Toward an Era of Restoration in Ecology: Successes, Failures, and Opportunities Ahead

TLDR

Societal demand for ecosystem restoration is rising as environmental degradation and change accelerate, yet comprehensive evaluations are scarce and outcomes vary widely, even as policy increasingly supports restoration opportunities. The study evaluates restoration successes and failures, examines how science informs these efforts, and explores forward‑looking paradigms such as ecosystem services enhancement and resilience building that require further assessment. The approach relies on evidence‑based evaluation and cross‑disciplinary knowledge transfer to inform site prioritization, uncertainty inclusion, temporal and spatial dependencies, and standardized outcome assessments. Complete recovery typically involves persistent species and abiotic processes enabling natural regeneration, whereas incomplete or absent recovery is driven by local and landscape constraints, species distribution shifts, land‑use legacies, and strong species feedbacks coupled with regional climate changes.

Abstract

As an inevitable consequence of increased environmental degradation and anticipated future environmental change, societal demand for ecosystem restoration is rapidly increasing. Here, I evaluate successes and failures in restoration, how science is informing these efforts, and ways to better address decision-making and policy needs. Despite the multitude of restoration projects and wide agreement that evaluation is a key to future progress, comprehensive evaluations are rare. Based on the limited available information, restoration outcomes vary widely. Cases of complete recovery are frequently characterized by the persistence of species and abiotic processes that permit natural regeneration. Incomplete recovery is often attributed to a mixture of local and landscape constraints, including shifts in species distributions and legacies of past land use. Lastly, strong species feedbacks and regional shifts in species pools and climate can result in little to no recovery. More forward-looking paradigms, such as enhancing ecosystem services and increasing resilience to future change, are exciting new directions that need more assessment. Increased evidence-based evaluation and cross-disciplinary knowledge transfer will better inform a wide range of critical restoration issues such as how to prioritize sites and interventions, include uncertainty in decision making, incorporate temporal and spatial dependencies, and standardize outcome assessments. As environmental policy increasingly embraces restoration, the opportunities have never been greater.