Explore the vast range of titles available.

Tribal communities in the Pacific Northwest of the United States of America (USA) have long-standing relationships to ancestral lands now managed by federal land management agencies. In recent decades, federal and state governments have increasingly recognized tribal rights to resources on public lands and to participate in their management. In support of a new planning initiative to promote sustainable land management, we reviewed scientific publications to examine relationships between tribal social-ecological systems and public lands in the region. We identified key ecocultural resources, impacts to those resources, and associated forest ecosystems, and strategies that have been piloted to redress those impacts. We found that many factors stemming from colonization by Euro-Americans have engendered social-ecological traps that have inhibited tribes from continuing traditional land stewardship activities that supported their well-being and maintained ecological integrity. These long-standing factors include legal and political constraints on tribal access and management; declining quality and abundance of forest resources due to inhibition of both natural disturbance and indigenous tending regimes; competition with nontribal users; species extirpations and introductions of invasive species; and erosion of tribal traditional ecological knowledge and relationships that are important for revitalizing resource use. As a consequence, both supply and demand for these forest resources have been reduced, as have the resilience and diversity of these ecosystems. Simply permitting resource harvest by tribal members does not sufficiently address the underlying constraints in ways that will promote tribal well-being. Escaping these traps will require addressing a gamut of ecological and social constraints through cooperative restoration efforts between land management agencies and tribes, several of which we highlight as examples. Because tribally focused restoration strategies generally align with broader strategies suggested to restore national forests in the region, they can foster both tribal well-being and ecological sustainability.

The degradation of the world's coral reefs has aroused growing interest in ecological restoration as a countermeasure, which is widely criticized, mainly due to cost-effectiveness concerns. Here, we propose the restocking of herbivorous fish as a restoration tool, based on supply of young fish to degraded reefs, with the aims of: 1. Buildup of a critical fish biomass for basic ecosystem functions (e.g. grazing); 2. Increased fishing yields, which can sustain coastal communities, and consequently; 3. Reduced reef destruction and better local compliance with fishery policies. We present the rationale of the restocking approach as both a reef restoration and a fishery management tool, and examine its pros and cons. This approach requires, however, further social-ecological and aquaculture research in order to support the critical stages of its implementation.

Conservation and environmental management are principal countermeasures to the degradation of marine ecosystems and their services. However, in many cases, current practices are insufficient to reverse ecosystem declines. We suggest that restoration ecology, the science underlying the concepts and tools needed to restore ecosystems, must be recognized as an integral element for marine conservation and environmental management. Marine restoration ecology is a young scientific discipline, often with gaps between its application and the supporting science. Bridging these gaps is essential to using restoration as an effective management tool and reversing the decline of marine ecosystems and their services. Ecological restoration should address objectives that include improved ecosystem services, and it therefore should encompass social–ecological elements rather than focusing solely on ecological parameters. We recommend using existing management frameworks to identify clear restoration targets, to apply quantitative tools for assessment, and to make the re-establishment of ecosystem services a criterion for success.

Coastal marine ecosystems provide critical goods and services to humanity but many are experiencing rapid degradation. The need for effective restoration tools capable of promoting recovery of coastal ecosystems and remediating their valued services has never been greater. We identify four major challenges for the future development and implementation of coastal marine ecosystem restoration (MER): (1) Development of more effective, scalable restoration tools, (2) adaptation of restoration tools to cope with climate change and global stressors, (3) integration of social and ecological restoration priorities, and (4) promotion of the perception and use of coastal MER as a scientifically-credible management approach. Tackling these challenges should improve restoration success rates, heighten their recognition, and accelerate investment in and promotion of coastal MER. Here, to reverse the currently accelerating decline of marine ecosystems, we discuss potential directions for meeting these challenges by applying coastal MER tools that are science-based and actionable. For coastal restoration to have a global impact, it must incorporate social science, technological and conceptual advances, and plan for future climates.

Degradation exacerbates food and water insecurity, economic hardship, biodiversity loss, and the devastating effects of climate change. Given that ecosystem restoration is a global challenge, the United Nations declared 2021 to 2030 as the Decade of Ecosystem Restoration. Many ecological restoration projects overlook social perspectives, resulting in unsuccessful restoration outcomes within Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR). Against this background, we review social-ecological restoration frameworks and summarize seven key balanced drivers that could help enhance the adoption of ecosystem restoration in a dynamic social context. The drivers relate to including the most affected communities, privileging local knowledge and practices, empowering local representatives and opinion leaders, ensuring social and environmental justice and equity, targeting deep leverage points, aligning restoration practices with local needs and aspirations, and connecting neighboring communities. We argue that ecosystem restoration will be most effective if approached from a social-ecological perspective. In developing countries, establishing social groups that share savings and credit structures within neighboring households can be a sustainable approach. With increasing global initiatives, taking a social-ecological perspective on ecosystem restoration as a social-ecological restoration approach offers new opportunities for both research and practice. Social-ecological restoration is a key strategy that can support the achievement of sustainable development goals (SDGs) and deliver net positive gains environmentally, socially, and economically. Further studies should focus on two new cross-cutting aspects: the ecological and social effects of restoration at small to large scales and social ecological restoration and peace building within a restorative landscape.

The current ‘UN Decade on Restoration’ calls for collaboration between scientists and practitioners to formulate guidelines for ecosystem restoration, within which transdisciplinary approaches are imperative to rethink the diverse values associated with nature, paving the way for sustainable ecosystem restoration. In our study, conducted within a real‐world laboratory for grassland restoration in Germany, we employed an individual and a deliberative Q method approach coupled with participant observation and discourse analysis. We aimed to investigate how values attributed to grasslands that were elicited individually can shift through group deliberation. Our findings revealed significant differences between the expression of grasslands values from an individual perspective compared to a deliberative group setting. Compared to individual values, deliberative perspectives exhibited less diversity and encompassed fewer values. Specifically, the proportion of relational values decreased significantly in importance during the deliberation process, while the expression of intrinsic and instrumental values increased. Except for stewardship, care and aesthetic values, relational values were generally lower in the deliberative compared to individual Q‐method Exercise. Values expressed explicitly in the individual Q‐method exercise, such as sense of place, therapeutic value, cultural identity, relaxation values, notably declined in the deliberative group setting. The shift in value expressions was strongly associated with a sense of trust in the institutional setting, participants' perception of a group balanced process, participants' self‐confidence and awareness of the shift in value expressions. Moreover, we argue that the shift in value expressions might result from the legacies of mainstream narratives in restoration and conservation, such as the importance of ‘nature for itself’ (intrinsic values) and ‘nature for people’ (instrumental values). Our study underscores the importance of considering both individual and deliberation levels in participatory ecosystem restoration processes, as values can be more dynamic than previously considered. Transdisciplinary and participatory approaches, such as those employed in this study, can provide valuable insights to better inform and legitimise associated restoration practices. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. La actual «Década de las Naciones Unidas para la Restauración» exige la colaboración entre científicos y profesionales para formular directrices para la restauración de los ecosistemas, en las que los enfoques transdisciplinarios son imprescindibles para replantearse los diversos valores asociados a la naturaleza, allanando el camino para la restauración sostenible de los ecosistemas. En nuestro estudio, realizado en un laboratorio real para la restauración de pastizales en Alemania, empleamos un método Q individual y deliberativo, junto con observación de participantes y análisis de discurso. Nuestro objetivo era investigar cómo los valores atribuidos a los pastos y praderas que se obtienen individualmente pueden cambiar a través de la deliberación en grupo. Nuestros hallazgos revelaron diferencias significativas entre la expresión de los valores de los pastos y praderas desde una perspectiva individual en comparación con un entorno deliberativo grupal. En comparación con los valores individuales, las perspectivas deliberativas mostraron menos diversidad y abarcaron menos valores. Concretamente, la proporción de valores relacionales disminuyó significativamente en importancia durante el proceso de deliberación, mientras que la expresión de valores intrínsecos e instrumentales aumentó. Excepto los valores de cuidado por la naturaleza y estéticos, los valores relacionales obtuvieron en general menos importancia en el ejercicio deliberativo en comparación con el ejercicio individual. Los valores expresados explícitamente en el ejercicio individual del método Q, como el sentido de pertenencia, el valor terapéutico, la identidad cultural y los valores de relajación, disminuyeron notablemente en el contexto del grupo deliberativo con método Q. El cambio en las expresiones de valores se asoció fuertemente con un sentido de confianza en el entorno institucional, la percepción de los participantes de un proceso equilibrado en el grupo, la confianza en sí mismos de los participantes y la conciencia del cambio en las expresiones de valor. Además, argumentamos que el cambio en las expresiones de valores podría ser el resultado del legado de las narrativas dominantes en la restauración y la conservación, relacionadas con la importancia de «la naturaleza por sí misma» (valores intrínsecos) y «la naturaleza para las personas» (valores instrumentales). Nuestro estudio subraya la importancia de tener en cuenta tanto el nivel individual como el deliberativo en los procesos participativos de restauración de ecosistemas, ya que los valores pueden ser más dinámicos de lo que se consideraba anteriormente. Los enfoques transdisciplinarios y participativos, como los empleados en este estudio, pueden proporcionar información valiosa para mejorar y legitimar las prácticas de restauración asociadas. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Over the past two decades dam removal has emerged as a viable tool for ecological restoration of riverine landscapes, partially as a result of changing societal values toward the ecological trade-offs associated with dammed rivers. Dam condition, purpose and ownership are key factors that determine the legal and political processes that lead to dam removal in most cases. In the United States removals of small, privately owned dams are most common, although the most high-profile removals are associated with large hydropower dams subject to a federal relicensing process. Scholars cite this legal process for periodic re-evaluation of hydroelectric dams as an important window of opportunity for institutionalising adaptive environmental governance toward the renegotiation of social and ecological values associated with rivers. It is clear, however, that this policy process alone is not sufficient to facilitate large-scale dam removal and larger transitions toward adaptive governance. In this paper we review several high-profile cases of dam relicensing and removal in the Pacific Northwest region of the US to better understand the combination of factors that couple with dam relicensing policy to present a window of opportunity for adaptive governance and social-ecological restoration. Examples from the Pacific Northwest reveal patterns suggesting the critical role of endangered species, Native American tribes, local politics and economics in determining the future of large hydropower dams in the United States.

Ecosystem restoration projects (ERPs) facilitate land degradation neutrality (LDN). However, the response dynamics and interactions of sectors within ecosystem-agriculture-economy nexus (EAEN) have not been sufficiently explored, which constrains the coordinated efficacy of LDN efforts. To bridge the knowledge gaps, the present study selected a land restoration hotspot in southeastern China as a case to investigate the simultaneous responses of the EAEN sectors to ERPs from a novel social-ecological system (SES)–based LDN perspective. Various biophysical models and Manne-Kendall trend test as well as multi-source spatially explicit data and socioeconomic statistics were applied to quantify the co-evolution of natural and socioeconomic indicators. ERPs converting cropland to woodland and grassland promoted vegetation restoration, reduced soil erosion, and enhanced carbon sequestration. However, cropland loss initially resulted in a decline in grain productivity. Policy adjustments and improvements in ecosystem restoration efforts and agricultural production conditions improved food security and increased agricultural production capacity. Effective policymaking and favorable resident engagement accelerated the transformation from a grain-production-based agriculture to diversified industries and, by extension, economic output, income, and population. The success of socioeconomic development under the SES framework for LDN demonstrated that this strategy could achieve the desired environmental, agricultural, and economic targets. EAEN under the SES conceptual framework provides an inclusive, comprehensive LDN perspective and improves ERP efficacy. The findings of the present work might be applicable to other land restoration areas challenged by the complex interactions among multidimensional factors. Comparably successful implementation of these ERPs could be realized if individual environmental and socioeconomic conditions are thoroughly considered during the formulation of coordinated development policies.

Resource management boundaries seldom align with environmental systems, which can lead to social and ecological problems. Mapping and analyzing how resource management organizations in different areas collaborate can provide vital information to help overcome such misalignment. Few quantitative approaches exist, however, to analyze social collaborations alongside environmental patterns, especially among local and regional organizations (i.e., in multilevel governance settings). This paper develops and applies such an approach using social–ecological network analysis (SENA), which considers relationships among and between social and ecological units. The framework and methods are shown using an estuary restoration case from Puget Sound, United States. Collaboration patterns and quality are analyzed among local and regional organizations working in hydrologically connected areas. These patterns are correlated with restoration practitioners’ assessments of the productivity of their collaborations to inform network theories for natural resource governance. The SENA is also combined with existing ecological data to jointly consider social and ecological restoration concerns. Results show potentially problematic areas in nearshore environments, where collaboration networks measured by density (percentage of possible network connections) and productivity are weakest. Many areas also have high centralization (a few nodes hold the network together), making network cohesion dependent on key organizations. Although centralization and productivity are inversely related, no clear relationship between density and productivity is observed. This research can help practitioners to identify where governance capacity needs strengthening and jointly consider social and ecological concerns. It advances SENA by developing a multilevel approach to assess social–ecological (or social–environmental) misalignments, also known as scale mismatches.