Highlights • A maturity model for surface-strip coal mine land rehabilitation planning is presented • The model was applied to mine rehabilitation guidelines and approval reports • Guidelines and approval reports are vulnerable to adequate, but not yet resilient • Legislation may be contributing to immaturity for some aspects of planning • Upfront planning and analysis in dynamic mining environments are discussed

Environmental information is acquired and assessed during the environmental impact assessment process for surface-strip coal mine approval. However, integrating these data and quantifying rehabilitation risk using a holistic multidisciplinary approach is seldom undertaken. We present a rehabilitation risk assessment integrated network (R 2 AIN TM ) framework that can be applied using Bayesian networks (BNs) to integrate and quantify such rehabilitation risks. Our framework has 7 steps, including key integration of rehabilitation risk sources and the quantification of undesired rehabilitation risk events to the final application of mitigation. We demonstrate the framework using a soil compaction BN case study in the Witbank Coalfield, South Africa and the Bowen Basin, Australia. Our approach allows for a probabilistic assessment of rehabilitation risk associated with multidisciplines to be integrated and quantified. Using this method, a site's rehabilitation risk profile can be determined before mining activities commence and the effects of manipulating management actions during later mine phases to reduce risk can be gauged, to aid decision making. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:190-208. C 2019 SETAC

Background and objectives: Land transformation of the Karkloof catchment is described for the period 1944–1999, together with implications for biodiversity integrity and hydrological functioning.Method: Maps of land categories were generated by using aerial photographs and a geographical information system. Property ownership and extent were mapped based on title deed searches and analysis of property grants. Implications of land transformation on biodiversity integrity and hydrological functioning were determined according to an expert approach using the analytic hierarchy process.Results: More than half (54%) of the natural grassland area has been transformed to commercial timber plantations (427% increase) and commercial agricultural cropping (311% increase). Loss of grassland in the Karkloof catchment is considered to be representative of the general trend in the moist eastern portion of the Grassland Biome of South Africa. Both combined forest and woodland and areas of dense alien vegetation increased (26% and 397%, respectively), whereas the area under subsistence cultivation decreased (98%). Land ownership has changed from private individuals to private business entities (31%) and corporate forestry (26%). Biodiversity integrity of the catchment is estimated to have decreased by 326% and hydrological functioning for the support of aquatic biodiversity by 166%.Conclusion: Continued pressure to change patterns of ownership and land use is expected. This is likely to occur within the global context of climate change, population growth and shortages of land and its products. Immense pressure on the land areas, and specifically water services and biodiversity, is likely to occur, with associated environmental impacts.

Overcoming Limitations of Ecology and Engineering in Addressing Society’s Challenges By providing an integrated, systems-approach to problem-solving that incorporates ecological principles in engineering design, ecological engineering addresses, many of the limitations of Ecology and Engineering needed to work out how people and nature can beneficially coexist on planet Earth. Despite its origins in the 1950s, ecological engineering remains a niche discipline, while at the same time, there has never been a greater need to combine the rigour of engineering and science with the systems-approach of ecology for pro-active management of Earth’s biodiversity and environmental life-support systems. Broad consensus on the scope and defining elements of ecological engineering and development of a globally consistent ecological engineering curriculum are key pillars to mainstream recognition of the discipline and practice of ecological engineering. The Importance of Ecological Engineering in Society In this paper, the importance of ecological engineering education is discussed in relation to the perceived need of our society to address global challenges of sustainable development. The perceived needs of industry, practitioners, educators and students for skills in ecological engineering are also discussed. The Importance and Need for Ecological Engineering Education The need for integrative, interdisciplinary education is discussed in relation to the scope of ecology, engineering and the unique role of ecological engineering. Scope for a Universally Recognised Curriculum in Ecological Engineering The scope for a universally recognised curriculum in ecological engineering is presented. The curriculum recognises a set of overarching principles and concepts that unite multiple application areas of ecological engineering practice. The integrative, systems-based approach of ecological engineering distinguishes it from the trend toward narrow specialisation in education. It is argued that the systems approach to conceptualising problems of design incorporating ecological principles is a central tenant of ecological engineering practice. Challenges to Wider Adoption of Ecological Engineering and Opportunities to Increase Adoption Challenges and structural barriers to wider adoption of ecological engineering principles, embedded in our society’s reliance on technological solutions to environmental problems, are discussed along with opportunities to increase adoption of ecological engineering practice. It is suggested that unifying the numerous specialist activity areas and applications of ecological engineering under an umbrella encompassing a set of core principles, approaches, tools and way of thinking is required to distinguish ecological engineering from other engineering disciplines and scale up implementation of the discipline. It is concluded that these challenges can only be realised if ecological engineering moves beyond application by a relatively small band of enthusiastic practitioners, learning by doing, to the education of future cohorts of students who will become tomorrow’s engineers, project managers, procurement officers and decision makers, applying principles informed by a growing body of theory and knowledge generated by an active research community, a need whose time has come, if we are to deploy all tools at our disposal toward addressing the grand challenge of creating a sustainable future.