08.00hs - 08.45hs - Can we Menage for Resilience
-
Upload
slides-mci -
Category
Science
-
view
551 -
download
1
Transcript of 08.00hs - 08.45hs - Can we Menage for Resilience
The rise of restoration ecology: a relatively new science, a major global role
Katharine SudingUniversity of Colorado USA
Bonn Challenge: restore 150 million hectares worldwide by 2020
New York Declaration: 350m hectares under restoration by 2030
The 20 x 20 initiative: to bring 20 million hectares of degraded land into restoration by 2020.
“This is a challenge that we face with determination and effort, and we are certain that our efforts will bring effective results in order for us to achieve our international goals”
-- Minister Sarney Filho, Brazil
“With more countries building synergies between global restoration commitments and initiatives,
we can capture these win-win opportunities: wins for biodiversity, wins for carbon, wins for
people, wins for the economy, wins for women, and wins for our planet.”
--Inger Andersen, Director General IUCN
This is exciting… …and scary
0
20
0
40
0
60
0
80
0
100
0
120
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Publications/year
Year
1987 Bradshaw: “an acid test” of ecological understanding
Ecology, keyword “restoration” ISI, Web of Knowledge
Where are we in the science of restoration? Can we deliver?
Eco
syst
em F
un
ctio
n
Ecosystem Structure
0
20
0
40
0
60
0
80
0
100
0
120
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Publications/year
Year
2009 Special issue, SCIENCE:The rise of restoration ecology
Where are we in the science of restoration? Can we deliver?
Ecology, keyword “restoration” ISI, Web of Knowledge
1987 Bradshaw: “an acid test” of ecological understanding
“Our planet’s future may depend on the
maturation of the young discipline of
ecological restoration”
--SCIENCE editors, 2009
0
20
0
40
0
60
0
80
0
100
0
120
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Publications/year
Year
Where are we in the science of restoration? Can we deliver?
Ecology, keyword “restoration” ISI, Web of Knowledge
2017 SER meeting, Brazil
2009 Special issue, SCIENCE:The rise of restoration ecology
1987 Bradshaw: “an acid test” of ecological understanding
A systematic evaluation of restoration:
• 89 Studies• Range of
ecosystem types• Global coverage• Cited over 1,000
times
Restoration increased biodiversity by 44%, but values remained lower than reference conditions
-14%
vs. degraded
vs. reference
+44%
Rey Benayas et al 2009
Restoration increased biodiversity by 44%, but values remained lower than reference conditions
-14%
vs. degraded
vs. reference
+44%
What do we mean by restoring biodiversity?
How risky is our enterprise?
How do we benchmark our success?
How does science guidepolicy and expectations?
1
2
3
4
What do we mean by restoring biodiversity?
1
Time since disturbance Spec
ies
div
ersi
ty
+44% -14%How should restoration affect diversity?
degraded restored reference
We often assume a increasing trajectory
Time since disturbance Spec
ies
div
ersi
ty
Biodiversity could change in many ways in a “successful” restoration
+44% -14%
Classic successional
work.
restoreddegraded reference
+44%
degraded restored reference
-14%
When we say diversity, do we really mean diversity?
Plant growth and survivalTotal abundance Behavior (% vigilance)Microbial biomass …
OTHER MEASURES INCLUDED IN BIODIVERSITY RESPONSE
Species richnessEvennessShannon-Weiner
BIODIVERSITY INDICES
49%
N=8
9 s
tud
ies
Rey Benayas et al 2009
51%
One suggestion: Compositional similarity
Laughlin et al 2017
• Multivariate technique• Based on the same
datasets as diversity calculations
One suggestion: Compositional similarity
Laughlin et al 2017
degraded
restoration
reference
• Rey Benayas et al (2009): 0/89 studies
• More recent metanalysis(Crouzeilleset al 2016): 13/221
• Multivariate technique• Based on the same
datasets as diversity calculations
How risky is our enterprise?
2
Restoration increased biodiversity by 44% but values remained lower than reference conditions
-14%
vs. degraded
vs. reference
+44%
Rey Benayas et al 2009
Restoration is a bit of a gamble
-14%
vs. degraded
vs. reference
+44%
Rey Benayas et al 2009
-70% +1000%
-77% +27%
Why such high variable outcomes?A. Our Metrics: Outcomes would be less variable if we would
standardized metrics.
B. Our techniques: We are failing too often, need to improve technological aspects of our practice [might indicate success in innovation too]
C. Our context: There are some places where restoration is far more challenging than others [we should focus on where it is easiest]
D. Our ecology: Ecological recovery is expected to be stochastic, with transient dynamics and priority effects [don’t expect otherwise]
Laughlin et al 2017
Ecological processes with more complex controls should show greater variability
Mo
re p
red
icta
ble
More variable
BIOMASS
RICHNESS
COMPOSITION
SiteYear
Despite identical:site preparationseed species mixesplanting techniques planting timing
Stuble et al 2017Species composition
Ecological dynamics are expected to be stochastic in disturbed systems as they assemble
How do we benchmark our success?
3
Degraded
Restoration
Reference
89ST
UD
IES
(Rey
Ben
ayas
et a
l 20
09
)
Degraded
Restoration
Reference
89ST
UD
IES
(Rey
Ben
ayas
et a
l 20
09
)Degraded
Restoration
Reference
269STU
DIES
(Cro
uzeilles
et al 2016
, on
ly Forest)
7%
70%
23%N=62
Why so few studies?Degraded
Restoration
Reference
A. We are doing it this way, but not publishing our work.
B. We should do it this way, and are not listening to advice.
C. There are many ways to benchmark success
D. All of the above.
The crisis of shifting baselines
Changing Climate
The crisis of shifting baselines
Changing Climate + Invasion of non-native species
The crisis of shifting baselines
Changing Climate + Invasion of non-native species+ Changing land use+ Changing disturbance regimes…
Nitrogen inputs
Stip
aR
esto
rati
on
Inva
ded
N
ativ
e
Reference benchmarks at low levels of nitrogen pollution, but we losing these at high N
Nitrogen inputs St
ipa
Res
tora
tio
nIn
vad
ed
Nat
ive
Larios et al 2017
As rates of environmental change increase, different types of benchmarks are needed
Nitrogen inputs
Let recover
Change benchmark
Actively restore
Stip
aR
esto
rati
on
Inva
ded
N
ativ
e
Different functional mix of natives
Different genotypes
Different set of species
One suggestion: triggers and trajectories
Areas with rapid change might be the places to set goals re: process and
innovate
How does our science guide policy and expectations?
4
How do our goals, principles, best practices, standards, reflect our science?
“Since it arose from political negotiations, the precise scientific definition is lacking”
-- L. Montanarella, EU Commission
How do our goals, principles, best practices, standards, reflect our science?
International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration, SER 2016Suding et al, 2015, Science
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Res
po
nse
Rat
ioP
lan
t d
iver
sity
in r
esto
red
/ref
eren
ceFive Star Standard
> 80% diversity of reference
Crouzeilles et al 2016
As a science, are we ready to set such expectations?
Study comparisons, ordered by response ratio
What do we mean by restoring biodiversity?
How do we benchmark our success?
How risky is our enterprise?
How does science guidepolicy and expectations?
1
2
3
4
What do we mean by restoring biodiversity?
How do we benchmark our success?
How risky is our enterprise?
How does science guidepolicy and expectations?
1
2
3
4
Thank you!