Young voices and visions for tropical restoration science in the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration

Abstract

We provide our five visions and contributions that the young tropical restoration science community can make for an impactful and beneficial UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Protecting ecosystems, in their current extent and function, is no longer sufficient to meet global conservation and sustainable development goals: we must also restore ecosystems to remedy past degradation (Gann et al., 2019; Leclère et al., 2020). Although ecosystem restoration is needed globally, focusing efforts on the tropics may provide the largest benefits to humans and nature (Strassburg et al., 2020). The tropics harbor a disproportionate amount of global “biodiversity hotspots” and therefore restoring habitat cover, connectivity, and quality in degraded tropical landscapes is critical to preventing species extinctions (Dutta et al., 2018; Newmark et al., 2017). Also, tropical restoration strategies that improve vegetation structure, functionality, and diversity can increase carbon sequestration and therefore contribute substantially to climate change mitigation strategies (Griscom et al., 2020). Additionally, ecosystem restoration in tropical landscapes can enhance water security (Ellison et al., 2017), improve water quality (Pires et al., 2017), facilitate climate change adaptation (Senior et al., 2019), and can contribute to income, consumption, and other dimensions of livelihoods and well-being (Bradbury et al., 2021). Young people are frequently overlooked, undervalued, or left out from key stages of sustainable development, leading to disengagement, and possible failure of projects (Barraclough et al., 2021). This trend might become relevant, if not already, in research communities involving young voices in academia focusing on tropical restoration science. Young voices are needed when developing and implementing restoration initiatives because they embody and reflect a different social, cultural, political, and academic environment than those of academics at advanced stages of their careers. For instance, young academics are likely to spend substantially longer time in the field during their graduate research, allowing them increased ability to witness how restoration affects local ecosystems and people. This is relative to more senior academics who would have cumulatively spent longer time doing fieldwork but might not as they progress to senior academic positions. Today, young restoration researchers develop their perspectives considering contemporary worldviews in conservation, such as Recoverable Earth narratives versus Finite Earth narratives, that is, grounded adaptive action to restore nature for the better future of nature and people versus morally motivated conservation foregrounded in villainous and heroic roles and worrying change, and pragmatic ways of approaching conservation and restoration in contrast with absolutist values (Jepson, 2019). This is a remarkable shift in ideals, when compared to relatively senior academics (senior in terms of age and time since graduating from a graduate program). The inclusion of young voices and visions in restoration science is, therefore, critical for a forward-looking and innovative development of this field. Hence, successful restoration initiatives are increasingly recognizing the involvement of the younger generation, including those who are young in their academic careers (IUCN, 2017a, 2017b). For instance, involving young voices in restoration are a key component of the current UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (UNEP, 2021). However, the priorities, steps, and action points that young researchers envision for the UN Decade are largely unknown. This crucial information will guide restoration-focused science, policy, finance, and on-the-ground implementation of activities, fostering future leaders in the field of ecosystem restoration. Here, we aim to outline key visions that young researchers have for the future of tropical restoration science, supported by our own experiences as young restoration scientists and the findings from a survey that we deployed during an open format session at the annual meeting of the Association of Tropical Biology and Conservation 2021 (ATBC, 2021). We then provide key contributions that young researchers can make when doing impactful research. These contributions will advance the science of restoration ecology in the tropical biome and encourage more effective strategies in the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. We define young voices in academia as voices of current graduate students (Master's level or doctoral students) or postdoctoral scientists within 1–2 years of completion of their doctorate degrees. We organized an open format session at the online ATBC 2021, titled ”Young Voices in and Visions for Tropical Restoration Science” (ATBC, 2021). The aims of this session were as follows: (1) to provide a platform for doctoral students to showcase their research and visions for restoration science in tropical landscapes, (2) to build a community of young restoration scientists working toward a sustainable future, and (3) to present and share a vision for the future of tropical restoration science by including the wider community of young researchers. The session consisted of a panel of six doctoral candidates who presented case studies of restoration-focused research in the tropics. These case studies encompassed tropical mountain, agricultural, and forest landscapes and featured a range of methodologies that are advancing the field of restoration science, including the use of remote sensing and derived products, functional ecology, field-based data collection, and governance instruments. Lastly, each panelist presented their vision for the future of tropical restoration (Table 1). We deployed a 9-multiple choice question survey during the Q&A part of the session, asking respondents for important actionable steps in the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, their vision for the future of tropical restoration science, and demographic information. We also provided the option to specify additional categories or ideas. We designed the survey based on our joint expertise and experience doing tropical restoration science research and using recent relevant literature (Aronson et al., 2020; Di Sacco et al., 2021; Gann et al., 2019; Osborne et al., 2021). We received 11 responses, nine of which were students (up to PhD) aged 18–35 years. The nationalities of the respondents included Brazilian, British, Dutch, German, Indian, Singaporean, Venezuelan, and Malaysian/French. The respondents researched in in Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia, West Africa, Old World tropical forests, Brazilian Atlantic Forest, India, the Andes, Australia, and Colombia. We acknowledge that our survey respondents were from a limited demographic base and therefore do not represent the beliefs and visions of all young restoration scientists. However, we use this information to outline broad trends and support the development of our five visions. We deployed the survey following review and approval by the Central University Research Ethics Committee (CUREC), based at the University of Oxford (reference: SOGE 1A2020-218). Refer to the Supplementary Methods for additional details of the survey instrument and results. Restoring connectivity in tropical forest systems: Benefits for biodiversity, climate, and key stakeholders (Rebekah Puttick, University of Newcastle) Investigating the use of liana cutting as a tool for rainforest restoration (Emma Mackintosh, University of the Sunshine Coast) Unraveling scale challenges in landscape restoration governance- evidence from Ecuador and Ethiopia (Daniel Wiegant, Wageningen University & Research) Choco Andinom Pichincha and Bosque Seco, Loja Ecuador Mount Guna, Amhara, Ethiopia and Kafa Biosphere, Southern Ethiopia Of the actionable steps, “More effective academic-practitioner collaborations” was most ranked among the top three priorities (91% of respondents) followed by “Addressing social dimensions of effective restoration such as governance, land tenure issues” (72.7% of respondents) and “Addressing critical research gaps in the natural science side of restoration ecology” (54.5% of respondents) (Figure 1). Additionally, respondents said that actionable steps should “engage and collaborate with major corporate actors, especially transnational corporations whose activities have direct impacts on land use and land cover change” and highlighted the need for “more investments in restoration science, particularly for projects/individuals to continue to do long term research…”, and the need for “...capacity building as an opportunity to co-develop actionable restoration knowledge…”. Evidence-based partnerships, at every step, will inspire impactful research allowing achievement of the goals of ecosystem restoration (Brancalion & Chazdon, 2017; Holl & Brancalion, 2020). Partnerships should inherently and explicitly foreground the importance of co-producing knowledge, and consider a variety of world views, epistemologies, and cosmologies from various stakeholders (Di Sacco et al., 2021). Ecosystem restoration is an inherently complex endeavor and needs to be viewed through and practiced using cross-disciplinarity (i.e., view from different perspectives) and interdisciplinarity (i.e., requiring integration of knowledge and methods from different disciplines) (Keynejad et al., 2021). However, ecosystem restoration can be most effective when a transdisciplinary approach is taken, allowing for the limitations of traditional disciplines of ecology and environmental sciences to be overcome. Currently, restoration studies across the tropics are biased toward certain biomes and regions, and few occur across large spatial or temporal scales (Christmann & Menor, 2021). Findings from such studies are therefore site-specific and context-dependent, limiting the extent to which their findings apply to restoration initiatives more widely. Tropical restoration science in this decade should represent science across multiple ecosystems and geographies, including a variety of data gathering techniques (Dudley et al., 2020; Temperton et al., 2019). Ecosystem restoration science should tackle disentangling and reconciling the contrasting outcomes of different ecosystem benefits and societal goals of livelihoods and well-being (Holl & Brancalion, 2020; Martin et al., 2021). In this vein, restoration projects must be monitored and evaluated after implementation and on long time scales (Poorter et al., 2021). Such long-term monitoring efforts are needed to assess achievement of multiple end goals decided at the inception of the project using participatory approaches that include the most vulnerable communities. We recommend using both established field-based monitoring methods and innovative and complementary remote sensing technologies. We recommend the use of remote sensing technologies include drone technology, LiDAR and multi/hyperspectral image sensors, soundscapes technologies, and camera traps that involve field data collection and field-based monitoring such as household surveys, interviews, and participatory workshops. Big data restoration studies, including large-scale and long-term data, have provided the impetus for restoration action by showing the potential of restoration activities to achieve multiple goals at global and continental scales (Bastin et al., 2019; Brancalion et al., 2019; Griscom et al., 2017; Strassburg et al., 2020). However, these studies have many assumptions that vary by region and lack nuanced contextual information, potentially leading to ineffective or even harmful restoration outcomes (Holl & Brancalion, 2020). In the coming decade, fine-scale analyses should also be completed to support bottom-up policy design and delivery that will better support national and subnational policy making (Murcia et al., 2016). Contribution 5- Global studies are often the basis for international campaigns, policies, and agreements, and also influence the development of restoration policy at the national and subnational levels. Young restoration scientists can design studies that analyze the trade-offs between restoration goals, that can critique and refine global scientific assumptions, and that estimate uncertainty when accounting for contextual information, available at regional and subnational scales. In this manner, young restoration scientists can support effective policy design and delivery at the scales of implementation. There is a magnifying glass on the state of restoration (science, implementation, evaluation) in the current UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, with attention on successes, failures, and lessons to be shared. The current and future generations of restoration scientists will have to step up and lead the way, a challenge that will be as exciting as it is complex. Hence, supporting and increasing the participation of young voices in restoration science is vital to ensuring current and future successes within the field of restoration. Young restoration scientists can positively impact policy at multiple spatial scales by building transdisciplinary collaborations with local stakeholders, across ecosystems, regions, and goals/outcomes with implicit long-term monitoring and evaluation schemes. Proactive inclusion of these voices and, indeed, all restoration-focused voices, in the future restoration initiatives is critical to the development of this field as a science, and to ensuring that the impact of the UN Decade is beneficial and long-lasting. We thank the organizing committee of the annual meeting of the Association of Tropical Biology and conservation 2021 for selecting our session proposal. We especially thank Ivan Ortiz Rodriguez, webmaster of the annual meeting, for patiently answering all our queries about the session and for providing us the post-conference statistics. We thank all the panelists who presented at the session, all audience who attended the session, and all audience who completed the survey. We thank Dr. Imma Oliveras, Dr. Yit Arn Teh, and Dr. Sergio Guerreiro Milheiras for helpful comments on the manuscript drafts. TG acknowledges funding from the Oxford India Centre for Sustainable Development, Somerville College, University of Oxford. TC acknowledges funding by the Rhodes Trust. MP acknowledges funding from the Gates Cambridge Trust and Jesus College, University of Cambridge. RP acknowledges funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (ONE Planet DTP #OP20206). We thank the anonymous reviewers whose suggestions and comments greatly improved this commentary. The authors declare no conflicting interests. TG and TC conceived the idea for the session, wrote and submitted the proposal and organized and ran the session during the annual meeting of the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation 2021 (with assistance from the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation). TG, TC, MP, RP, and other panelists designed the survey. TG wrote various manuscript drafts with feedback and additional input from TC, MP, and RP. TC designed Figure 2 with additional input from TG. Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The data that support the commentary are available from the Association of Tropical Biology and Conservation, as part of the annual meeting of the Association of Tropical Biology and Conservation 2021. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used with permission. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.