Topic_10_Restoring_Ecosystems ENG.pptxgammeejawaral

For ....

1. Ecosystem Restoration Topic 10 © Neil Palmer / IWMI

2. Explain the concept of ecosystem restoration Discuss approaches and barriers to ecosystem restoration Design an ecosystem restoration process that aims to enhance ecosystem services for poverty alleviation Learning outcomes © Colin Crowley / Wikimedia Commons

3. Defining ecosystem restoration

4. The costs and benefits of land degradation and restoration (IPBES 2018) Land degradation negatively impacts 3.2billion people It represents an economic loss of around 10% of annual global gross product Avoiding land degradation and restoring degraded lands has multiple benefits: Increased food and water security Increased employment Increased gender equality Avoidance of conflict and migration On average, the benefits of restoration are 10 times higher than the costs

5. What are ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation? (IPBES 2018) Restoration: “any intentional activity that initiates or accelerates the recovery of an ecosystem from a degraded state” Rehabilitation: “restoration activities that may fall short of fully restoring the biotic community to its pre-degradation state” © WWF / Mauri Rautkari © Esgichia i / Wikimedia Commons

6. Motivations for restoration Restoring ecosystem services Mitigating impacts to ecosystems elsewhere Habitat for threatened or endangered species Aesthetic concerns, moral reasons Legal requirements (Clean Water Act, etc.) Improving human livelihoods Empowering local people Improving ecosystem productivity

7. Key concepts Restoration ecology: research and study of restored populations, communities and ecosystems Mitigation process: where a new site is created or rehabilitated as a substitute for another area which is destroyed or undergoing development Reference sites: areas with a comparable species composition and ecosystem structure, used to determine appropriate introductions and processes for a restoration site

8. Approaches to ecosystem restoration

9. Restoration at different scales Small-scale, site-specific, e.g. tree-planting Medium-scale, focus on critical areas within an ecosystem Large-scale, restoration of entire ecosystems, e.g. recreation of wetlands

10. Ecosystem degradation and restoration model © Adapted from Whisenant (1999), Hobbs and Harris (2001) Abiotic Barrier Biotic Barrier Requires Physical-Chemical Modification Requires Biological Modification Requires Improved Management Fully Functional Non-Functional Ecosystem Attribute Ecosystem State Degraded Intact 1 2 4 3 5 6

11. Class exercise On the previous slide, we discussed two types of thresholds/barriers which prevent systems from returning to a less-degraded state without the input of management effort Working in groups, can you identify and illustrate some examples of the two types of thresholds/barriers to ecosystem restoration? For each threshold/barrier, can you identify the type of restoration response needed to overcome it?

12. Approaches to restoration (Cameron 2018) Passive restoration: Relies on the natural regeneration capacity of the ecosystem Depends on reducing damaging external pressures or drivers of degradation Active ecological interventions: Designed to drive succession and increase pace of restoration Often focuses on a limited number of ecosystem services Particularly beneficial in highly degraded ecosystems

13. Forest land restoration options (IUCN and WRI 2014) Forest land Planted forests and woodlots Natural regeneration Silviculture Agricultural land Agroforestry Improved fallow Protective land and buffers Mangrove restoration Watershed protection and erosion control

14. Ecosystem restoration processes

15. Restoration and poverty (Cameron 2018) Many restoration activities have social goals but very few have measurable targets Active restoration can offer temporary employment Restoration can increase availability of a range of ecosystem services – but links between improved biodiversity and ecosystem service yields are not always clear The poorest may lose out if regeneration activities deny them access to ecosystems on which they are disproportionately dependent

16. Case study: Restoration trade-offs in southern Ethiopia ( Byg et al. 2017) Reforestation projects in 3 study areas – all with explicit aim to improve wellbeing Projects resulted in more ecosystem services than disservices: Ecosystem services: cooler temperature; reduced erosion and flood risk; increased provision of timber, firewood, fodder, thatch Ecosystem disservices: warthogs and monkeys raided crops next to restored forests But participants were dissatisfied because: Crop raiding was a more immediate and serious threat to local livelihoods than the various benefits of restoration Wealthy households benefited more and were less vulnerable to the risks of crop raiding Suggests the need for meaningful participation of local people – rich and poor – in negotiating distribution of costs and benefits of restoration

17. Factors to consider when planning restoration (Holl and Aide 2011) Goals: biodiversity, ecosystem services, livelihoods Resources: budget, labour, time Restoration strategy (from passive to active), which requires consideration of: Land-use history – what is the level of degradation? Ecosystem resilience – what is the intrinsic rate of recovery? Landscape characteristics – what drivers of degradation and seed/animal sources are present?

18. In summary There is a massive global need for ecosystem restoration activities Passive restoration is often more effective (and better value for money) than active restoration It is important to consider which ecosystem services will be restored, and for whom? While restoration activities may benefit the poor, few projects explicitly state their social goals and fewer still monitor their achievements Restoration processes need to engage diverse stakeholders in transparent negotiations to agree goals and resolve trade-offs.

19. Class exercise: Design a restoration project Using the example of a damaged ecosystem identified in SLIDE 4 , work in groups to design a restoration project that aims to enhance ecosystem services for poverty alleviation. This is an opportunity to integrate the knowledge from the previous topics in this series by thinking about: Which ecosystem services do you want to restore? And who for? Equity: Are there winners and losers? How can trade-offs be resolved? Could modelling and mapping techniques help plan the restoration? Could the restoration be funded through a PES scheme?

20. References Key readings Cameron, A. (2018) Restoration of ecosystems and ecosystem services. Chapter 9 in Schreckenberg, K., Mace, G. and Poudyal , M. (eds) Ecosystem Services and Poverty Alleviation: Trade-offs and Governance . Routledge, Abingdon, UK. Holl, K.D. and Aide, T.M. (2010) When and where to actively restore ecosystems? Forest Ecology and Management 261 : 1558-1563. IPBES (2018): Summary for policymakers of the assessment report on land degradation and restoration of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. Available at: www.ipbes.net IUCN and WRI (2014). A guide to the Restoration Opportunities Assessment Methodology (ROAM): Assessing forest landscape restoration opportunities at the national or sub-national level. Working Paper (Road-test edition). Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 125pp. Other readings Byg , A. et al. (2017) Trees, soils, and warthogs – Distribution of services and disservices from reforestation areas in southern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics 84 :112-119.

21. Case study for further discussion Case Study G: Re-greening Africa’s Sahel Region Reij , C., Tappan, G. and Smale , M. (2009) Re-Greening the Sahel: Farmer-led innovation in Burkina Faso and Niger. Chapter 7 in Spielman, D.J. and Pandya-Lorch, R. (Eds.) Millions Fed: Proven Successes in Agricultural Development . International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C. Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/130817