Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis

Landscape transformation due to agriculture affects more than 40% of the planet’s land area and is the most important driver of losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES) worldwide. Ecological restoration may significantly reduce these losses, but its effectiveness has not been systematicall...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barral, Maria Paula, Rey Benayas, José María, Meli, Paula, Maceira, Nestor Oscar
Formato: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880915000109
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/4226
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.009
_version_ 1855035282877841408
author Barral, Maria Paula
Rey Benayas, José María
Meli, Paula
Maceira, Nestor Oscar
author_browse Barral, Maria Paula
Maceira, Nestor Oscar
Meli, Paula
Rey Benayas, José María
author_facet Barral, Maria Paula
Rey Benayas, José María
Meli, Paula
Maceira, Nestor Oscar
author_sort Barral, Maria Paula
collection INTA Digital
description Landscape transformation due to agriculture affects more than 40% of the planet’s land area and is the most important driver of losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES) worldwide. Ecological restoration may significantly reduce these losses, but its effectiveness has not been systematically assessed in agroecosystems at the global level. We quantitatively meta-analyzed the results of 54 studies of how restoration actions reflecting the two contrasting strategies of land sparing and land sharing affect levels of biodiversity and ES in a wide variety of agroecosystems in 20 countries. Restoration increased overall biodiversity of all organism types by an average of 68%. It also increased the supply of many ES, in particular the levels of supporting ES by an average of 42% and levels of regulating ES by an average of 120% relative to levels in the pre-restoration agroecosystem. In fact, restored agroecosystems showed levels of biodiversity and supporting and regulating ES similar to those of reference ecosystems. Recovery levels did not correlate with the time since the last restoration action. Comparison of land sparing and land sharing as restoration strategies showed that while both were associated with similar biodiversity recovery, land sparing led to higher median ES response ratios. Passive and active restoration actions did not differ significantly in the levels of biodiversity or ES recovery. Biodiversity recovery positively correlated with ES recovery. We conclude that ecological restoration of agroecosystems is generally effective and can be recommended as a way to enhance biodiversity and supply of supporting and regulating ES in agricultural landscapes. Whether a land sharing or land sparing strategy is preferable remains an open question, and might be case dependent. Moreover, it is unclear whether crop production on restored land can meet future food production needs.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
id INTA4226
institution Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina)
language Inglés
publishDate 2019
publishDateRange 2019
publishDateSort 2019
publisher Elsevier
publisherStr Elsevier
record_format dspace
spelling INTA42262019-01-08T13:05:23Z Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis Barral, Maria Paula Rey Benayas, José María Meli, Paula Maceira, Nestor Oscar Agroecosistemas Servicios de los Ecosistemas Ecología Ordenación Territorial Biodiversidad Agroecosystems Ecosystem Services Ecology Land Use Planning Biodiversity Landscape transformation due to agriculture affects more than 40% of the planet’s land area and is the most important driver of losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES) worldwide. Ecological restoration may significantly reduce these losses, but its effectiveness has not been systematically assessed in agroecosystems at the global level. We quantitatively meta-analyzed the results of 54 studies of how restoration actions reflecting the two contrasting strategies of land sparing and land sharing affect levels of biodiversity and ES in a wide variety of agroecosystems in 20 countries. Restoration increased overall biodiversity of all organism types by an average of 68%. It also increased the supply of many ES, in particular the levels of supporting ES by an average of 42% and levels of regulating ES by an average of 120% relative to levels in the pre-restoration agroecosystem. In fact, restored agroecosystems showed levels of biodiversity and supporting and regulating ES similar to those of reference ecosystems. Recovery levels did not correlate with the time since the last restoration action. Comparison of land sparing and land sharing as restoration strategies showed that while both were associated with similar biodiversity recovery, land sparing led to higher median ES response ratios. Passive and active restoration actions did not differ significantly in the levels of biodiversity or ES recovery. Biodiversity recovery positively correlated with ES recovery. We conclude that ecological restoration of agroecosystems is generally effective and can be recommended as a way to enhance biodiversity and supply of supporting and regulating ES in agricultural landscapes. Whether a land sharing or land sparing strategy is preferable remains an open question, and might be case dependent. Moreover, it is unclear whether crop production on restored land can meet future food production needs. EEA Balcarce Fil: Barral, Maria Paula. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: Rey Benayas, José María. Universidad de Alcalá. Departamento de Ciencias de la Vida-UD Ecología; España. Universidad de Alcalá. Fundación Internacional para la Restauración de Ecosistemas; España Fil: Meli, Paula. Universidad de Alcalá. Fundación Internacional para la Restauración de Ecosistemas; España. Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos A.C.; México Fil: Maceira, Nestor Oscar. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina 2019-01-08T13:03:42Z 2019-01-08T13:03:42Z 2015-04 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880915000109 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/4226 0167-8809 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.009 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess application/pdf Elsevier Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 202 : 223-231 (April 2015)
spellingShingle Agroecosistemas
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Ecología
Ordenación Territorial
Biodiversidad
Agroecosystems
Ecosystem Services
Ecology
Land Use Planning
Biodiversity
Barral, Maria Paula
Rey Benayas, José María
Meli, Paula
Maceira, Nestor Oscar
Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title_full Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title_fullStr Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title_short Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis
title_sort quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems a global meta analysis
topic Agroecosistemas
Servicios de los Ecosistemas
Ecología
Ordenación Territorial
Biodiversidad
Agroecosystems
Ecosystem Services
Ecology
Land Use Planning
Biodiversity
url https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880915000109
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/4226
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.009
work_keys_str_mv AT barralmariapaula quantifyingtheimpactsofecologicalrestorationonbiodiversityandecosystemservicesinagroecosystemsaglobalmetaanalysis
AT reybenayasjosemaria quantifyingtheimpactsofecologicalrestorationonbiodiversityandecosystemservicesinagroecosystemsaglobalmetaanalysis
AT melipaula quantifyingtheimpactsofecologicalrestorationonbiodiversityandecosystemservicesinagroecosystemsaglobalmetaanalysis
AT maceiranestoroscar quantifyingtheimpactsofecologicalrestorationonbiodiversityandecosystemservicesinagroecosystemsaglobalmetaanalysis