Adjustive ecological restoration through stakeholder involvement: a case of riparian landscape restoration on privately owned land with public access

Guiding restoration of riparian ecosystems degraded by plant invasions: Insights from a complex social-ecological system in the Global South

Restoring riparian ecosystems in human-dominated landscapes requires attention to complexity, and consideration of diverse drivers, social actors, and contexts. Addressing a Global North bias, this case study uses a mixed-method approach, integrating historical data, remote sensing techniques and stakeholder perceptions to guide restoration of a river in the Western Cape, South Africa. An analysis of aerial photographs of the riparian zone from 1953 to 2016 revealed that although anthropogenic land conversion happened primarily before the 1950s, several land use and land cover classes showed marked increases in area, including: waterbodies (+ 1074%), urban areas (+ 316%), alien weeds (+ 311%) and terrestrial alien trees (+ 79%). These changes have likely been driven by land fragmentation, disturbance, and agricultural intensification. Stakeholder interviews revealed that despite the clear need for restoration, several barriers exist to successful implementation; these stem from inadequate financial resources, inappropriate funding models, institutional challenges, and a lack of techno-scientific knowledge. We give several recommendations to overcome these barriers.

Best Practices for Monitoring and Assessing the Ecological Response to River Restoration

Nature-based solutions are widely advocated for freshwater ecosystem conservation and restoration. As increasing amounts of river restoration are undertaken, the need to understand the ecological response to different measures and where measures are best applied becomes more pressing. It is essential that appraisal methods follow a sound scientific approach. Here, experienced restoration appraisal experts review current best practice and academic knowledge to make recommendations and provide guidance that will enable practitioners to gather and analyse meaningful data, using scientific rigor to appraise restoration success. What should be monitored depends on the river type and the type and scale of intervention. By understanding how habitats are likely to change we can anticipate what species, life stages, and communities are likely to be affected. Monitoring should therefore be integrated and include both environmental/habitat and biota assessments. A robust scientific approach to monitoring and appraisal is resource intensive. We recommend that appraisal efforts be directed to where they will provide the greatest evidence, including ‘flagship’ restoration schemes for detailed long-term monitoring. Such an approach will provide the evidence needed to understand which restoration measures work where and ensure that they can be applied with confidence elsewhere.