Search for: All records

Innovation in ecological restoration is necessary to achieve the ambitious targets established in United Nations conventions and other global restoration initiatives. Innovation is also crucial for navigating uncertainties in repairing and restoring ecosystems, and thus practitioners often develop innovations at project design and implementation stages. However, innovation in ecological restoration can be hindered by many factors (e.g., time and budget constraints, and project complexity). Theory and research on innovation has been formally applied in many fields, yet explicit study of innovation in ecological restoration remains nascent. To assess the use of innovation in restoration projects, including its drivers and inhibitors, we conducted a social survey of restoration practitioners in the United States. Specifically, we assessed relationships between project-based innovation and traits of the individual practitioner (including, for example, age, gender, experience); company (including, for example, company size and company’s inclusion of social goals); project (including, for example, complexity and uncertainty); and project outcomes (such as completing the project on time/on budget and personal satisfaction with the work). We found positive relationships between project-based innovation and practitioner traits (age, gender, experience, engagement with research scientists), one company trait (company’s inclusion of social goals in their portfolio), and project traits (project complexity and length). In contrast, two practitioner traits, risk aversion and the use of industry-specific information, were negatively related to project-based innovation. Satisfaction with project outcomes was positively correlated with project-based innovation. Collectively, the results provide insights into the drivers and inhibitors of innovation in restoration and suggest opportunities for research and application. 

Priority effects refer to the order or timing of species arrival, including how species that arrive early at a site either positively or negatively affect establishment, growth, or reproduction of species that arrive later. Despite the clear implications of priority effects for ecological restoration, there have been no reviews of how and where priority effects have been studied and the extent to which findings can be applied to restoration. Here, we systematically review the literature on priority effects by (1) synthesizing information from papers that compared simultaneous and nonsimultaneous planting or sowing; (2) discussing the mechanisms through which priority effects operate, (3) considering how these mechanisms might be manipulated to achieve restoration goals; and (4) highlighting future research needed to improve the use of priority effects in restoration. In a term‐targeted search, we found 43 studies that experimentally manipulated the order of arrival of different species. Overall, these concluded that even small delays in arrival time, as opposed to simultaneous arrival of species, can promote differences in subsequent community composition as well as ecosystem functions. There were very few studies on the long‐term stability of these priority effects, and the majority were conducted in temperate grasslands. Our findings suggest that creating alternative vegetation states via priority treatments is a promising avenue for restoration. However, for the concept to be best operationalized for restoration, we need research in more ecosystems that are priorities for restoration, and treatments that are followed over extended time periods.