America and the Caribbean region, where no regional study of this kind has previously been conducted. In 84 of the 91 articles retained for the study, ecological indicators were evaluated, while only seven articles included measurements of socioeconomic indicators. Regarding the Society for Ecological Restoration Primer attributes of restored ecosystems, we only found indicators measuring attributes 1–6, with attribute 1 (species assemblages) predominating (73%), followed by physical conditions (54%) and ecological functions (51%). Brazil was the country in the region where most monitoring was being carried out (51% of the articles), and tropical rainforest (33%) and tropical dry forest (25%) were the ecosystem types where ecological restoration was most frequently monitored. Highly vulnerable ecosystems such as mangroves and paramos were underrepresented. Attributes related to ecosystem stability or to governance and education of communities were not monitored at all. More real long‐term monitoring, instead of chronosequences, is needed, especially where understanding socioeconomic implications of, and barriers to, effective ecological restoration is a top priority.     

How to infer population trends in sparse data: examples with opportunistic sighting records for great white sharks

Aim Biodiversity is declining at accelerating rates. Understanding past and ongoing changes to biodiversity is paramount in prioritizing conservation action and restoring functional ecosystems. Yet long‐term, systematic data on the distribution and abundance of species are sparse. For many organisms, specimen collections and anecdotal accounts of chance sightings or captures constitute the only source of information. Such data have the potential to provide valuable insights on long‐term ecosystem changes, but are often neglected because they are difficult to analyse quantitatively. Here we review available methods and introduce a new approach. Location Historic data on sightings and captures of great white sharks in the eastern Adriatic and off eastern Canada serve to illustrate the utility of both the existing methods and the new approach. Method Unlike existing methods, the new approach focuses on estimating population trends rather than verifying extinction and explicitly addresses uncertainty over observation effort via two tiers of sensitivity analysis. It fits a series of generalized linear models that provide multiple estimates of declines under alternate scenarios regarding the appropriate reference period and observer trends. Programming code to implement the approach in freely available software is provided as supplementary material. Results Example analyses of great white shark sightings suggest that local populations of this species have suffered dramatic declines, both in the eastern Adriatic and along Canada’s eastern coast. Although not yet extinct, this top predator may therefore no longer be able to fulfil its former ecological role. Main conclusions Careful quantitative analyses of imperfect historical data can provide valuable insights into past ecological changes. Such insights are crucial to improved management and restoration of individual species and their ecosystems. We therefore hope that our review of available methods will facilitate quantitative evaluations of species for which analysis was previously impeded by a lack of systematically collected data.     

Defining ecological restoration of peatlands in Central Kalimantan,Indonesia

Indonesia declared an ambitious plan to restore its degraded and fire‐prone peatlands, which have been a source of significant greenhouse gas and haze. However, the progress has been slow and the plan cannot succeed without sustained social supports and political will. Although many previous studies argued for the need to see ecological restoration in socio‐economic contexts, empirical assessments have been lacking for how restoration is operationalized on the ground. We interviewed 47 key informants involved in four different projects in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, and assessed their definitions, goals, and practices of peatland restoration. Most of the actors we interviewed defined peatland restoration primarily in an ecological context following the global concept of ecological restoration. However, all four restoration projects were designed without determining reference and trajectory conditions. Their intermediate goals and practices were more focused on engaging local communities and developing sustainable livelihood options than improving the ecological conditions of peatlands. To be internally consistent, peatland restoration needs to recognize a social dimension in its process, as well as in its goal. Setting clear trajectory conditions is also important to clarify achievable goals and measurable intermediate outcomes. We propose the following definition of peatland restoration: a process of assisting the recovery of degraded peatland ecosystems to achieve the appropriate trajectories defined through multi‐stakeholder collaboration within social‐ecological contexts. We hope to generate healthy debates to further refine the definition that encompasses both social and ecological dimensions to generate broader support for sustaining and expanding peatland restoration projects in Indonesia.     

露天煤矿不同恢复阶段大型土壤动物群落结构

对平朔安太堡露天煤矿恢复生态系统中不同恢复阶段的大型土壤动物群落组成进行了调查,共获取大型土壤动物316头,隶属4纲8目30科。利用DIC多样性指数与密度-类群多样性指数(DG指数)以及Gower相似性指数对土壤动物群落结构进行了分析。结果表明:随着土地复垦与生态重建时间的延长,恢复生态系统中土壤动物群落的结构趋于复杂;在排土场形成到复垦13年的这个恢复阶段中,大型土壤动物群落的演替处于增长期,且在增长期内,土壤动物群落的增长速度为快-慢-快;在恢复时间较长的生态系统之间,土壤动物群落之间相似性指数值相对较大。