A primer on choosing goals and indicators to evaluate ecological restoration success

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60076658%3A12310%2F19%3A43899431" target="_blank" >RIV/60076658:12310/19:43899431 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/67985939:_____/19:00509476

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/rec.13011" target="_blank" >https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/rec.13011</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rec.13011" target="_blank" >10.1111/rec.13011</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

A primer on choosing goals and indicators to evaluate ecological restoration success

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

We discuss aspects of one of the most important issues in ecological restoration: how to evaluate restoration success. This first requires clearly stated and justified restoration goals and targets; this may seem &quot;obvious&quot; but in our experience, this step is often elided. Indicators or proxy variables are the typical vehicle for monitoring; these must be justified in the context of goals and targets and ultimately compared against those to allow for an evaluation of outcome (e.g. success or failure). The monitoring phase is critical in that a project must consider how the monitoring frequency and overall design will allow the postrestoration trajectories of indicators to be analyzed. This allows for real-time management adjustments-adaptive management (sensu lato)-to be implemented if the trajectories are diverging from the targets. However, as there may be large variation in early postrestoration stages or complicated (nonlinear) trajectory, caution is needed before committing to management adjustments. Ideally, there is not only a goal and target but also a model of the expected trajectory-that only can occur if there are sufficient data and enough knowledge about the ecosystem or site being restored. With so many possible decision points, we focus readers&apos; attention on one critical step-how to choose indicators. We distinguish generalizable and specific indicators which can be qualitative, semiquantitative, or quantitative. The generalizable indicators can be used for meta-analyses. There are many options of indicators but making them more uniform would help mutual comparisons among restoration projects.

Název v anglickém jazyce

A primer on choosing goals and indicators to evaluate ecological restoration success

Popis výsledku anglicky

We discuss aspects of one of the most important issues in ecological restoration: how to evaluate restoration success. This first requires clearly stated and justified restoration goals and targets; this may seem &quot;obvious&quot; but in our experience, this step is often elided. Indicators or proxy variables are the typical vehicle for monitoring; these must be justified in the context of goals and targets and ultimately compared against those to allow for an evaluation of outcome (e.g. success or failure). The monitoring phase is critical in that a project must consider how the monitoring frequency and overall design will allow the postrestoration trajectories of indicators to be analyzed. This allows for real-time management adjustments-adaptive management (sensu lato)-to be implemented if the trajectories are diverging from the targets. However, as there may be large variation in early postrestoration stages or complicated (nonlinear) trajectory, caution is needed before committing to management adjustments. Ideally, there is not only a goal and target but also a model of the expected trajectory-that only can occur if there are sufficient data and enough knowledge about the ecosystem or site being restored. With so many possible decision points, we focus readers&apos; attention on one critical step-how to choose indicators. We distinguish generalizable and specific indicators which can be qualitative, semiquantitative, or quantitative. The generalizable indicators can be used for meta-analyses. There are many options of indicators but making them more uniform would help mutual comparisons among restoration projects.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10618 - Ecology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA17-09979S" target="_blank" >GA17-09979S: Faktory determinující sukcesi vegetace v měřítku České republiky</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Restoration Ecology

ISSN

1061-2971

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

27

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

5

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

7

Strana od-do

917-923

Kód UT WoS článku

000484997000001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85071157231