| dc.contributor.author |
Marchand, Lilian |
| dc.contributor.author |
Castagneyrol, Bastien |
| dc.contributor.author |
Jiménez, Juan José |
| dc.contributor.author |
Rey Benayas, José María |
| dc.contributor.author |
Benot, Marie-Lise |
| dc.contributor.author |
Martínez Ruiz, Carolina |
| dc.contributor.author |
Alday, Josu G. |
| dc.contributor.author |
Jaunatre, Renaud |
| dc.contributor.author |
Dutoit, Thierry |
| dc.contributor.author |
Buisson, Elise |
| dc.contributor.author |
Mench, Michel |
| dc.contributor.author |
Alard, Didier |
| dc.contributor.author |
Corcket, Emmanuel |
| dc.contributor.author |
Comín, F. A. (Francisco A.) |
| dc.date |
2021-03-11T07:37:59Z |
| dc.date |
2021-03-11T07:37:59Z |
| dc.date |
2021-01-23 |
| dc.identifier |
1470-160X |
| dc.identifier |
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/70722 |
| dc.identifier |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107362 |
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/70722 |
| dc.description |
Ecological restoration (ER) of terrestrial ecosystems has become widespread in past decades. However, assessing its success is complex mainly due to the diversity of objectives pursued, actions undertaken but also statistical methods for treating data. We demonstrate here that, due to the heterogeneity of collected data, the success of restoration actions can be overestimated in meta-analyses. We advocate analyzing distinctly two types of actions in ER, those aiming at increasing an ecosystem attribute (e.g. species richness of a native plant species, ER+), and those aiming at decreasing it (e.g. invasive species cover, ER-). We also suggest that only one index for assessing the success of a restoration action is not enough. We propose here to complete RR (Remaining Recovery) by a novel index informing on ‘what has been restored by comparison to what should have been recovered’: the ‘Achieved Restoration’ index (AR). |
| dc.description |
This work has been granted by the AgreenSkills + fellowship program, INRA and Agreenium, France, which has received funding from the EU’s Seventh Framework Program under grant agreement N° FP7-609398 (AgreenSkills + contract), and Bordeaux Metropole, France, under the grant agreement N° 22000964. JMRB acknowledges support from REMEDINAL TE-CM S2018/EMT-4338. J.G.A. was supported by Ramon y Cajal fellowship (RYC-2016-20528). |
| dc.language |
eng |
| dc.publisher |
Elsevier |
| dc.relation |
Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107362 |
| dc.relation |
Ecological Indicators, 2021, vol. 123, p. 107362 |
| dc.relation |
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/609398 |
| dc.rights |
cc-by (c) Marchand et al., 2021 |
| dc.rights |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| dc.rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| dc.subject |
Achieved restoration index |
| dc.subject |
Activerestoration |
| dc.subject |
Meta-analysis |
| dc.subject |
Passive restoration |
| dc.subject |
Remaining recovery |
| dc.title |
Conceptual and methodological issues in estimating the success of ecological restoration |
| dc.type |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| dc.type |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
