Publications

Link to the article 

Abstract:

Large-scale ecological restoration is crucial for effective biodiversity conservation and combating climate change. However, perspectives on the goals and values of restoration are highly diverse, as are the different approaches to restoration e.g. ranging from the restoration of cultural ecosystems to rewilding. We assess how the future of nature is envisioned in participatory scenarios, focusing on which elements of rewilding and nature contributions to people have been considered in scenario narratives across Europe. We used the Nature Futures Framework archetypes as a template to synthesize pluralistic perspectives of nature. We found that different values of nature are often represented as counteracting elements and fail to integrate the plural views of nature. Nature as Culture was the main archetype found in the scenarios, usually associated with positive impacts on the non-material benefits to people. Intrinsic values of nature (i.e., Nature for Nature) were associated with positive impacts on regulating benefits and negative impacts on material benefits, being the only archetype of future associated with positive impacts on all three components of rewilding. Nature for Society was associated with moderate positive impacts on material and regulatory nature contributions to people. Business as usual futures were associated with negative impacts on regulating and non-material benefits to people and on all three components of rewilding. Our results highlight two major gaps in the scenarios that should be addressed in participatory restoration planning and models. Firstly, there is a paucity of spatially explicit approaches, with most studies failing to transform the results of participatory scenario planning into model projections. Secondly, we found scenarios that explored co-benefits between multiple nature perspectives were overall missing from the literature. Novel scenario narratives and approaches that explore synergies among different nature values are needed to design future large-scale restoration where biodiversity recovery and human well-being are intrinsically linked and fostered.

Link to the article 

Abstract:

Societal Impact Statement

Plants play fundamental roles in ecosystems, yet merely 10% of species have an assessment of their global extinction risk. Through the integration of national Red Lists and comprehensive global plant distribution data, we identify previously unassessed plant species in Europe that are threatened throughout their geographic range and thus at risk of global extinction. Our workflow can be replicated to facilitate the integration of disparate national monitoring efforts around the world and help accelerate global plant risk assessments.

Summary

• A comprehensive extinction risk assessment for plant species is a global biodiversity target. However, currently, only 10% of plant diversity is assessed in the global Red List of Threatened Species. To guide conservation and restoration actions in times of accelerated species extinction, plant risk assessments must be expedited.
• Here, we examine the extinction risk of vascular plant species in Europe through the integration of two data streams: (1) national Red Lists and (2) global plant distribution data from Kew’s Plants of the World Online database. For each species listed on a national Red List, we create a list of countries that form part of its range and indicate the threat status in these countries, allowing us to calculate the percentage of the range in which a given species is listed as threatened.
• We find that 7% to 9% of European vascular plant diversity is threatened in its entire range, the majority of which are single-country endemics. Of these globally threatened species, 84% currently have no assessment in the global Red List.
• With increasing national biodiversity monitoring commitments shaping the post-2020 policy environment, we anticipate that integrating national Red Lists with global plant distribution data is a scalable workflow that can help accelerate global risk assessments of plants.

Link to the article 

Abstract:

We review palaeoenvironmental proxies and combinations of these relevant for understanding hunter-gatherer niche construction activities in pre-agricultural Europe. Our approach consists of two steps: (1) identify the possible range of hunter-gatherer impacts on landscapes based on ethnographic studies; (2) evaluate proxies possibly reflecting these impacts for both the Eemian (Last Interglacial, Middle Palaeolithic) and the Early–Middle Holocene (Mesolithic). We found these paleoenvironmental proxies were not able to unequivocally establish clear-cut differences between specific anthropogenic, climatic and megafaunal impacts for either time period in this area. We discuss case studies for both periods and show that published evidence for Mesolithic manipulation of landscapes is based on the interpretation of comparable data as available for the Last Interglacial. If one applies the ‘Mesolithic’ interpretation schemes to the Neanderthal record, three common niche construction activities can be hypothesised: vegetation burning, plant manipulation and impact on animal species presence and abundance. Our review suggests that as strong a case can be made for a Neanderthal impact on landscapes as for anthropogenic landscape changes during the Mesolithic, even though the Neanderthal evidence comes from only one high-resolution site complex. Further research should include attempts (e.g. by means of modelling studies) to establish whether hunter-gatherer impact on landscapes played out at a local level only versus at a larger scale during both time periods, while we also need to obtain comparative data on the population sizes of Last Interglacial and Holocene hunter-gatherers, as these are usually inferred to have differed significantly.