Restoration at the landscape scale as a means of mitigation and adaptation to climate change

Holle, Betsy Von; Yelenik, Stephanie G.; Gornish, Elise S.

doi:10.1007/s40823-020-00056-7

Cited by 29 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 109 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Landscape-scale restoration of natural systems (e.g. by increasing connectivity of geomorphological processes between different landscape units) benefits not only dynamic geomorphological interests but may alleviate biodiversity loss (von Holle et al 2020). While adaptation and intervention are most commonly expected to be in the nexus between geoheritage and ecosystem services, there may be other overlaps such as a geoheritage-based decision to allow bluffs on an eroding coastline to erode having an adverse effect on archaeological resources on the bluff tops (see Vousdoukas et al 2022 for a World-Heritage context).…”

Section: Ecosystem Services and Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning for Climate Change Impacts on Geoheritage Interests in Protected and Conserved Areas

Gordon

Wignall

Brazier³

et al. 2022

Geoheritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change presents challenges for the management of geoheritage at all scales from individual geosites to whole landscapes, and affecting all areas of the planet. Direct impacts will arise principally through the effects of climate changes on geomorphological processes and vegetation cover, while indirect impacts will result from hard engineering interventions to mitigate risks from natural hazards. We present an indicative framework that sets out key steps to help geoconservation practitioners and managers of all protected and conserved areas (PCAs) with geoheritage interests to assess and manage the impacts of climate change on geoheritage. Strategies for mitigation and adaptation to assist contingency planning and implementation should be supported by site condition monitoring and as far as possible work with nature, but will require to be adaptive in the face of many uncertainties. Our approach is based on assessment of the risk of degradation of geosites and their features and processes arising from the likelihood of climate change affecting them and the predicted severity of impacts. The risk of degradation of a site, feature or process will depend on (i) its geographic location and proximity to geomorphological systems that are likely to respond dynamically to climate changes; (ii) the magnitude, rate and duration of these changes; and (iii) intrinsic factors that include the geological and physical characteristics of the site and its features and processes. Management options range from non-intervention to planned interventions informed by the risk of degradation assessment. However, documentation for posterity may be the only practical option for geoheritage interests close to existential thresholds, such as small mountain glaciers, and sites at risk from sea-level rise and coastal or river erosion. Adaptation strategies for geoheritage in protected and conserved areas should, as far as practicable, align with those for biodiversity and aim to deliver multiple co-benefits for nature and people, although economic, social and political constraints may hinder implementation where wider stakeholder interests are involved. Managers of PCAs will need substantial input from geoconservation experts to carry out the assessments recommended and determine the action required.

show abstract

Section: Ecosystem Services and Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning for Climate Change Impacts on Geoheritage Interests in Protected and Conserved Areas

Gordon

Wignall

Brazier³

et al. 2022

Geoheritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, we devise five directions for future research. Given the overwhelming amount of TME studies on a patch and local scale identified here, research on large-scale restoration 186 will be needed to scale up mountain restoration to a landscape level. Geo-spatial technologies, such as remote sensing could aid with this, for instance through restoration potential and opportunity assessments for entire mountain ecosystems.…”

Section: Future Directions For Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A synthesis and future research directions for tropical mountain ecosystem restoration

Christmann

Menor

2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many tropical mountain ecosystems (TME) are severely disturbed, requiring ecological restoration to recover biodiversity and ecosystem functions. However, the extent of restoration efforts across TMEs is not known due to the lack of syntheses on ecological restoration research. Here, based on a systematic review, we identify geographical and thematic research gaps, compare restoration interventions, and consolidate enabling factors and barriers of restoration success. We find that restoration research outside Latin-America, in non-forested ecosystems, and on socio-ecological questions is scarce. For most restoration interventions success is mixed and generally limited by dispersal and microhabitat conditions. Finally, we propose five directions for future research on tropical mountain restoration in the UN decade of restoration, ranging from scaling up restoration across mountain ranges, investigating restoration in mountain grasslands, to incorporating socio-economic and technological dimensions.

show abstract

“…Restoration needs a continued effort (in terms of time and economic and personal resources) of research and implementation. It is clear that research so far has been very productive, but the results obtained should be more effectively integrated with policy-making, general wetland restoration practices and with a landscape perspective [ 156 ], particularly under future climatic scenarios.…”

Section: Final Remarks and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wetland Restoration with Hydrophytes: A Review

Rodrigo

2021

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration cases with hydrophytes (those which develop all their vital functions inside the water or very close to the water surface, e.g., flowering) are less abundant compared to those using emergent plants. Here, I synthesize the latest knowledge in wetland restoration based on revegetation with hydrophytes and stress common challenges and potential solutions. The review mainly focusses on natural wetlands but also includes information about naturalized constructed wetlands, which nowadays are being used not only to improve water quality but also to increase biodiversity. Available publications, peer-reviewed and any public domain, from the last 20 years, were reviewed. Several countries developed pilot case-studies and field-scale projects with more or less success, the large-scale ones being less frequent. Using floating species is less generalized than submerged species. Sediment transfer is more adequate for temporary wetlands. Hydrophyte revegetation as a restoration tool could be improved by selecting suitable wetlands, increasing focus on species biology and ecology, choosing the suitable propagation and revegetation techniques (seeding, planting). The clear negative factors which prevent the revegetation success (herbivory, microalgae, filamentous green algae, water and sediment composition) have to be considered. Policy-making and wetland restoration practices must more effectively integrate the information already known, particularly under future climatic scenarios.

show abstract

Restoration at the landscape scale as a means of mitigation and adaptation to climate change

Cited by 29 publications

References 109 publications

Planning for Climate Change Impacts on Geoheritage Interests in Protected and Conserved Areas

Planning for Climate Change Impacts on Geoheritage Interests in Protected and Conserved Areas

A synthesis and future research directions for tropical mountain ecosystem restoration

Wetland Restoration with Hydrophytes: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About