Myth‐busting tropical grassy biome restoration

The historical focus in research and policy on forest restoration and temperate ecosystems has created misunderstandings for the restoration of tropical and subtropical old‐growth grassy biomes (TGB). Such misconceptions have detrimental consequences for biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human livelihoods in woodlands, savannas, and grasslands worldwide. Here, we demystify TGB restoration myths to promote a positive agenda to increase the likelihood of success of ambitious landscape‐scale restoration goals of nonforest ecosystems. The 10 TGB restoration myths are: (1) grasslands originate from degraded forests, (2) tree cover is a reliable indicator of habitat quality, (3) planting trees is always good for biodiversity and ecosystem services, (4) grasslands are biodiversity‐poor and provide few ecosystem services, (5) enhancing plant nutrition is needed in restoration, (6) disturbance is detrimental, (7) techniques used to restore temperate grasslands also work for TGB, (8) grasslands represent early stages of forest succession, (9) grassland restoration is only about grasses, and (10) grassland restoration is fast. By demystifying TGB restoration, we hope that policymakers, scientists, and restorationists come to understand and embrace the value of these ecosystems and are motivated to establish policies, standards, indicators, and techniques that enhance the success of TGB restoration. We must abandon misperceptions and misunderstandings of TGB ecology that result in ill‐conceived policies and build an informed and compelling global ecosystem restoration agenda that maintains and improves the well‐being of all inhabitants of grassy biomes.     

湖泊生态服务受益者分析及生态生产函数构建

生态系统服务管理作为生态系统管理的优化方式,是生态学研究的前沿方向。湖泊生态系统服务管理是指综合利用生态学、经济学、社会学和管理学等学科知识,对影响湖泊生态系统结构、过程、功能的关键因子进行调控,提高湖泊生态系统服务供给水平和供给能力的过程。近年来国内外学者针对湖泊生态系统服务内涵、分类、经济价值评估等方面开展了大量研究,极大地促进了湖泊生态系统服务从认知走向管理实践。然而,现有研究在开展湖泊生态系统服务价值评估时多忽略生态系统服务受益者和生态系统特征对生态系统服务的边际影响分析,无法揭示生态系统服务空间流动和转移特征及生态系统服务时空权衡关系,制约了生态系统服务研究与管理决策和政策设计结合。在综述湖泊生态系统服务定量评估方法的基础上,认为通过生态系统服务受益者分析确定湖泊生态系统最终服务,并通过构建生态生产函数确定湖泊生态系统服务权衡关系及湖泊生态系统特征对生态系统最终服务的边际影响,是生态系统服务走向管理实践和政策设计的科学依据,可以确保生态、社会、经济可持续发展。     

基于陆地-水生态系统耦合的海河流域水生态功能分区

水生态功能分区是针对水生态系统特征的陆地生态系统划分,是为流域水生态管理提供生态背景和基本单元。陆地-水生态系统的耦合是水生态功能分区的核心,但多停留在个别小流域进行理论探讨,大型流域的实际案例较少。针对海河流域独特的气候、地貌、水文和人类活动特征,提出了水生态功能分区的三级指标体系。一级二级区针对气候、地貌、水文背景进行"自上而下"的分区,三级区针对人类活动对水资源、水环境、生境影响,采用"自下而上"的分区方法。最终,海河流域划分了6个一级区、16个二级区和73个三级区。研究充分体现了"以水定陆、以陆控水"的基本原则,以及"自下而上"和"自上而下"分区方法的优点,结果可为海河流域水生态管理提供科学依据,为水资源空间调配与合理利用、产业结构布局与区域协调等服务。     

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.     

Research needs for incorporating the ecosystem service approach into EU biodiversity conservation policy

Using a range of different methods including extensive reviews, workshops and an electronic conference, 70 key research recommendations and 12 priority research needs to integrate the ecosystem services approach into biodiversity conservation policy and funding were identified by a cross-disciplinary group of over 100 scientists and 50 stakeholders, including research funders and policy-makers. These recommendations focus on the ecological underpinning of ecosystem services, drivers that affect ecosystems and their services, biological traits and ecosystem services, the valuation of ecosystem services, spatial and temporal scales in ecosystem service assessment, indicators of ecosystem services, and habitat management, conservation policy and ecosystem services. The recommendations in this paper help steer the research agenda on ecosystem services into policy-relevant areas, agreed upon by funders, researchers and policy-makers. This research agenda will only succeed with increased collaboration between researchers across disciplines, thereby providing a challenge to the research community and research funders to work in new, interdisciplinary ways.     

Ecological indicators for stream restoration success

Exploitation of freshwater resources is essential for sustenance of human existence and alteration of rivers, lakes and wetlands has facilitated economic development for centuries. Consequently, freshwater biodiversity is critically threatened, with stream ecosystems being the most heavily affected. To improve the status of freshwater habitats, e.g. in the context of the European Water Framework Directive and the US Clean Water Act, it is essential to implement the most effective restoration measures and identify the most suitable indicators for restoration success. Herein, several active and passive bioindication approaches are reviewed in light of existing legal frameworks, current targets and applicable implementation of river restoration. Such approaches should move from the use of single biological indicators to more holistic ecological indicators simultaneously addressing communities, multiple life stages and habitat properties such as water quality, substrate composition and stream channel morphology. The proposed Proceeding Chain of Restoration (PCoR) can enable the integration of natural scientific, political and socioeconomic dimensions for restoration of aquatic ecosystems and associated services. Generally, an analysis that combines target species-based active bioindication with community-based passive bioindication and multivariate statistics seems to be most suitable for a holistic evaluation of restoration success, as well as for the monitoring of stream ecosystem health. Since the response of biological communities to changing environmental conditions can differ between taxonomic groups and rivers, assessments at the ecosystem scale should include several levels of biological organisation. A stepwise evaluation of the primary factors inducing disturbance or degradation is needed to integrate increasing levels of complexity from water quality assessments to the evaluation of ecological function. The proposed PCoR can provide a step-by-step guide for restoration ecologists, comprising all planning steps from the determination of the conservation objectives to the use of ecological indicators in post-restoration monitoring.     

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.     

Learning from scientific literature: Can indicators for measuring success be standardized in “on the ground” restoration?

The Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) Primer identifies key ecosystem attributes for evaluating restoration outcome. Broad attribute categories could be necessary due to the large variety of restoration projects, but could make overall evaluations and assessments challenging and might hamper the development of sound and successful restoration. In this study we carry out a systematic review of scientific papers addressing evaluation of restoration outcome. We include 104 studies published after 2010 from Europe or North America, representing different types of restoration projects in terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. We explore the main ecological and socioeconomic attributes used to evaluate restoration outcome, and related indicators and specific methods applied to measure this, in relation to ecosystem and type of restoration project. We identify a wide range of indicators within each attribute, and show that very different methods are employed to measure them. This complexity reduces the opportunity for meaningful comparison and standardization of evaluation of restoration outcome, within and between ecosystems. Socioeconomic indicators are rarely used to evaluate restoration outcome, and studies including both ecological and socioeconomic indicators are nearly absent. Based on our findings we discuss whether standardization and streamlining of indicators is useful to improve the evaluation of “on the ground” restoration, or if this is not appropriate given the diversity of goals and ecosystems involved. Species‐specific traits are used in many projects and should be considered as an addition to the original SER attributes. Furthermore, we discuss the potential for restoration evaluation that encompasses not only assessment of ecological but also socioeconomic indicators.     

Impacts of large‐scale forest restoration on socioeconomic status and local livelihoods: what we know and do not know

Forests are sources of wood, non‐timber forest products and ecosystems services and goods that benefit society as a whole, and are especially important to rural livelihoods. Forest landscape restoration (FLR) has been proposed as a way to counteract deforestation and reconcile the production of ecosystem services and goods with conservation and development goals. But limited evidence indicates how large‐scale forest restoration could contribute to improving local livelihoods. Here, we present a conceptual framework to analyze the effects of large‐scale restoration on local livelihoods, and use it to review the scientific literature and reduce this knowledge gap. Most of the literature referred to case studies (89%), largely concentrated in China (49%). The main theme explored was income, followed by livelihoods diversification, off‐farm employment opportunities, poverty reduction, equity and the provision of timber and energy as ecosystem services. Nearly 60 percent of the papers discussed the importance of governance systems to socioeconomic outcomes. The reforestation/restoration programs and policies investigated in the studies had mixed socioeconomic effects on local livelihoods depending on other variables, such as availability of off‐farm jobs, household characteristics, land productivity, land tenure, and markets for forest products and ecosystem services. We conclude that the effects of large‐scale restoration initiatives on local livelihoods may vary due to several factors and is still not clear for many situations; therefore, monitoring over time with clear indicators is needed.     

Restoration ecology of riverine wetlands: A 5-year post-operation survey on the Rhône River, France

Bibliographical study of articles published in scientific journals over the last 10 years, and of books published over the last 20 years, reveals a clear increase in the number of publications dealing with ecological engineering, particularly on aquatic ecosystems, which today are becoming a major topic. The concept of ecological restoration must be clearly defined scientifically and include adequate pre- and post-restoration monitoring of various performance indicators, to allow for restoration, evaluation and increase its success. A restoration experiment was carried out in a former channel of the Rhône River according to a scientifically based decision framework. Long-term monitoring of aquatic vegetation (17 years of data) on two former channels (reference and restored ecosystem) clearly demonstrated human impacts on aquatic ecosystems. A channel exhibiting rapid terrestrialization and eutrophication processes after completion of a hydroelectric scheme construction was restored. In keeping with the hypothesis, the increase in groundwater supply led the restored ecosystem to return to a less advanced and self-sustainable successional stage, whereas vegetation monitoring in the reference channel did not show significant changes over this 17-year of period, supporting long-term studies to determine the effects of restoration on the biota.     

Ecological restoration of rich fens in Europe and North America: from trial and error to an evidence‐based approach

Fens represent a large array of ecosystem services, including the highest biodiversity found among wetlands, hydrological services, water purification and carbon sequestration. Land‐use change and drainage has severely damaged or annihilated these services in many parts of North America and Europe; restoration plans are urgently needed at the landscape level. We review the major constraints on the restoration of rich fens and fen water bodies in agricultural areas in Europe and disturbed landscapes in North America: (i) habitat quality problems: drought, eutrophication, acidification, and toxicity, and (ii) recolonization problems: species pools, ecosystem fragmentation and connectivity, genetic variability, and invasive species; and here provide possible solutions. We discuss both positive and negative consequences of restoration measures, and their causes. The restoration of wetland ecosystem functioning and services has, for a long time, been based on a trial‐and‐error approach. By presenting research and practice on the restoration of rich fen ecosystems within agricultural areas, we demonstrate the importance of biogeochemical and ecological knowledge at different spatial scales for the management and restoration of biodiversity, water quality, carbon sequestration and other ecosystem services, especially in a changing climate. We define target processes that enable scientists, nature managers, water managers and policy makers to choose between different measures and to predict restoration prospects for different types of deteriorated fens and their starting conditions.     

Look down—there is a gap—the need to include soil data in Atlantic Forest restoration

Consideration of soil quality indicators is fundamental for understanding and managing ecosystems. Despite the evidence regarding the importance of soil for provision of local and global ecosystem services, such as water regulation and carbon sequestration, soil remains an under‐investigated and undermined aspect of the environment. Here we evaluate to what extent soil indicators are taken into account in restoration. We focused on the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, a highly fragmented biome and a global biodiversity hotspot. We conducted a systematic literature review and we showed that the majority (59%) of the studies on restoration did not consider any soil indicator. Studies that demonstrated the importance of soil indicators most commonly reported soil pH (71%, n = 44), followed by potassium content (66%, n = 41) and phosphorus (64.5%, n = 40), while the least reported indicator was water retention (6.5%, n = 4). Only 40% of the retrieved studies included information about reference sites or project baseline information. We complement our literature review with a case study on restoration in two areas of the Atlantic Forest. We found a relation between soil indicators such as soil organic matter, nitrogen, sodium and sand content, and aboveground indicators, confirming a necessity to include soil screening in restoration. Moreover, we found that prior to restoration none of these soil indicators were analyzed. This study highlights the gap that exists in soil data in restoration in studies on the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. We urge scientists and practitioners to include basic soil analysis to maximize the successful outcomes of restoration.     

Ecological assessments with algae: a review and synthesis

Algae have been used for a century in environmental assessments of water bodies and are now used in countries around the world. This review synthesizes recent advances in the field around a framework for environmental assessment and management that can guide design of assessments, applications of phycology in assessments, and refinements of those applications to better support management decisions. Algae are critical parts of aquatic ecosystems that power food webs and biogeochemical cycling. Algae are also major sources of problems that threaten many ecosystems goods and services when abundances of nuisance and toxic taxa are high. Thus, algae can be used to indicate ecosystem goods and services, which complements how algal indicators are also used to assess levels of contaminants and habitat alterations (stressors). Understanding environmental managers' use of algal ecology, taxonomy, and physiology can guide our research and improve its application. Environmental assessments involve characterizing ecological condition and diagnosing causes and threats to ecosystems goods and services. Recent advances in characterizing condition include site‐specific models that account for natural variability among habitats to better estimate effects of humans. Relationships between algal assemblages and stressors caused by humans help diagnose stressors and establish targets for protection and restoration. Many algal responses to stressors have thresholds that are particularly important for developing stakeholder consensus for stressor management targets. Future research on the regional‐scale resilience of algal assemblages, the ecosystem goods and services they provide, and methods for monitoring and forecasting change will improve water resource management.     

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.     

Ecosystem Service Valuations of Mangrove Ecosystems to Inform Decision Making and Future Valuation Exercises

The valuation of ecosystem services is a complex process as it includes several dimensions (ecological, socio-cultural and economic) and not all of these can be quantified in monetary units. The aim of this paper is to conduct an ecosystem services valuation study for mangroves ecosystems, the results of which can be used to inform governance and management of mangroves. We used an expert-based participatory approach (the Delphi technique) to identify, categorize and rank the various ecosystem services provided by mangrove ecosystems at a global scale. Subsequently we looked for evidence in the existing ecosystem services literature for monetary valuations of these ecosystem service categories throughout the biogeographic distribution of mangroves. We then compared the relative ranking of ecosystem service categories between the monetary valuations and the expert based analysis. The experts identified 16 ecosystem service categories, six of which are not adequately represented in the literature. There was no significant correlation between the expert based valuation (the Delphi technique) and the economic valuation, indicating that the scope of valuation of ecosystem services needs to be broadened. Acknowledging this diversity in different valuation approaches, and developing methodological frameworks that foster the pluralism of values in ecosystem services research, are crucial for maintaining the credibility of ecosystem services valuation. To conclude, we use the findings of our dual approach to valuation to make recommendations on how to assess and manage the ecosystem services provided by mangrove ecosystems.     

Ecosystem services provided by waterbirds

Ecosystem services are ecosystem processes that directly or indirectly benefit human well‐being. There has been much recent literature identifying different services and the communities and species that provide them. This is a vital first step towards management and maintenance of these services. In this review, we specifically address the waterbirds, which play key functional roles in many aquatic ecosystems, including as predators, herbivores and vectors of seeds, invertebrates and nutrients, although these roles have often been overlooked. Waterbirds can maintain the diversity of other organisms, control pests, be effective bioindicators of ecological conditions, and act as sentinels of potential disease outbreaks. They also provide important provisioning (meat, feathers, eggs, etc.) and cultural services to both indigenous and westernized societies. We identify key gaps in the understanding of ecosystem services provided by waterbirds and areas for future research required to clarify their functional role in ecosystems and the services they provide. We consider how the economic value of these services could be calculated, giving some examples. Such valuation will provide powerful arguments for waterbird conservation.     

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.     

生态系统服务功能分类与价值评估探讨

生态系统服务功能及其价值评估研究是当前生态学研究的热点,对于促进生态系统可持续管理具有重要作用。目前,在生态系统服务功能分类及价值评估方面,还没有形成比较系统的理论;在服务价值的评估方面,国内相关研究多数套用现有的一般化计算公式对生态服务功能进行计算,缺少针对性和探索性。总结近年来笔者在这方面的研究得失,并综合前人的研究,将生态系统服务功能进行新的分类,提出“核心”服务功能、“理论”服务价值与“现实”服务价值的概念,并以温州三湿地生态系统服务功能及其价值评估研究作为实例,论证所提出的新概念。生态系统服务功能及价值评估研究的最终目的是为生态系统管理决策者提供信息,因此服务价值评估的意义不在于对每一项服务功能价值的精确估算,甚至不需要计算一个生态系统所有的服务功能价值,而应抓住一个或几个有计算依据的核心服务功能。提出理论服务价值概念的主要目的在于同现实服务价值的比较,量化某服务功能的退化程度,明确后续生态恢复和重建的主要目标,并可在一定程度上作为生态恢复的重要指标。     

A conceptual framework for urban ecological restoration and rehabilitation

Urban greenspace has gained considerable attention during the last decades because of its relevance to wildlife conservation, human welfare, and climate change adaptation. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation worldwide require the formation of new concepts of ecological restoration and rehabilitation aimed at improving ecosystem functions, services, and biodiversity conservation in cities. Although relict sites of natural and semi-natural ecosystems can be found in urban areas, environmental conditions and species composition of most urban ecosystems are highly modified, inducing the development of novel and hybrid ecosystems. A consequence of this ecological novelty is the lack of (semi-) natural reference systems available for defining restoration targets and assessing restoration success in urban areas. This hampers the implementation of ecological restoration in cities. In consideration of these challenges, we present a new conceptual framework that provides guidance and support for urban ecological restoration and rehabilitation by formulating restoration targets for different levels of ecological novelty (i.e., historic, hybrid, and novel ecosystems). To facilitate the restoration and rehabilitation of novel urban ecosystems, we recommend using established species-rich and well-functioning urban ecosystems as reference. Such urban reference systems are likely to be present in many cities. Highlighting their value in comparison to degraded ecosystems can stimulate and guide restoration initiatives. As urban restoration approaches must consider local history and site conditions, as well as citizens’ needs, it may also be advisable to focus the restoration of strongly altered urban ecosystems on selected ecosystem functions, services and/or biodiversity values. Ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation in cities can be either relatively inexpensive or costly, but even expensive measures can pay off when they effectively improve ecosystem services such as climate change mitigation or recreation. Successful re‐shaping and re-thinking of urban greenspace by involving citizens and other stakeholders will help to make our cities more sustainable in the future.     

Opportunities and Challenges for Ecological Restoration within REDD+

The Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism has the potential to provide the developing nations with significant funding for forest restoration activities that contribute to climate change mitigation, sustainable management, and carbon‐stock enhancement. In order to stimulate and inform discussion on the role of ecological restoration within REDD+, we outline opportunities for and challenges to using science‐based restoration projects and programs to meet REDD+ goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and storing carbon in forest ecosystems. Now that the REDD+ mechanism, which is not yet operational, has expanded beyond a sole focus on activities that affect carbon budgets to also include those that enhance ecosystem services and deliver other co‐benefits to biodiversity and communities, forest restoration could play an increasingly important role. However, in many nations, there is a lack of practical tools and guidance for implementing effective restoration projects and programs that will sequester carbon and at the same time improve the integrity and resilience of forest ecosystems. Restoration scientists and practitioners should continue to engage with potential REDD+ donors and recipients to ensure that funding is targeted at projects and programs with ecologically sound designs.