Restoration ecology is the scientific study supporting the practice of ecological restoration, which is the practice of renewing and restoring degraded, damaged, or destroyed ecosystems and habitats in the environment by active human intervention and action.
Natural ecosystems provide ecosystem services in the form of resources such as food, fuel, and timber; the purification of air and water; the detoxification and decomposition of wastes; the regulation of climate; the regeneration of soil fertility; and the pollination of crops. These ecosystem processes have been estimated to be worth trillions of dollars annually. There is consensus in the scientific community that the current environmental degradation and destruction of many of the Earth's biota is taking place on a "catastrophically short timescale". Scientists estimate that the current species extinction rate, or the rate of the Holocene extinction, is 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the normal, background rate. Habitat loss is the leading cause of both species extinctions and ecosystem service decline. Two methods have been identified to slow the rate of species extinction and ecosystem service decline, they are the conservation
of currently viable habitat, and the restoration of degraded habitat.
The commercial applications of ecological restoration have increased
exponentially in recent years. The United Nations General Assembly (01.03.2019) declared 2021 – 2030 the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration
Definition
Restoration
ecology is the academic study of the process, whereas ecological
restoration is the actual project or process by restoration
practitioners. The Society for Ecological Restoration
defines "ecological restoration" as an "intentional activity that
initiates or accelerates the recovery of an ecosystem with respect to
its health, integrity and sustainability". Ecological restoration includes a wide scope of projects including erosion control, reforestation, removal of non-native species and weeds, revegetation of disturbed areas, daylighting streams, reintroduction of native species (preferably native species that have local adaptation), and habitat and range improvement for targeted species.
E. O. Wilson,
a biologist, states, "Here is the means to end the great extinction
spasm. The next century will, I believe, be the era of restoration in
ecology."
History
Restoration ecology emerged as a separate field in ecology in the late twentieth century. The term was coined by John Aber and William Jordan III when they were at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. However, indigenous peoples,
land managers, stewards, and laypeople have been practicing ecological
restoration or ecological management for thousands of years.
Considered the birthplace of modern ecological restoration, the first tallgrass prairie restoration was the 1936 Curtis Prairie at the University of Wisconsin–Madison Arboretum. Civilian Conservation Corps
workers replanted nearby prairie species onto a former horse pasture,
overseen by university faculty including renowned ecologist Aldo Leopold, botanist Theodore Sperry, mycologist Henry C. Greene, and plant ecologist John T. Curtis.
Curtis and his graduate students surveyed the whole of Wisconsin,
documenting native species communities and creating the first species
lists for tallgrass restorations. Existing prairie remnants, such as locations within pioneer cemeteries
and railroad rights-of-way, were located and inventoried by Curtis and
his team. The UW Arboretum was the center of tallgrass prairie research
through the first half of the 20th century, with the development of the
nearby Greene Prairie, Aldo Leopold Shack and Farm, and pioneering techniques like prescribed burning.
The latter-half of the 20th century saw the growth of ecological
restoration beyond Wisconsin borders. The 285-hectare Green Oaks
Biological Field Station at Knox College began in 1955 under the guidance of zoologist Paul Shepard. It was followed by the 40-hectare Schulenberg Prairie at the Morton Arboretum, started in 1962 by Ray Schulenberg and Bob Betz. Betz then worked with The Nature Conservancy to establish the 260-hectare Fermi National Laboratory tallgrass prairie in 1974.
These major tallgrass restoration projects marked the growth of
ecological restoration from isolated studies to widespread practice.
Australia has also been the site of historically significant
ecological restoration projects. In 1935 Ambrose Crawford commenced
restoring a degraded four acres (1.7 hectares) patch of the Big Scrub
(Lowland Tropical Rainforest) at Lumley Park reserve, Alstonville, in
northern New South Wales. Clearing of weeds and planting of suitable
indigenous flora species were his main restoration techniques. The
restored rainforest reserve still exists today and is home to threatened
plant and animal species. In 1936 Albert Morris
and his restoration colleagues initiated the Broken Hill regeneration
area project, which involved the natural regeneration of indigenous
flora on a severely degraded site of hundreds of hectares in arid
western New South Wales. Completed in 1958, the successful project still
maintains ecological function today as the Broken Hill Regeneration
Area.
Theoretical foundations
Restoration ecology draws on a wide range of ecological concepts.
Disturbance
Disturbance
is a change in environmental conditions that disrupts the functioning
of an ecosystem. Disturbance can occur at a variety of spatial and
temporal scales, and is a natural component of many communities. For example, many forest and grassland restorations implement fire as a natural disturbance regime.
However the severity and scope of anthropogenic impact has grown in the
last few centuries. Differentiating between human-caused and naturally
occurring disturbances is important if we are to understand how to
restore natural processes and minimize anthropogenic impacts on the ecosystems.
Succession
Ecological succession
is the process by which a community changes over time, especially
following a disturbance. In many instances, an ecosystem will change
from a simple level of organization with a few dominant pioneer species
to an increasingly complex community with many interdependent species.
Restoration often consists of initiating, assisting, or accelerating
ecological successional processes, depending on the severity of the
disturbance. Following mild to moderate natural and anthropogenic
disturbances, restoration in these systems involves hastening natural
successional trajectories through careful management. However, in a
system that has experienced a more severe disturbance (such as in urban
ecosystems), restoration may require intensive efforts to recreate
environmental conditions that favor natural successional processes.
Fragmentation
Habitat fragmentation
describes spatial discontinuities in a biological system, where
ecosystems are broken up into smaller parts through land use changes
(e.g. agriculture)
and natural disturbance. This both reduces the size of the populations
and increases the degree of isolation. These smaller and isolated
populations are more vulnerable to extinction. Fragmenting ecosystems
decreases quality of the habitat. The edge of a fragment
has a different range of environmental conditions and therefore
supports different species than the interior. Restorative projects can
increase the effective size of a population by adding suitable habitat
and decrease isolation by creating habitat corridors that link isolated fragments. Reversing the effects of fragmentation is an important component of restoration ecology.
Ecosystem function
Ecosystem function describes the most basic and essential foundational processes of any natural systems, including nutrient cycles and energy fluxes.
An understanding of the complexity of these ecosystem functions is
necessary to address any ecological processes that may be degraded.
Ecosystem functions are emergent properties of the system as a whole, thus monitoring and management
are crucial for the long-term stability of ecosystems. A fully
functional ecosystem that is completely self-perpetuating is the
ultimate goal of restorative efforts. We must understand what ecosystem
properties influence others to restore desired functions and reach this
goal.
Community assembly
Community assembly "is a framework that can unify virtually all of (community) ecology under a single conceptual umbrella".
Community assembly theory attempts to explain the existence of
environmentally similar sites with differing assemblages of species. It
assumes that species have similar niche requirements, so that community formation is a product of random fluctuations from a common species pool.
Essentially, if all species are fairly ecologically equivalent, then
random variation in colonization, and migration and extinction rates
between species, drive differences in species composition between sites
with comparable environmental conditions.
Population genetics
Genetic diversity has shown to be as important as species diversity for restoring ecosystem processes.
Hence ecological restorations are increasingly factoring genetic
processes into management practices. Population genetic processes that
are important to consider in restored populations include founder effects, inbreeding depression, outbreeding depression, genetic drift, and gene flow. Such processes can predict whether or not a species successfully establishes at a restoration site.
Applications
Soil heterogeneity effects on community heterogeneity
Spatial
heterogeneity of resources can influence plant community composition,
diversity, and assembly trajectory. Baer et al. (2005) manipulated soil resource heterogeneity in a tallgrass prairie restoration project. They found increasing resource heterogeneity, which on its own was insufficient to insure species diversity
in situations where one species may dominate across the range of
resource levels. Their findings were consistent with the theory
regarding the role of ecological filters on community assembly. The
establishment of a single species, best adapted to the physical and biological conditions can play an inordinately important role in determining the community structure.
Invasion and restoration
Restoration
is used as a tool for reducing the spread of invasive plant species in a
number of ways. The first method views restoration primarily as a means
to reduce the presence of invasive species and limit their spread. As
this approach emphasizes control of invaders, the restoration techniques
can differ from typical restoration projects. The goal of such projects is not necessarily to restore an entire ecosystem or habitat. These projects frequently use lower diversity mixes of aggressive native species seeded at high density. They are not always actively managed following seeding.
The target areas for this type of restoration are those which are
heavily dominated by invasive species. The goals are to first remove the
species and then in so doing, reduce the number of invasive seeds being
spread to surrounding areas. An example of this is through use of
biological control agents (such as herbivorous insects) which suppress
invasive weed species while restoration practitioners concurrently seed
in native plant species that take advantage of the freed resources.
These approaches have been shown to be effective in reducing weeds,
although it is not always a sustainable solution long term without
additional weed control, such as mowing, or re-seeding.
Restoration projects are also used as a way to better understand
what makes an ecological community resistant to invasion. As restoration
projects have a broad range of implementation strategies and methods
used to control invasive species, they can be used by ecologists to test
theories about invasion.
Restoration projects have been used to understand how the diversity of
the species introduced in the restoration affects invasion. We know that
generally higher diversity prairies have lower levels of invasion. Incorporation of functional ecology has shown that more functionally diverse restorations have lower levels of invasion.
Furthermore, studies have shown that using native species functionally
similar to invasive species are better able to compete with invasive
species.
Restoration ecologists have also used the variety of strategies
employed at different restoration sites to better understand the most
successful management techniques to control invasion.
Successional trajectories
Progress
along a desired successional pathway may be difficult if multiple
stable states exist. Looking over 40 years of wetland restoration data,
Klötzli and Gootjans (2001) argue that unexpected and undesired
vegetation assemblies "may indicate that environmental conditions are
not suitable for target communities".
Succession may move in unpredicted directions, but constricting
environmental conditions within a narrow range may rein in the possible
successional trajectories and increase the likelihood of a desired
outcome.
Sourcing material for restoration
For
most restoration projects it is generally recommend to source material
from local populations, to increase chance of restoration success and
minimize the effects of maladaptation. However the definition of local can vary based on species. habitat and region.
US Forest Service recently developed provisional seed zones based on a
combination of minimum winter temperature zones, aridity, and the Level
III ecoregions.
Rather than putting strict distance recommendations, other guidelines
recommend sourcing seeds to match similar environmental conditions. For
example, sourcing for Castilleja levisecta
found that farther source populations that matched similar
environmental variables were better suited for the restoration project
than closer source populations.
Principles
Rationale
There are many reasons to restore ecosystems. Some include:
- Restoring natural capital such as drinkable water or wildlife populations
- Helping human communities and the ecosystems upon which they depend adapt to the impacts of climate change (through ecosystem-based adaptation)
- Mitigating climate change (e.g. through carbon sequestration)
- Helping threatened or endangered species
- Aesthetic reasons
- Moral reasons: human intervention has unnaturally destroyed many habitats, and there exists an innate obligation to restore these destroyed habitats
- Regulated use/harvest, particularly for subsistence
- Cultural relevance of native ecosystems to Native people
- Environmental health of nearby populations
There exist considerable differences of opinion in how to set
restoration goals and how to define their success among conservation
groups. Some urge active restoration (e.g. eradicating invasive animals
to allow the native ones to survive) and others who believe that
protected areas should have the bare minimum of human interference, such
as rewilding.
Ecosystem restoration has generated controversy. Skeptics doubt that
the benefits justify the economic investment or who point to failed
restoration projects and question the feasibility of restoration
altogether. It can be difficult to set restoration goals, in part
because, as Anthony Bradshaw claims, "ecosystems are not static, but in a
state of dynamic equilibrium…. [with restoration] we aim [for a] moving
target."
Some
conservationists argue that, though an ecosystem may not be returned to
its original state, the functions of the ecosystem (especially ones
that provide services to us) may be more valuable in its current
configuration (Bradshaw 1987). This is especially true in cases where
the ecosystem services are central to the physical and cultural survival
of human populations, as is the case with many Native groups in the
United States and other communities around the world who subsist using
ecological services and environmental resources. One reason to consider ecosystem restoration is to mitigate climate change through activities such as afforestation. Afforestation involves replanting forests, which remove carbon dioxide from the air. Carbon dioxide is a leading cause of global warming
(Speth, 2005) and capturing it would help alleviate climate change.
Another example of a common driver of restoration projects in the United
States is the legal framework of the Clean Water Act, which often
requires mitigation for damage inflicted on aquatic systems by
development or other activities.
Challenges
Some
view ecosystem restoration as impractical, partially because
restorations often fall short of their goals. Hilderbrand et al. point
out that many times uncertainty (about ecosystem functions, species
relationships, and such) is not addressed, and that the time-scales set
out for 'complete' restoration are unreasonably short, while other
critical markers for full-scale restoration are either ignored or
abridged due to feasibility concerns.
In other instances an ecosystem may be so degraded that abandonment
(allowing a severely degraded ecosystem to recover on its own) may be
the wisest option. Local communities sometimes object to restorations that include the introduction of large predators or plants that require disturbance regimes such as regular fires, citing threat to human habitation in the area. High economic costs can also be perceived as a negative impact of the restoration process.
Public opinion is very important in the feasibility of a
restoration; if the public believes that the costs of restoration
outweigh the benefits they will not support it.
Many failures have occurred in past restoration projects, many
times because clear goals were not set out as the aim of the
restoration, or an incomplete understanding of the underlying ecological
framework lead to insufficient measures. This may be because, as Peter
Alpert says, "people may not [always] know how to manage natural systems
effectively". Furthermore, many assumptions are made about myths of restoration such as carbon copy, where a restoration plan, which worked in one area, is applied to another with the same results expected, but not realized.
Science-practice gap
One
of the struggles for both fields is a divide between restoration
ecology and ecological restoration in practice. Many restoration
practitioners as well as scientists feel that science is not being
adequately incorporated into ecological restoration projects.
In a 2009 survey of practitioners and scientists, the "science-practice
gap" was listed as the second most commonly cited reason limiting the
growth of both science and practice of restoration.
There are a variety of theories about the cause of this gap.
However, it has been well established that one of the main issues is
that the questions studied by restoration ecologists are frequently not
found useful or easily applicable by land managers.
For instance, many publications in restoration ecology characterize the
scope of a problem in depth, without providing concrete solutions.
Additionally many restoration ecology studies are carried out under
controlled conditions and frequently at scales much smaller than actual
restorations.
Whether or not these patterns hold true in an applied context is often
unknown. There is evidence that these small-scale experiments inflate
type II error rates and differ from ecological patterns in actual
restorations.
There is further complication in that restoration ecologists who
want to collect large-scale data on restoration projects can face
enormous hurdles in obtaining the data. Managers vary in how much data
they collect, and how many records they keep. Some agencies keep only a
handful of physical copies of data that make it difficult for the
researcher to access. Many restoration projects are limited by time and money, so data collection and record keeping are not always feasible.
However, this limits the ability of scientists to analyze restoration
projects and give recommendations based on empirical data.
Contrasting restoration ecology and conservation biology
Restoration ecology may be viewed as a sub-discipline of conservation biology, the scientific study of how to protect and restore biodiversity. Ecological restoration is then a part of the resulting conservation movement.
Both restoration ecologists and conservation biologists agree
that protecting and restoring habitat is important for protecting
biodiversity. However, conservation biology is primarily rooted in population biology. Because of that, it is generally organized at the population genetic level and assesses specific species populations (i.e. endangered species). Restoration ecology is organized at the community level, which focuses on broader groups within ecosystems.
In addition, conservation biology often concentrates on vertebrate animals because of their salience and popularity, whereas restoration ecology concentrates on plants.
Restoration ecology focuses on plants because restoration projects
typically begin by establishing plant communities. Ecological
restoration, despite being focused on plants, may also have "poster
species" for individual ecosystems and restoration projects. For example, the Monarch butterfly is a poster species for conserving and restoring milkweed
plant habitat, because Monarch butterflies require milkweed plants to
reproduce. Finally, restoration ecology has a stronger focus on soils, soil structure, fungi, and microorganisms because soils provide the foundation of functional terrestrial ecosystems.
Natural Capital Committee's recommendation for a 25-year plan
The UK Natural Capital Committee
(NCC) made a recommendation in its second State of Natural Capital
report published in March 2014 that in order to meet the Government's
goal of being the first generation to leave the environment in a better
state than it was inherited, a long-term 25-year plan was needed to
maintain and improve England's natural capital. The UK Government has
not yet responded to this recommendation.
The Secretary of State for the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Owen Paterson,
described his ambition for the natural environment and how the work of
the Committee fits into this at an NCC event in November 2012: "I do
not, however, just want to maintain our natural assets; I want to
improve them. I want us to derive the greatest possible benefit from
them, while ensuring that they are available for generations to come.
This is what the NCC's innovative work is geared towards".