DOCSLIB.ORG

Kristina Simonaityte History and Novelty in Ecological Restoration In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kristina Simonaityte History and Novelty in Ecological Restoration In Kristina Simonaityte History and Novelty in Ecological Restoration in the Southwest of Western Australia: A Discourse Analysis MSC THESIS WUR 2016 WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY FOREST AND NATURE CONSERVATION POLICY GROUP History and Novelty in Ecological Restoration in the Southwest of Western Australia: A Discourse Analysis MSc Thesis by KRISTINA SIMONAITYTĖ 910216763170 Under the Supervision of PROF. DR. ESTHER TURNHOUT March 2016 Acknowledgements Working on this thesis has afforded me an opportunity to further my understanding of restoration ecology, but more importantly it has introduced me to the social aspect of what it means to do restoration. It is not just faceless management documents or green protective tubes on the hillsides, but it is also people who plan and plant, who are first and foremost optimistic, passionate and extremely knowledgeable about the pieces of land they are trying to recover. The time spent in Perth, Western Australia doing my fieldwork was very inspiring. Given the format of the thesis report I could not illuminate all of these experiences and encounters or provide detailed descriptions of the sites I visited (or what course of actions and coincidences have led me there). Here, however, I would like to briefly recognise some of the people who supported my work and were essential in this thesis seeing the light of day. First of all, I would like to thank all of my interviewees for their time and their words, but also, at times, an extraordinary interest in my research, which I found really motivating. I give my thanks to my thesis supervisor prof. dr. Esther Turnhout whose comments were invaluable to keep my report on track, while I found our discussions on the topic very thought-provoking and revealing of new perspectives. I also want to acknowledge dr. Marleen Buizer whose advice was key at the beginning stages of the project, both regarding my topic as well as fieldwork in Perth. My time in Perth would have been significantly less special and productive if not for the kindness, encouragement and all around support by Catherine and also Jane (and their beautiful families), as well as Joe, Christina, Pawel, and Katherine. I also want to give a shout-out to the awesome people at MERG and all the amazing work they are doing in Banksia Woodland Reserve, Melaleuca Swamp and elsewhere. I also thank my friends in Wageningen for their endless patience when for months I could not talk about anything else but Australia and provenance and weeding. Last but not least, this thesis project would never have happened without the guidance and care of my family, especially my mum, dad, my brother and my grandmother, who all contributed in one way or another. Ačiū, brangieji. I dedicate this thesis to them. I would like to acknowledge that Murdoch University, where I stayed and carried out my research, is situated on the lands of the Whadjuk Noongar people. I pay respect to their enduring and dynamic culture and the leadership of Noongar elders both past and present. March 22, 2016 Kristina Simonaitytė [email protected] i Summary Ecosystems all over the world have been directly or indirectly affected by human-driven activities: climate change, habitat loss, weed invasion, disease and so on. Some of these ecosystems have been degraded to such an extent that it requires active assistance to instigate their recovery. The importance of this practice – ecological restoration – has grown tremendously over the last few decades, taking on many forms and involving many different actors. Greater attention to restoration has unsurprisingly led to many of its concepts being questioned, contested and re-articulated. While traditionally restoration has been seen as a practice to bring back, to restore the original, historical, complete ecosystems, nowadays with the growing recognition of the severity and inevitability of many environmental changes, including the on-going anthropogenic climate change, this key tenet of restoration is being extensively challenged. In restoration theory, novel ecosystems has presented the best developed counter-discourse to the dominant discourse of historical state restoration. Novel ecosystems focus on systems with not-seen-before combinations of species and biophysical conditions, and also on the delivery of ecological functions rather than recombination of past species assemblages, when it comes to restoration objectives. Novel ecosystems also appear to primarily pursue critique of historical restoration and its impracticality and unsustainability in the changing world with hard to define original ecosystem conditions. Critics of the concept in turn consider novel ecosystems as arguing for abandoning traditional restoration practices and conservation goals, and providing rationale for further ecosystem degradation. As a result, restoration is in flux, all the while its importance is only increasing and question of what to restore to is becoming more and more crucial, but also more complex. This applies not only to the restoration theory, but also to the practice: large proportion of ecological restoration exists beyond academia, and in practice restoration objectives are also shifting, but are little studied. This calls for a greater understanding of the knowledge and concepts (the basis of restoration discourses) articulated and manifesting in the two domains – this was also the objective and contribution of this study. This thesis thus by employing discourse analysis examined, first, the discourses underpinning the current debates in restoration theory, secondly, the discourses manifesting and guiding restoration practice, and thirdly, the similarities and differences between the two sets of discourses. In addition to outlining the struggles between the hegemonic discourse of historical state restoration and counter- discourse of novel ecosystems, as mentioned above, the literature analysis also showed the emergence of the third discourse, history-as-guide, which treats history less as a target, but more as an information source. Not actually a fully-fledged counter-discourse, history-as-guide could also be seen as an upgrade ii to historical state restoration, leading to the latter’s eventual re-articulation as a more realistic and practical restoration discourse, which is informed both by the past and future considerations. As for the restoration practice, I chose the Perth metropolitan area, Western Australia as a study setting. Perth is situated in the Southwest Australia Ecoregion, which is one of the 35 global biodiversity hotspots and the only one in Australia. Majority of its mega-diversity has, unfortunately, been lost to various causes, mostly anthropogenic, since the European settlement of the area less than 200 years ago. Large number and variety of restoration-type activities is being carried out in Perth to counteract these degradation trends, with many different actors involved in the processes. The southwest has also been experiencing dramatic shifts in climate, primarily reduced precipitation, which also impacts restoration practice, among other things. I was interested in the discourses manifesting in the planning and doing parts of the restoration. Based on the analysis it appears that both are largely underpinned by historical state restoration discourse, persuasively articulated through nostalgic, restoring “what should be here” objectives. The major focus of restoration practice in the southwest was on the protection and recovery of the native, local provenance species; reliance on historical species lists in lieu of restoration reference state; opposition to bringing in non-natives from more arid areas to respond to climate change; insistence on removing all non-native invasive weeds already present; and shifts in traditional (non)watering regime to ensure better survival of (historical) plantings. Some concessions to historical state are evident, however. These include, for example, prioritisation of the weeding based on the available resources and species effect on the environment; outsourcing to non-local provenance due to lack of plant material within the provenance (while still sticking to the native species); and supplementary watering itself. Given the fact that all these measures are taken to ensure continued preservation of the local genetic material in the light of changing environmental conditions, and thus enabling historical restoration, they fit well under history-as-guide discourse. Novel ecosystems in turn were articulated by the interviewed academics, who saw the approach as practical and realistic; in theory overall “being practical” was articulated as a critique to an ideological commitment to restoring historical state. In the eyes of the practitioners and volunteers, conversely, “being practical” became a way to make the historical state restoration discourse actionable, thereby reinforcing its hegemonic position – though with slight modifications of history-as-guide. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................... i Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... ii Figure list .............................................................................................................................................................. v Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Managing the Whole Landscape: Historical, Hybrid, and Novel Ecosystems
    Managing the whole landscape: historical, hybrid, and novel ecosystems Hobbs, R. J., Higgs, E., Hall, C. M., Bridgewater, P., Chapin III, F. S., Ellis, E. C., ... & Yung, L. (2014). Managing the whole landscape: historical, hybrid, and novel ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 12(10), 557-564. doi:10.1890/130300 10.1890/130300 Ecological Society of America Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse REVIEWS REVIEWS REVIEWS Managing the whole landscape: historical, 557 hybrid, and novel ecosystems Richard J Hobbs1*, Eric Higgs2, Carol M Hall2, Peter Bridgewater3, F Stuart Chapin III4, Erle C Ellis5, John J Ewel6, Lauren M Hallett7, James Harris8, Kristen B Hulvey1,22, Stephen T Jackson9, Patricia L Kennedy10, Christoph Kueffer11, Lori Lach12, Trevor C Lantz2, Ariel E Lugo13, Joseph Mascaro14, Stephen D Murphy15, Cara R Nelson16, Michael P Perring1, David M Richardson17, Timothy R Seastedt18, Rachel J Standish1, Brian M Starzomski2, Katherine N Suding7,18, Pedro M Tognetti19, Laith Yakob20, and Laurie Yung21 The reality confronting ecosystem managers today is one of heterogeneous, rapidly transforming landscapes, particularly in the areas more affected by urban and agricultural development. A landscape management framework that incorporates all systems, across the spectrum of degrees of alteration, provides a fuller set of options for how and when to intervene, uses limited resources more effectively, and increases the chances of achieving management goals. That many ecosystems have departed so substantially from their historical tra- jectory that they defy conventional restoration is not in dispute. Acknowledging novel ecosystems need not constitute a threat to existing policy and management approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity of Novel Ecosystems: a Literature Review
    Portland State University PDXScholar Environmental Science and Management Faculty Publications and Presentations Environmental Science and Management 2018 The Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity of Novel Ecosystems: A literature review Cody Evers Portland State University, [email protected] Chloe Wardropper University of Idaho Benjamin Branoff University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras Elise F. Granek Portland State University, [email protected] Shana Hirsch University of Idaho See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/esm_fac Part of the Environmental Policy Commons, and the Environmental Studies Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Evers, C. R., Wardropper, C. B., Branoff, B., Granek, E. F., Hirsch, S. L., Link, T. E., ... & Wilson, C. (2018). The ecosystem services and biodiversity of novel ecosystems: A literature review. Global Ecology and Conservation, e00362. This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental Science and Management Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Cody Evers, Chloe Wardropper, Benjamin Branoff, Elise F. Granek, Shana Hirsch, Timothy E. Link, Sofia Olivero-Lora, and Codie Wilson This article is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/esm_fac/235 Global Ecology and Conservation 13 (2018) e00362 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Global Ecology and Conservation journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/gecco Review Paper The ecosystem services and biodiversity of novel ecosystems: A literature review * Cody R.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Novel Ecosystems: Governance and Conservation in the Age of the Anthropocene * 2 Sarah Clementa and Rachel J
    1 Novel ecosystems: governance and conservation in the age of the Anthropocene * 2 Sarah Clementa and Rachel J. Standishb 3 a 4 Department of Geography and Planning, School of Environmental Sciences, Roxby 5 Building, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZQ, United Kingdom b 6 Environmental and Conservation Sciences, School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, 7 Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, Western Australia 6150, Australia 8 9 * Corresponding author. Tel +44 (0)151 794 3123 10 11 Email addresses: [email protected] (S. Clement), 12 [email protected] (R.J. Standish) 13 14 Type of Article: Review 15 16 Keywords: adaptive governance; biodiversity conservation; governance; ecosystem 17 transformation; environmental governance; novel ecosystems 18 1 19 Abstract 20 Meeting conservation objectives in an era of global environmental change has 21 precipitated debate about where and how to intervene. Ecological and social values 22 of novel ecosystems are particularly contested. Governance has a role to play, but 23 this role is underexplored. Here, we critically review the novel ecosystems literature 24 to identify challenges that fall within the realm of governance. Using a conceptual 25 framework for analysing adaptive governance, we consider how governance could 26 help address five challenges. Specifically, we argue that reforming governance can 27 support the re-framing of policy objectives for ecosystems where transformation is 28 likely, and in doing so, it could highlight the tensions between the emergence of 29 novel ecosystems on the one hand and cultural expectations about how ecosystems 30 should look on the other. We discuss the influence of power, authority and 31 administrative competence on conservation efforts in times of environmental 32 change.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions for the Next-Generation Aquatic Ecosystem Models
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Modeling water quality in the Anthropocene: directions for $,$$ the next-generation aquatic ecosystem models 1,2 1,2,3 4,5 Wolf M Mooij , Dianneke van Wijk , Arthur HW Beusen , 6 1,2 7,8 Robert J Brederveld , Manqi Chang , Marleen MP Cobben , 9 10 11 Don L DeAngelis , Andrea S Downing , Pamela Green , 1 12 1,4 Alena S Gsell , Inese Huttunen , Jan H Janse , 3 13,14 Annette BG Janssen , Geerten M Hengeveld , 15 16 10,17 Xiangzhen Kong , Lilith Kramer , Jan J Kuiper , 18 19 19 Simon J Langan , Bart A Nolet , Rascha JM Nuijten , 3 16 20 Maryna Strokal , Tineke A Troost , Anne A van Dam and 1 Sven Teurlincx 11 “Everything changes and nothing stands still” (Heraclitus). Here we Environmental Sciences Initiative, Advanced Science Research Center at the Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY), New review three major improvements to freshwater aquatic ecosystem York, NY 10031 USA models — and ecological models in general — as water quality 12 Fresh Water Centre, Finnish Environment Institute - SYKE, P.O. Box scenario analysis tools towards a sustainable future. To tackle the 140, 00251 Helsinki, Finland 13 rapid and deeply connected dynamics characteristic of the Biometris, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands Anthropocene, we argue for the inclusion of eco-evolutionary, 14 novel ecosystem and social-ecological dynamics. These dynamics Forest and Nature Conservation Policy group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA, Wageningen, Netherlands arise from adaptive responses in organisms and ecosystems to 15 Department of Lake Research, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental global environmental change and act at different integration levels Research (UFZ), Bru¨ ckstrasse 3A, 39114 Magdeburg, Germany 16 and different time scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Origins of the Novel Ecosystems Concept Joseph Mascaro1, James A
    Chapter 5 Origins of The Novel Ecosystems Concept Joseph Mascaro1, James A. Harris2, Lori Lach3, Allen Thompson4, Michael P. Perring5, David M. Richardson6 and Erle C. Ellis7 1Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, California, USA 2Environmental Science and Technology Department, Cranfield University, UK 3Ecosystem Restoration and Intervention Ecology (ERIE) Research Group, School of Plant Biology and the Centre for Integrative Bee Research, University of Western Australia, Australia 4School of History, Philosophy, and Religion, Oregon State University, USA 5Ecosystem Restoration and Intervention Ecology (ERIE) Research Group, School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, Australia 6Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, Stellenbosch University, South Africa 7Geography & Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, USA “In such ways anthropogenic ecosystems differ from those developed independently of man. But the essential forma- tive processes . are the same.” Arthur G. Tansley, 1935 5.1 INTRODUCTION his academic nature, variously accepting and rejecting terms that appear throughout the literature. He accepts Reading Tansley’s (1935) opus, combatively titled ‘The ‘climax’ (within which he notably allows slow gradual use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms’ change), coins the term ‘ecosystem’ (surely his greatest nearly a century on, is illuminating in many ways. For gift to the field), then roundly rejects the idea that eco- one, the prose leaps off the
    [Show full text]
  • RESTORATION and ‘‘NOVEL Curt Meine2 ECOSYSTEMS’’: PRIORITY OR PARADOX?1
    RESTORATION AND ‘‘NOVEL Curt Meine2 ECOSYSTEMS’’: PRIORITY OR PARADOX?1 ABSTRACT The practice of ecological restoration is challenged by accelerating rates and expanding scales of anthropogenic ecosystem change. The concept of ‘‘novel ecosystems’’ has become a focal point of intramural debate, leading restoration practitioners and researchers to reject, defend, revise, and reframe prior premises and goals. In a world of rapid environmental change, restoration can be seen, depending on one’s perspective, as more necessary than ever, or as essentially futile. By revisiting restoration’s history and defining a more nuanced approach to the realities of ecosystem change, we may be able to find space for reconciliation, or at least accommodation, of these divergent views. Aldo Leopold recognized as early as the 1930s that human impacts on the ‘‘biotic community’’ are pervasive; that ‘‘wilderness is a relative condition’’; that conservationists must recognize ‘‘the dynamics of [the land’s] past history and probable future.’’ At the same time, he pursued restoration as a necessary new dimension of conservation and proposed his ‘‘land ethic’’ as ‘‘a mode of guidance for meeting ecological situations so new or intricate’’ that society had not yet evolved an effective ethical response. Since Leopold’s generation, the ‘‘great acceleration’’ in global environmental change has altered the context in which we assess the promise and potential of restoration. It has only deepened, however, the need for conservation science, policy, ethics, and practice to engender resilient landscapes. Ecological restoration remains an essential means of doing so, albeit with redefined aims and methods. Key words: Aldo Leopold, ecological restoration, land ethic, novel ecosystems, resilience, wilderness.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Historicity, Functional Goals, and Novelty in the Anthropocene
    Forthcoming in Environmental Values © The White Horse Press: accepted 18-12-2017 http://www.whpress.co.uk/EV/papers/1539-Desjardins.pdf Ecological Historicity, Functional Goals, and Novelty in the Anthropocene Eric Desjardins, Justin Donhauser*, and Gillian Barker Rotman Institute of Philosophy, University of Western Ontario, London ON *[email protected] Abstract While many recognize that rigid historical and compositional goals are inadequate in a world where climate and other global systems are undergoing unprecedented changes, others contend that promoting ecosystem services and functions encourages practices that can ultimately lower the bar of ecological management. These worries are foregrounded in discussions about Novel Ecosystems (NEs); where some researchers and conservationists claim that NEs provide a license to trash nature as long as some ecosystem services are provided. This criticism arises from what we call the “anything goes” problem created by the release of historical conditions. After explaining the notion of NE, we identify numerous substantive motivations for worrying about the anything-goes-problem and then go on to show the problem can be solved by correcting two mistaken assumptions. In short, we argue that the problem is a product of adopting an overly sparse functional perspective and one that assumes an unrealistically high degree of convergence in the trajectories of natural processes. Our analysis illuminates why such assumptions are unwarranted. Finally, we further argue that adopting an appropriate ethical framework is essential to overcoming the anything-goes-problem and suggest that a certain virtue ethics conception of ecological management provides useful resources for framing and resolving the problem. Keywords: novel ecosystems, ecosystem function and functioning, historicity, Anthropocene, virtue ethics 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Grappling with the Social Dimensions of Novel Ecosystems
    CONCEPTS AND QUESTIONS Grappling with the social dimensions of 1 novel ecosystems Anna C Backstrom1*, Georgia E Garrard1,2,3, Richard J Hobbs2,4, and Sarah A Bekessy1,2,3,5 The novel ecosystem concept has emerged in response to the increasing prevalence of modified ecosystems. Traditional conservation and restoration strategies have been deemed inadequate to guide the management of ecosystems that are the product of anthropogenic environmental change and have no “natural” analogs. Opinions about novel ecosystems are currently divided between those who embrace the flexibility offered by the concept and those who see it as a shift toward the abandonment of traditional strategies. However, the debate is missing a key element: recognition that all conservation decisions are socially constructed and that the concept of novel ecosystems is most practicable within a decision or management context. Management of novel ecosystems should be framed in such a context, and the concept evaluated for its capacity to meet social, ecological, and economic objectives. Front Ecol Environ 2018; doi: 10.1002/fee.1769 s more of the Earth becomes modified by humans ecosystems”, “no- analog communities”, “synthetic or A and as “natural” areas increasingly become unrecog- emerging ecosystems”, and “spontaneous vegetation” nizable in relation to the systems they replace (Radeloff (Truitt et al. 2015). Regardless of terminology, highly et al. 2015), debate has emerged around the labeling of modified ecosystems do exist (Chapin and Starfield 1997; such systems as “novel ecosystems” (Murcia et al. 2014; Hobbs et al. 2006; Collier 2015) and when traditional Radeloff et al. 2015; Miller and Bestelmeyer 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • 7 2 Consilience of Cultural and Environmental Landscapes.Pdf
    Landscape and Urban Planning 177 (2018) 148–159 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan Perspective Essay Novel ecosystems: A bridging concept for the consilience of cultural T landscape conservation and ecological restoration ⁎ Eric Macdonalda, , Elizabeth G. Kingb a College of Environment and Design, University of Georgia, 285 S. Jackson Street, Athens, GA, 30602, USA b Odum School of Ecology and, Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT Four themes of consilience (white arrows) between cultural landscape conservation and ecological restoration, which are embodied in the novel ecosystems concept. ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: We evaluate the historical, philosophical, and practical relationships between two fields of theory and practice: Restoration ecology cultural landscape conservation and ecological restoration. Each field has distinct intellectual and disciplinary Heritage conservation roots, bodies of theory, norms of practice, institutions, and modes of professional discourse. Yet both aim to Human-nature dichotomy understand and wisely steward environments for the benefit of humans and non-human nature, and both grapple Interdisciplinary collaboration with similar issues inherent in the complex nexus of nature, society, history, and sustainability. Increasingly, the Cultural landscapes thinking and the practices that once clearly distinguished their respective efforts have begun
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Ecosystems: Hope Or Hype?
    Marilyn Jordan Ph.D. Former Senior Conservation Scientist 1992−2014 For The Nature Conservancy on Long Island, NY [email protected] What are novel (no analog/emerging ) ecosystems? New species combinations (introduced/alien). Result from deliberate/inadvertent human actions. Need no human management to persist (and typically are not managed). Includes all ecosystems at all scales: terrestrial, fresh water, estuarine, and marine. None of the species in this image are native W. Jacobs Novel ecosystem are created by changes in: (1) Species: invasion/extinction/degradation (2) Terrestrial, aquatic & wetland ecosystems (by human agency) (3) Global processes: climate, oceanic and atmospheric chemistry Hobbs 2006 Return to Novel forever? “historical?” Hybrid/mixed? Hybrid/mixed? Dredging Altered water flow; Jordan Pollution Ellis New thinking about novel ecosystems Hobbs, Higgs and Hall. 2013. Novel Ecosystems: Intervening in the New Ecological World Order. Wiley-Blackwell ISBN New: Richard Hobbs 1. Different from historic ecosystems. 2. Includes social components (e.g. values, regulations, funding, land ownership, technical knowledge). 3. Thresholds (ecological, environmental & social) distinguish novel from hybrid ecosystems. http://www.wiley.com/go/hobbs/ecosystems Access to tools and resources Is ecosystem How to identify a altered because of human novel ecosystem actions? Are changes reversible? Hybrid ecosystem Harris, Mascaro, Murphy and Nelson: Chapter 6 in Hobbs et al. 2013. Novel Ecosystems: Intervening in the New Ecological World
    [Show full text]
  • Liko Nā Pilina: Developing Novel Ecosystems That Enhance Carbon Storage, Native Biodiversity, and Human Mobility in Lowland Hawaiian Forests
    FINAL REPORT Liko Nā Pilina: Developing Novel Ecosystems that Enhance Carbon Storage, Native Biodiversity, and Human Mobility in Lowland Hawaiian Forests SERDP Project RC-2117 AUGUST 2016 Dr. Rebecca Ostertag University of Hawai‘i at Hilo Dr. Susan Cordell Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service Dr. Peter Vitousek Stanford University Distribution Statement A Page Intentionally Left Blank This report was prepared under contract to the Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). The publication of this report does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official policy or position of the Department of Defense. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Department of Defense. Page Intentionally Left Blank Page Intentionally Left Blank Table of Contents Abstract: .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1. Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 9 2. Background ............................................................................................................................... 11 3. Materials and Methods .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Ecosystems: Challenges and Opportunities for the Anthropocene
    ANR0010.1177/2053019616662053The Anthropocene ReviewCollier and Devitt 662053research-article2016 Review The Anthropocene Review 1 –12 Novel ecosystems: Challenges © The Author(s) 2016 Reprints and permissions: and opportunities for the sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/2053019616662053 Anthropocene anr.sagepub.com Marcus J Collier and Catherine Devitt Abstract Novel ecosystems are ecological assemblages that have emerged in the landscapes of the Anthropocene, where an ecological abiotic or biotic threshold has been passed and can no longer be restored to a previous state. In such landscapes, novelty is attributed to unanticipated rapid anthropogenic environmental change, and deliberate land use practices, and can be characterised by the arrival over time of differing species assemblages and extent. While little has been explored in the literature with respect to the policy implications of novel ecosystems, calls have been made for a better understanding of the barriers to adopting novel ecosystems within mainstream policy. This review reports on a qualitative literature analysis carried out in order to identify the challenges and opportunities for transposing novel ecosystem theory into mainstream policy. Though published debate is still emerging, eleven policy challenges broadly conforming to three themes were identified. Within these themes three opportunity areas were identified, revealing that more focused discussion is required on the wider policy implications of novel ecosystems beyond the stated concerns about lowering standards in ecological conservation. The analysis also shows that there exists a greater understanding of the challenges to transposing novel ecosystems in policy, as opposed to the possible opportunities under current policy timeframes. While a resilience framework has been put forward to offer an outline for policy makers, mechanisms for incorporating novel ecosystem theory into policy and decision making is some distance off.
    [Show full text]