Abstract
Restoration of agricultural drylands globally, here farmlands and grazing lands, is a priority for ecosystem function and biodiversity preservation. Natural areas in drylands are recognized as biodiversity hotspots and face continued human impacts. Global water shortages are driving increased agricultural land retirement providing the opportunity to reclaim some of these lands for natural habitat. We used meta-analysis to contrast different classes of dryland restoration practices. All interventions were categorized as active and passive for the analyses of efficacy in dryland agricultural ecosystems. We evaluated the impact of 19 specific restoration practices from 42 studies on soil, plant, animal, and general habitat targets across 16 countries, for a total of 1,427 independent observations. Passive vegetation restoration and grazing exclusion led to net positive restoration outcomes. Passive restoration practices were more variable and less effective than active restoration practices. Furthermore, passive soil restoration led to net negative restoration outcomes. Active restoration practices consistently led to positive outcomes for soil, plant, and habitat targets. Water supplementation was the most effective restoration practice. These findings suggest that active interventions are necessary and critical in most instances for dryland agricultural ecosystems likely because of severe anthropogenic pressures and concurrent environmental stressors—both past and present.
Highlights
Dryland ecosystems are a dominant land cover type globally (White & Nackoney, 2003), encompassing many natural habitats such as grasslands, shrublands, and deserts (Reid et al, 2005)
We collected data from studies that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) research articles that included numerical results; review and theoretical articles were not included; (2) agriculture as the main disturbance reported; (3) studies demonstrating a clear comparison of restoration practices and reference groups (Wortley, Hero & Howes, 2013); (4) reported statistical analysis and significance of treatments
The meta-analysis included the evaluation of 19 different restoration practices, categorized into three active and three passive practices, on restoration outcomes (Table 3)
Summary
Dryland ecosystems are a dominant land cover type globally (White & Nackoney, 2003), encompassing many natural habitats such as grasslands, shrublands, and deserts (Reid et al, 2005). Human-influenced agricultural ecosystems such as farmlands and grazing lands are common in drylands globally (Ramankutty et al, 2008; Kennedy et al, 2019). Natural habitats within dryland ecosystems are hotspots of biodiversity and provide important ecosystem services including food provision, water regulation, and carbon sequestration These services support nearly 40% of the world’s population (Castro, Quintas-Soriano & Egoh, 2018). Drylands are an important set of ecosystems to manage from both anthropogenic and ecological perspectives, and synthesis of existing research will inform knowledge for balancing restoration with opportunity and change
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
