首页> 外文期刊>Ecological Processes >Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century
【24h】

Incorporating novelty and novel ecosystems into restoration planning and practice in the 21st century

机译:将新颖性和新型生态系统纳入21世纪的恢复规划和实践

获取原文
       

摘要

Novelty pervades the biosphere. In some cases, potentially irreversible abiotic and/or biotic changes have led to the crossing of thresholds and thus the formation of “novel ecosystems.” Their widespread emergence (particularly on land) and the presence of continued environmental change challenge a traditional restoration goal of restoring an historical ecosystem. Instead, we argue that restoration could broaden its frame of reference to consider how novel ecosystems might be used to maintain global biodiversity and provide ecosystem services and, in doing so, save potentially wasted efforts in attempting to fulfil traditional goals. Here we explore this contention in more depth by addressing: Are novel ecosystems innovative planning or lowering the bar? We show that novel ecosystems were not innovative planning in their original conception. On the contrary, they were recognized as ecosystems that were recalcitrant to traditional restoration approaches, coupled with an awareness that they had arisen inadvertently through deliberate human activity, either on- or off-site. Their recalcitrance to traditional restoration suggests that alternative goals may exist for these ecosystems using sometimes innovative intervention. This management may include biodiversity conservation or restoration for ecological function. We elucidate the latter aspect with reference to an experiment in the wheatbelt of Western Australia—The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment—the design of which has been informed by ecological theory and the acceptance of novelty as an ecosystem component. Although novel ecosystems do provide opportunities to broaden restoration planning and practice, and ultimately maintain and conserve global biodiversity in this era of environmental change, they necessarily “lower the bar” in restoration if the bar is considered to be the historical ecosystem. However, in these times of flux, such a bar is increasingly untenable. Instead, careful and appropriate interventions are required at local, regional, and global scales. These interventions need to take history into account, use ecological and evolutionary theory to inform their design, and be mindful of valid concerns such as hubris. Careful interventions thus provide an opportunity for broadening restoration’s framework to focus on maintaining global biodiversity and delivering ecosystem services as well as the traditional goals of restoring historical ecosystems.
机译:新奇遍布生物圈。在某些情况下,潜在的不可逆的非生物和/或生物变化导致越过阈值,从而形成了“新型生态系统”。它们的广泛出现(特别是在陆地上)和持续的环境变化的存在,对恢复历史生态系统的传统恢复目标提出了挑战。相反,我们认为,恢复可以扩大其参考框架,以考虑如何使用新型生态系统来维护全球生物多样性并提供生态系统服务,并且这样做可以节省尝试实现传统目标时可能浪费的精力。在这里,我们通过解决以下问题来更深入地探讨这一争论:新型生态系统是否在创新规划或降低门槛?我们表明,新颖的生态系统在其原始概念中并不是创新计划。相反,它们被认为是对传统恢复方法不利的生态系统,并且意识到它们是由于有意在现场或非现场进行的人类活动而无意中产生的。他们对传统恢复的顽固态度表明,有时使用创新干预措施,可能为这些生态系统存在其他目标。这种管理可能包括保护生物多样性或恢复生态功能。我们将参考西澳大利亚州小麦带中的一项实验-里奇菲尔德(Ridgefield)多生态系统服务实验来阐明后一个方面,该实验的设计已获得生态学理论的认可,并接受了新颖性作为生态系统的组成部分。尽管新颖的生态系统确实提供了扩展恢复计划和实践的机会,并最终在这个环境变化时代维护和保护了全球生物多样性,但如果将这种标准视为历史生态系统,它们必然会“降低标准”。然而,在这些通量的时代,这种条变得越来越站不住脚。相反,需要在本地,区域和全球范围内进行谨慎且适当的干预。这些干预措施需要考虑历史,使用生态学和进化论来指导其设计,并注意诸如自大之类的有效顾虑。因此,谨慎的干预措施为扩大恢复框架提供了机会,使之侧重于维护全球生物多样性和提供生态系统服务以及恢复历史生态系统的传统目标。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号