Despite their ecological, economic and social importance, grasslands in areas with Mediterranean climates continue to receive limited scientific, political and media attention. The main objectives of this review are to compare and contrast dryland grasslands in the ‘Old World’ regions of the Mediterranean basin (southern Europe, western Asia and North Africa) with those of ‘New World’ regions with Mediterranean climates (Australia and Chile) and to identify common research priorities. The common characteristics and differences in climate, soils, native vegetation, importance of the livestock sector and the socio‐economic background for the different Mediterranean environments are examined. Past trends and the current status of temporary and permanent Mediterranean grasslands are also described. Some common issues between these regions are as follows: (i) adaptation to climate change; (ii) increasing persistence and drought survival of both annual and perennial species; (iii) the important role of forage legumes; (iv) maintaining grassland plant diversity; and (v) improved ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration, control of soil erosion and wildfires, and preservation of both wild and domestic biodiversity. The favourable climate in these regions, which allows year‐round grazing and the growth of legumes, should be exploited to improve the sustainability of grassland‐based, extensive farming systems and the quality of their animal products, while at the same time improving ecosystem services. The decreasing support for grassland research and development programmes requires increased international scientific and technical cooperation among the few institutions operating in the different Mediterranean‐climate areas of the World to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to farmers.
Restoration efforts in the Mediterranean Basin have been changing from a silvicultural to an ecological restoration approach. Yet, to what extent the projects are guided by ecological restoration principles remains largely unknown. To analyse this issue, we built an on-line survey addressed to restoration practitioners. We analysed 36 restoration projects, mostly from drylands (86%). The projects used mainly soil from local sources. The need to comply with legislation was more important as a restoration motive for European Union (EU) than for non-EU countries, while public opinion and health had a greater importance in the latter. Non-EU countries relied more on non-native plant species than EU countries, thus deviating from ecological restoration guidelines. Nursery-grown plants used were mostly of local or regional provenance, whilst seeds were mostly of national provenance. Unexpected restoration results (e.g. inadequate biodiversity) were reported for 50% of the projects and restoration success was never evaluated in 22%. Long term evaluation (>6years) was only performed in 31% of cases, and based primarily on plant diversity and cover. The use of non-native species and species of exogenous provenances may: i) entail the loss of local genetic and functional trait diversity, critical to cope with drought, particularly under the predicted climate change scenarios, and ii) lead to unexpected competition with native species and/or negatively impact local biotic interactions. Absent or inappropriate monitoring may prevent the understanding of restoration trajectories, precluding adaptive management strategies, often crucial to create functional ecosystems able to provide ecosystem services. The overview of ecological restoration projects in the Mediterranean Basin revealed high variability among practices and highlighted the need for improved scientific assistance and information exchange, greater use of native species of local provenance, and more long-term monitoring and evaluation, including functional and ecosystem services' indicators, to improve and spread the practice of ecological restoration.
Ecological restoration is key to counteracting anthropogenic degradation of biodiversity and to reducing disaster risk. However, there is limited knowledge of barriers hindering the wider implementation of restoration practices, despite high-level political priority to halt the loss of biodiversity. In Europe, progress on ecological restoration has been slow and insufficient to meet international agreements and comply with European Union Nature Directives. We assessed European restoration experts' perceptions on barriers to restoration in Europe, and their relative importance, through a multiple expert consultation using a Delphi process. We found that experts share a common multi-dimensional concept of ecological restoration. Experts identified a large number of barriers (33) to the advancement of ecological restoration in Europe. Major barriers pertained to the socio-economic, not the environmental, domain. The three most important being insufficient funding, conflicting interests among different stakeholders, and low political priority given to restoration. Our results emphasize the need to increase political commitment at all levels, comply with existing nature laws, and optimize the use of financial resources by increasing funds for ecological restoration and eradicate environmentally harmful subsidies. The experts also call for the integration of ecological restoration into land-use planning and facilitating stakeholders' collaboration. Our study identifies key barriers, discusses ways to overcome the main barriers to ER in Europe, and contributes knowledge to support the implementation of the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the EU 2030 Restoration Plan in particular.
Production and nutritive value of forage in silvopastural systems can be improved by introducing shade‐ tolerant grass and legume species in appropriate mixtures. The management of these systems can present a challenge regarding the selection of the proper grass and legume species as well as the maintenance of the optimum balance between the two species in the grass–legume stand. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the performance of pure stands and mixtures (75:25, 50:50, 25:75) of Dactylis glomerata:Trifolium subterraneum under full sun, 60% shade and 90% shade. Dry matter production of D. glomerata was not affected by shading, while that of T. subterraneum was drastically reduced. Shading increased the crude protein (CP) and acid detergent lignin content, but did not affect the acid detergent fibre and neutral detergent fibre content. The dry matter production of the 75:25 and 25:75 mixtures was higher compared to the one of the 50:50 mixture, while the CP content of the 75:25 mixture was the highest under moderate shading. However, relative yield, aggressivity index and competitive balance index indicated higher competitive ability for D. glomerata compared with T. subterraneum especially under shade. Therefore, the 25:75 mixture is suggested as the most suitable under moderate shade (60%), to perpetuate the stand and avoid the frequent re‐sowing of T. subterraneum.
Global warming, land use change, mass tourism and a deteriorating socioeconomic situation pose serious threats to the sustainability of mountain areas. The future development of these areas could be an example of the Great Transition scenario. Based on iterative and collaborative discussions with 60 treeline experts, we 1) envisioned plausible futures of treeline ecosystems in Europe and 2) explored the role of pragmatism in scenario development and use. The three global change scenario classes (Conventional Worlds, Barbarization and Great Transitions) and four European scenarios (Economy First, Fortress Europe, Policy Rules, Sustainability Eventually) were downscaled using the drivers-pressures-state-impact-response (DPSIR) framework. The scenarios that emerged, i.e. Global Markets, Self-sufficient Economies, Tyranny of Climate Governance and Sustainable Use of Ecosystem Services, show that pragmatism can have either a propitious or pernicious role in scenario analysis. Instead of being truly honest brokers, scenario producers are likely to manipulate, reconstruct and change scientific knowledge to avoid socially and politically undesired trajectories. We showed by mathematical optimization that scenario users are likely to miss the Sustainable Use of Ecosystem Services scenario if they search within the pragmatic decision space which optimally justifies the two pre-existing global policies: climate policy and economic growth. We conclude that pernicious pragmatism leads to the trap a tendency of both users and producers of scenarios to use pre-existing policy agendas and scientific narratives as a pretext to promote their own objectives instead of being open to transformation in science and policy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.