Maybe like me you are confused by how many principles there are for restoration. In this spreadsheet I identify 64 principles for restoration in 6 papers published in the last 2 years. No wonder I was confused! docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…
There is substantial overlap - for example, several emphasize importance of protecting intact ecosystems & including stakeholders.
There are also striking conflicts - one principle is "make it pay" while another principle is "prioritize social and ecological benefits over financial returns"
I'll have to dig a bit deeper to understand the different frameworks, each of which has a slightly different purpose, and the extent to which the principles are normative desires or evidence based claims.
Am I missing any publications or principles?
(you thought I was joking about writing a paper with 10 principles for how to write a paper with 10 principles fo restoration? well... looks like I'm writing the paper now, right?)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I spent the weekend troubled by this editorial in Science. I agree with some of the main messages: Restoration has great potential to improve human well-being while caring for the planet. BUT I'm troubled by what isn't said. science.org/doi/full/10.11…
Restoration often involves difficult tradeoffs. The editorial makes it seem like its just win-win, but often land that is restored used to be agricultural land, or is used in some other way by people, or there are tradeoffs between ecological goals.
The editorial says that we can reconcile large-scale restoration of natural systems and food production, but it isn't clear to me how this statement is grounded in the current scientific literature.
In the last week I've started to receive inquiries from people running tree planting programs wanting my help. I am suggesting that they shut down their programs. Here I will explain why:
India has attempted large scale forest restoration for decades. We have just published one of the first systematic evaluations of these efforts. We find that decades of tree planting have had almost no impact on forest canopy cover or rural livelihoods. A Thread.
These results are pretty disappointing: These plantations failed to achieve their goals. This failure also raises questions about the aims of global restoration and tree planting initiatives: Can they deliver on their ambitions plans?
The full paper is here. nature.com/articles/s4189… and I will post a link to the author's version (ungated) at my university repository once it is available (in a few hours)
2 pieces of advice for writing academic cover letters: (1) your cover letter (and any accompanying statements) is an essay about your accomplishments & agenda. It should have a clear thesis statement & each paragraph should contain a specific piece of supporting information
We all tend to write these things chronologically, or to list off things we've done, but letters that shine instead describe a research (or teaching, or diversity) agenda that is specific, focused, and can be broken down into subcomponents that provide evidence.
(2) show don't tell. I actually got this advice from my high school guidance counselor. If you say "I encourage active learning in my classes" describe specifically how you do this in a class you teach (or plan to teach) using a specific example.
@reddmonitor has a great post summarizing a number of recent articles about "plant for the planet," which raise a host of interesting questions about the potential for tree planting & forest restoration to serve lofty goals. redd-monitor.org/2021/01/11/pla…
I got involved in this because I've done fieldwork in the area where Plant for the Planet's Mexican forests are. I was last there in 2015, so around the same time Plant for the Planet got started there. I can't report direct observations.
When the lofty goals of forest landscape restoration are put into practice, the rhetoric is replaced by a focus on planting trees, often in places where they don't belong. link.springer.com/article/10.100…
I've had a bunch of arguments with FLR advocates about this. Mostly, they boil down to a believe on the part of FLR advocates that their complex science-based prescriptions will be translated into careful on-the-ground action.
My own observations from S. Asia have always led me to be skeptical of this. Here are a set of similar cases from Africa.