Meredith Root-Bernstein
Shalom D. Addo-Danso
Brandon Bestelmeyer5- 1Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR) Center for Ecology and Conservation Sciences, Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle/Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France
- 2Center for Applied Ecology and Sustainability, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
- 3Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad, Santiago, Chile
- 4Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)-Forestry Research Institute of Ghana, Kumasi, Ghana
- 5U.S. Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) Range Management Research Unit, Jornada Experimental Range, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, United States
Rewilding is a flexible conservation approach that may be applicable to a wide variety of ecological, historical and socio-cultural contexts. We believe that comparative socio-ecological research on woodland habitat trajectories among contexts is an excellent opportunity to consider possible rewilding approaches. Here, we draw on a comparison between arid and seasonally dry woodlands of the Sahel region of Africa and the Southern Cone of South America. The two regions, while sharing a common Gondwanan floral origin, differ in terms of subsequent biogeographical processes and have different climatic gradients. Historically, both regions were colonised, although along different models, and the Southern Cone has experienced greater land-use change and agricultural modernisation. Culturally, both regions have indigenous populations with traditional management techniques and local ecological knowledge, although attention to these topics in research and conservation has had different emphases in each region. Rewilding, focusing on charismatic animals, has been proposed and implemented in some parts of the Southern Cone, but has hardly been mentioned for the Sahel. We discuss the applicability of potential rewilding models involving key plants for each region, and what a plant-focused rewilding practice could gain from a comparative approach in the two regions.
Introduction
Rewilding is an approach to conservation and restoration that focuses on ecological functions and processes, rather than on species composition or habitat structure. Rewilding is usually put into practice by using (re)introduced key species as “natural restoration tools” while maintaining relatively low land use intensity and adaptive management where necessary (Carver et al., 2021). It has been argued that rewilding projects should be both socially and ecologically context-specific (Root-Bernstein et al., 2017a). Nevertheless, most rewilding policy and practice recommendations are framed in global or general terms (e.g. Pettorelli et al., 2018; IUCN, 2021). In addition, most practical experience with rewilding comes from North America and Europe (see Pettorelli et al., 2018). Here we focus on two large regions, the Sahel [in which we include broadly the transition between the Sahara and tropical forests from East to West Africa (Campbell et al., 2021)] and the Southern Cone of South America (in which we include the arid diagonal), which present interesting similarities and contrasts (Figure 1). Furthermore, in this paper we focus on rewilding with plants.
Figure 1. The main woodland habitats considered in this paper. They include (A) Cerrado (By Marcelo Camargo/Agência Brasil, CC BY 3.0 br), (B) Caatinga (Allan Patrick from Mossoró, Brasil - IMG_0026, CC BY-SA 2.0), (C) Dry chaco (By Peer V - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0), (D) the WWF Ecoregions Chilean matorral (locally known as espinal; photo MR-B), (E) Espinal (photo Wikabyel, CC BY-SA 4.0), (F) West Sudanian Savanna (NOAA, US Gov, Unidentified, Public Domain), (G) Sahelian Acacia Savanna (photo SAD), (H) East Sudanian Savanna (David Stanley from Nanaimo, Canada, CC BY 2.0), (I) Northern Congolian Forest savanna (Cnatra09, CC BY-SA 3.0), (J) Guinean Forest-Savanna (photo SAD).
Most of the focus in the rewilding literature has been on reintroducing animal species, usually megafauna (Bühne et al., 2022). But key plant species can structure ecological interactions (Enquist et al., 2020; Schweiger and Svenning, 2020) and can have cultural importance and charisma (Hall et al., 2011; Yadav et al., 2024). Our definition of rewilding with plants is that it focuses on these ecologically structuring and culturally important “megaflora”, or more generally, “foundation plants” (cf. foundation species; Ellison, 2019). These are primarily trees and shrubs, palms, and cacti, which have foundational roles interacting with other species and abiotic ecosystem components (e.g. soil). The focus on foundation plants has the goal of contributing to a natural restoration of ecological processes. However, unlike traditional reintroduction and conservation projects, in rewilding the goal is not primarily to improve the conservation status of a given species (this can be an additional goal), nor is it composition-oriented (with targets for species presence or biodiversity level). Rather, it focuses on recovering ecological functions and ecosystem processes. One strand of rewilding, trophic rewilding, focuses on reintroducing herbivores and carnivores with the justification that trophic interactions have a top-down effect controlling vegetation (e.g. Svenning et al., 2019). If this were always the case or the whole story, there would be no argument for the efficiency of intervening directly to restore plant populations to achieve desired rewilding outcomes. However, the top down vs. bottom up debate in ecology has led to the understanding that both situations can exist in nature (Meserve et al., 2003), for example in drylands with variable rainfall, and in such bottom up cases and situations direct intervention on plants would be appropriate. In addition, there are foundational plant functions that are not directly controlled by herbivory, e.g. the ecological legacy effects and biodiversity benefits of old trees and deadwood (Garbarino et al., 2015; Hämäläinen et al., 2023). To claim that rewilding can only be enacted by animals via trophic impacts would be to confuse a specific causal pathway with a desired ecological outcome.
Further, rewilding with plants is different from some other forms of restoration or conservation in that it strongly favors the recovery of natural or naturalistic habitat structures. Naturalistic plantation structures such as nucleation clusters can potentially satisfy this criterion where they may lead, through succession, to naturalistic habitat. Rewilding with plants also aims to provide the conditions for greater species’ autonomy, agency, and spontaneous self-regulation (i.e. “passive management”). This implies the acceptance of novel and unpredicted ecosystem trajectories. However, it does not mean that plants in rewilding projects cannot have interactions with humans, such as having instrumental value as restoration “tools”, or providing resources, e.g. timber and non-timber forest resources, where these can be harvested sustainably. Passive management, or the redistribution of autonomy and control between humans and other species, also does not mean no management at all: control of invasive alien plants, insect outbreaks or plant diseases, fire frequencies, or woody encroachment of ancient grasslands would be appropriate management choices in many contexts. The form of management favored by a rewilding approach would, however, tend as much as possible towards management through reintroduction of natural ecological functions and processes.
Humans have manipulated vegetation to achieve functional ecosystems through planting, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, improving soil, burning, mowing, coppicing, and so on, for millennia. While traditional management, agriculture, forestry, ecological restoration, or plant conservation may use some methods that overlap with what we describe above as rewilding with foundation plants, it is the goals and ethos related to jump-starting the spontaneous reassembly of functional natural ecosystems that make it distinct as a practice. In the same way, rewilding with animals is not identical to domestication, taming, hunting, pastoralism, species translocation, in situ conservation, or other forms of manipulating animals, although some of the methods may overlap. For example, tree planting is to rewilding with foundation plants what species translocation and reintroduction are to rewilding with megafauna: a practical method shared across several other practices, which may however be implemented to achieve a specific and different set of goals within rewilding.
Here we focus on rewilding with foundation plants in the Sahel and the Southern Cone, two less-considered areas for such an approach. The Sahel and the Southern Cone have very different faunas, but much of their floras share a common Gondwanan origin (Carta et al., 2022). Both regions have generally experienced considerable defaunation (Stuart, 2015) and long histories of anthropogenic disturbance (Pausata et al., 2020; Borrero, 2022). They also differ biogeographically in important ways: the Sahel is an east-west horizontal region with a limited but extreme dry-to-moist north-south gradient, while the dry woodlands of the Southern Cone form a diagonal southwest- northeast distribution divided by the rain shadow and distributional barrier of the Andes (Couvreur et al., 2021; Campbell et al., 2021). As we will discuss in more detail below, they also have divergent if comparable cultural and socioeconomic histories and current conditions.
Comparisons and contrasts
Biogeography of the Sahel and Southern Cone
Both the Sahel and the Southern Cone of South America, except for the extreme of Patagonia, have a common plant origin in Gondwanan or Holotropical flora (Carta et al., 2022). Leguminosae, Moraceae, Lauraceae and Annonaceae dominate tropical rainforests on both continents (Pennington and Dick 2004). In turn the Amazonian tropical forests are the evolutionary source for most dryland woodland species in South America (Antonelli et al., 2018). A similar diversification during past periods of cooling and drying seems to have occurred for plant taxa in Africa (Monthe et al., 2019; Couvreur et al., 2021). The Sahara has fluctuated between a “green” savanna with wetlands and an arid desert since the Eocene (Larrasoaña et al., 2013), and long term climate variation continues to largely explain the Sahara-Sahel boundary (Thomas and Nigam, 2018; Brandt et al., 2015). Changing patterns of aridity in southern South America are due to the interactions of changing ocean currents and Andean uplift (Garreaud et al., 2010). The fauna of South America was strongly altered by the Great American Biotic Interchange (Carrillo et al., 2015), and was also more affected by megafaunal extinctions than African fauna (Stuart, 2015). In the Southern Cone, we can identify a set of arid, semi-arid and seasonally dry woodland types including Chilean Espinal and sclerophyllous woodlands, the Chaco Seco, the Argentinian Espinal and Caldenal woodlands, and the Cerrado (we also include the Caatinga to complete the so-called arid woodland diagonal) (Campbell et al., 2021). Some important wooded habitats also have substantial grass cover (Overbeck et al., 2022). In the Sahel region, we find desert thornscrub, Afrotropical dry thorn savanna and thornscrub, Afrotropical moist mixed savanna, and Guinea savanna (Campbell et al., 2021). According to Campbell et al. (2021), the Guinea savanna is comparable to the Cerrado, and the Afrotropical moist mixed savanna is comparable to the Chaco Seco and Argentinian Espinal.
Different critical research traditions
Different heritages of colonization (Horvath, 1972), development, land tenure, and land-use change have affected how dry forests and woodlands in each region are perceived, studied and managed. Following the extension of the Incan empire into parts of southern South America, the colonization of that region by the Spanish was (post-1500) an extension of imperial colonialism focused on resource extraction, although subsequent historical waves of post-independence colonialism starting in the 1800s focused on settlement and elimination of indigenous polities (Combès et al., 2009; Delrio et al., 2010; Harambour-Ross, 2012; Covey, 2020). By contrast, European colonialism in the Sahel was primarily focused on imperial extraction and trade, while previous North African Muslim campaigns were also a major force shaping a complex region of multiple ethnicities and kingdoms (Webb, 1995; Calkins and Ille, 2014; Mann, 2021). Thus both regions have undergone significant cultural change or syncretism over the past centuries, with important implications for indigenous livelihoods practices and ecological knowledge. Interestingly, in the Sahel and in Africa in general we find many post-colonial critiques of productivity, fire, pastoralism and degradation (Fairhead and Leach, 1996; 2003; Leach and Mearns, 1996; André et al., 2003; Davis, 2007; Ballouche 2019; Benjaminsen and Hiernaux, 2019; Hoag, 2022). By contrast in the Southern Cone colonial discourses shaping perceptions of the landscape and its management are less often explicitly critiqued (but see Bestelmeyer, 2014; Le Polain de Waroux et al., 2016; del Giorgio et al., 2022; Cypher, 2022).
In addition we observe different attitudes towards local subsistence practices in woodlands in the two regions. The Southern Cone sees industrialization of agriculture for export as key to development (e.g. Kay, 2002; Norberg, 2019). For most of the twentieth and twenty-first century, Argentina and Paraguay have favored cattle ranching, plantations and the expansion of soy monocultures (Norberg, 2019). During the same period Chile has favored large, modernized fruit, wine and vegetable production for export, and promoted plantations of eucalyptus and pine (Kay, 2002; Navarro et al., 2005). This has led to a long-term exodus of the rural population to urban areas (Sili, 2018). In complement to these trends, conservation of woodlands typically seeks to preserve or restore high-profile “natural habitats” such as remote areas or temperate forests with limited human uses (Squeo et al., 2012; Wakild, 2015; Grau et al., 2015). Enforcement of deforestation regulations is highly variable (Le Polain de Waroux et al., 2016). Woodland restoration is in many cases carried out as industrial compensation for habitat destruction, and mainly consists of enclosed tree plantations. Techniques appropriate for arid and semi-arid habitats such as nurse species or nucleation are rarely applied (Root-Bernstein and Silva, 2022).
By contrast development goals in the Sahel are focused on improving the conditions of smallholder agricultural populations (Mortimore, 2016; Lalou et al., 2019). Africa, including in particular the Sahel, is urbanizing rapidly (Güneralp et al., 2017). This has not (yet) produced the demographic, land-use and conservation transitions seen in the Southern Cone. Thus, restoration and management in the Sahel region, which is mainly driven by farmer and community-led initiatives, continues to focus on creating productive habitats for peasant economies by addressing drivers of land degradation (e.g. Lipper et al., 2010; Lahmar et al., 2012; FAO, 2016; Maisharou et al., 2015; Pasiecznik and Reij, 2020; Assèdé et al., 2021). Restoration mainly consists of planting economically valuable trees, forming enclosures to protect them, and managing rangelands, soil and water resources (Chirwa and Mahamane, 2017). Drought, violence, and food insecurity, and inclusion of women and youth, as well as minority groups are key issues that intersect with restoration and conservation (Abiodun et al., 2020; Pasiecznik and Reij, 2020).
Despite more attention to rural development in the Sahel, the Southern Cone seems to lead the way in considering local ecological knowledge. While the knowledge of mestizo peasants of the Southern Cone has been overlooked (but see Root-Bernstein et al., 2017c; 2022; Costa, 2021), research on the ecological knowledge and practices of indigenous populations is relatively abundant (e.g. Rozzi, 2015; Joa et al., 2018), as are indigenous accounts of their own environmental knowledge and ontologies (e.g. Loncon, 2023; Krenak, 2022; Raoni and Dutilleux, 2019; Kopenawa and Albert, 2010). In the Sahel, such scholarship appears to be less influential (Sacande and Muir, 2022), although we can find abundant ethnobiology (e.g. Boadu and Asase, 2017; Boakye, 2018; Van Huis, 2017, 2022; Gouwakinnou et al., 2019) and ontological reflection (Mbembe, 2023).
Comparing and contrasting woodland dynamics
Across the Sahel we find some shared issues around dryland forest and woodland restoration. One constant theme is land degradation/desertification (Swift, 1996; Larrasoaña et al., 2013; Thomas and Nigam, 2018; Brandt et al., 2015). Land degradation in forests and woodlands (as variably defined in the literature) can involve processes including land clearing for agriculture, overexploitation of woody plants such that regeneration and recovery cannot stabilize plant populations, overstocking that limits plant recovery, reduced cover that leads to soil erosion, falling water tables due to increasing aridity and water withdrawals for agriculture, and fuel buildup that leads to high intensity fires that led to shifts in plant life forms (Bestelmeyer et al., 2015; Grünzweig et al., 2022; Mortimore and Turner, 2005; Peinetti et al., 2024). In some parts of the Sahel region we also see impacts of modernization (also present in the Southern Cone), such as exotic timber forestry leading to increasing fire risk, or reduction in livestock movements leading to overgrazing (Biaou, 2009). Another key issue is the role of good governance in achieving restoration outcomes. This is particularly critical in areas of the Sahel with weak states or with ongoing conflicts (Fletcher et al., 2022; Root-Bernstein and Mugelé in press). However, there are certain countries including Ghana where there are policies and legislative frameworks to promote good governance and citizen participation, especially land owners and local communities in the management of forest/woodland resources and restoration efforts (Addo-Danso et al., 2020).
In the Southern Cone, we find a different set of key research interests. Important themes include the roles of fire and livestock in shaping natural woodland and forest dynamics and patterns. In the Bolivian Cerrado, use of fire in wet seasons benefits savanna and doesn’t affect forest, but livestock overgrazing prevents use of fire for savanna management by removing burnable biomass (Veldman, 2010). Low intensity cattle grazing is reported to be better than cattle exclusion for maintaining typical cerrado understory vegetation and preventing woody encroachment (Durigan et al., 2022). In the Chaco, livestock produce a mosaic of grazing effects with persistent vegetation loss in limited areas near to water sources (Tálamo et al., 2021). This mosaic of varying vegetation cover, featuring open areas alongside intact forest, may have important positive effects on biodiversity (Bestelmeyer, 2014). Recovery of valuable tree species can occur over time with grazing management and protection from thorny nurse plants (Tálamo et al., 2015, 2021). European livestock raised by the Mapuche indigenous peoples may have formed the now-threatened espinal and caldenal woodlands in Argentina (Cypher, 2022; Guida-Johnson and Zuleta, 2013). In woodlands of central Chile, the effects of cattle on woodland conditions are contingent on the type of pasturing (Root-Bernstein et al., 2022). Cattle with prior foraging experience that roamed freely in the woodlands all year long increased tree seedling regeneration. In contrast, cattle bought to fatten for slaughter reduced tree seedling regeneration by indiscriminately eating tree seedlings. Throughout the Southern Cone, in the absence of native large herbivores, cattle may play important ecological roles (Van Uytvanck and Verheyen, 2014; Mazzini et al., 2018; Johnson et al., 2018).
Across the Sahel and the Southern Cone we also see opportunities to use the comparative method to investigate general issues in woodland management and natural dynamics. For example, while it appears that combinations of factors cause woodland ecosystem collapses, we know little about the factors that influence trajectories of restoration or succession away from collapse (Newton 2021). Finding woodlands in both regions that are comparable in terms of size, management, restoration technique, or climate, and then following how differences across them may influence trajectories of recovery could be a useful exercise. It may be important, both in the Sahel and the Southern Cone, to clearly distinguish between habitat changes as forms of natural resilience or succession, and habitat changes as barriers to certain economic activities. Preventing woodland change to preserve associated economic uses of woodlands may lead to woodland loss, such as via land conversion to pasture or cropland use. Although the Southern Cone and to a lesser extent the Sahel are invested in sedentary, highly specialized economies (e.g. industrial monocrops), more flexible, mixed, and mobile livelihoods have long been adaptations to variation and change. While transhumance and nomadic pastoralism have existed in both regions, they remain only in a limited form in the Southern Cone, and are threatened in the Sahel (Nwangwu et al., 2020). We also need to take into account that different variables drive woodland regeneration and recovery across the two regions. Notably, variability in precipitation controls regeneration of trees in South America but not in Africa (Holmgren et al., 2013). Thus, herbivory escape due to high precipitation pulses is possible in South America, but may not be possible in Africa. Adaptive differences between tree species in each region mean different restoration and rewilding strategies will be necessary.
Recommendations for rewilding with plants from the comparative perspective
Woodland change is inevitable. Rewilding needs to be adjusted to context (Root-Bernstein et al., 2017b), and ongoing processes of climate and social change are among these contextual aspects. It will be important to recognize where woodland restoration is appropriate considering ecological history, function, and potential, and where establishing trees represents intentional land conversion from long-term grasslands that never supported trees (Veldman et al., 2015). A rewilding approach to restoration can embrace novel trajectories influenced by climate change, globalization, and evolving anthropogenic disturbances, while taking a holistic approach to bringing back a functional ecosystem. In regions like the Southern Cone where preserving nature values is on the restoration agenda, a rewilding approach that embraces areas that some consider to be degraded (Macchi and Grau, 2012) should be considered as an important tool for preserving natural habitats. In the Sahel, where development and subsistence issues are more prominent, it is important to recognise that low-nutrient soils and arid conditions can support a mosaic of woodland or forest islands of varying degrees of productivity (e.g. André et al., 2003; Fairhead and Leach, 1996). Pragmatically, taking into account governance limitations, the need for adaptation, and resources, it may be most feasible to focus on mosaic restoration and connectivity of landscapes (Hobbs et al., 2014). The challenge is to be able to guarantee spontaneous and autonomous habitat development around woodlands exploited for human livelihoods and kept in a more static condition. This might be envisioned as a mosaic of agricultural lands and woodland types with different rates of change and degrees of autonomy in their successional trajectory. Such mosaics can provide a diversity of ecosystem services (e.g., Kunst et al., 2016).
In Table 1 we suggest desirable plant rewilding baselines, appropriate techniques, compatible human uses, barriers and opportunities. An interesting difference across the two zones is that while the entire Southern Cone experienced clear moments of significant ecological and socio-ecological change at a regional scale, which can serve as baselines—the megafaunal extinctions and colonization—similar regional scale shared baselines are not obvious for the Sahel. Climatic dynamics affect the position of aridity gradients but have not necessarily reorganized habitat types and land uses in the entire region. Thus, baselines in the Sahel are likely to depend on local histories of species extirpation, land-use and livelihoods changes.
Table 1. Desirable baselines for rewilding, suggested implementation, and barriers and opportunities for implementation. .
In both zones, a small number of projects have already begun to explore the rewilding space, although with limited attention to plants. The “socio-ecological rewilding” proposed and initiated by the non-governmental organization Kintu for central Chile is focused on re-establishing the plant-animal interaction between guanacos (Lama guanicoe) and the native acacia Vachellia caven (Root-Bernstein et al., 2017b; Guerrero-Gatica and Root-Bernstein, 2019). Guanacos may also disperse other endemic and rare trees in central Chile, including the Chilean palm (Guerrero-Gatica and Root-Bernstein, 2019; Cordero et al., 2021), which could be the focus of future rewilding actions. The largest implemented rewilding project in the Southern Cone, Parque Iberá, is run by a privately funded foundation, and does not to our knowledge focus specifically on any megaflora (Zamboni et al., 2017). However, it is worth noting that this project has been the subject of fierce national controversy concerning the scientific justification for species translocations which have been funded with support from the Argentinian government (Balza et al., 2023; de las Mercedes Guerisoli et al., 2023a, b). This is seen as unjustifiably depriving publically-funded research and conservation of resources, and of diverting funding from conservation of species in their contemporary ranges, which is claimed to be more important than reintroductions to historical ranges. The attack by publicly funded researchers on Parque Iberá resulted in the project threatening to sue for libel. This points to the way that differences in scientific opinions about priorities can become exaggerated by competition for limited funding. It also highlights that rewilding has a strong appeal and can engage important stakeholders, but that this should not be used as an excuse to marginalize other actors. Alliances and consensus are critical to rewilding success.
Similarly, a few rewilding projects involving different megafauna exist in different regions of the Sahel, and their implementation provides evidence of the context-specific nature of such projects and the need for certain key principles to ensure their success (Root-Bernstein et al., 2017a; Mutillod et al., 2024). A key example is the Scimitar-horned Oryx Reintroduction Project, which is jointly implemented by Sahara Conservation (a non-for profit organisation leading the reintroduction of large bird and mammal species in the Sahel), the Chadian Ministry for the Environment and Fishing, and the Abu Dhabi Environment Agency (EAD) in Chad, with the aim to recover and enhance the trophic interactions in the Sahelian grassland of Ouadi Rimé-Ouadi Achim Game Reserve through the reintroduction of the Scimitar-horned Oryx (Chuven et al., 2018; Ogden et al., 2020). The Scimitar-horned Oryx (Oryx dammah) was last seen in the wild in the 1980s, but the project started reintroducing the species in 2016, and by the end of 2023, the population had reached 600, and the species, which in 2000 was classified as Extinct by the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, is currently reclassified as Endangered. The success of this huge conservation effort was achieved through a strong collaboration among key partners, the integration of scientific and local knowledge and the deployment of an effective monitoring framework that incorporates both advanced technologies and ground-based activities to monitor the reintroduced populations (Ogden et al., 2020; Majaliwa et al., 2022).
A megaflora project that has focused on restoring the wilderness of the Sahel is the Great Green Wall for Sahara and the Sahel Initiative for Restoration and Peace. This large-scale initiative was started in 2007 to restore and create a belt of 100 million hectares of through tree planting and natural regeneration in 11 founding African countries stretching some 15 square kilometers wide, more than 8,000 km long from Senegal to Djibouti (Goffner et al., 2019; Koech et al., 2020). The initiative, among other things, was designed as a strategy to combat land degradation, desertification and drought, and to would transform the lives of communities in the Sahel region. This initiative involves many stakeholders at the national and international levels who are working together to build the resilience of the Sahel landscape (FAO, 2016). It generally consists of two kinds of interventions: tree planting to prevent desertification, and women-led agricultural initiatives for local sale (e.g. https://ohmi-tessekere.in2p3.fr accessed August 2022; http://ssnrmp.org/ accessed January 2023). In several countries the Great Green Wall has been accused of favoring agriculturalist populations and ignoring the needs of itinerant pastoralists (Delay et al., 2022; Spiegelenberg, 2022). Whatever the intentions, the integration of accessible forest resources into these projects is sometimes lacking (Sacande and Muir, 2022) and reforestation takes the form of enclosed tree plantations planted in a gridded style (Mugelé 2018).
Traditional conservation initiatives in the Sahel may do better at integrating sustainable woodland resource use and management. An example of good governance integrating local ecological knowledge about tree species for reforestation and social considerations coming from the Sahel region can be found in Ghana. The Forest and Wildlife Policy of Ghana and Ghana’s Forest Plantation Development Strategy seek to promote and develop mechanisms for transparent governance, equitable sharing of benefits and citizen’s participation in resource management and restoration activities (Addo-Danso et al., 2020). Approaches like the Community Resources Management Areas (CREMA) in Ghana that incorporate local ecological knowledge provide examples of how to incorporate contextual knowledge into best practice. The CREMA concept seeks to encourage local communities to integrate natural resource management into their traditional livelihood strategies in areas outside forest reserves and Protected Areas. The CREMA concept has now been adopted as a viable governance mechanism for managing Ghana’s forest resources for climate change mitigation activities such as the REDD+ (Asare et al., 2013). Rewilding also emphasizes the contextual specificity of habitat change and habitat management, and as such can be an important complementary tool with which policy makers can ensure the protection of biocultural diversity.
In conclusion, while there are successful examples of various elements of rewilding with plants in the Sahel and the Southern Cone, as well as conflictual or problematic examples, we see a large potential to consolidate the positive examples and initiate new projects with a full complement of rewilding characteristics. Adaptive learning is essential to adjusting rewilding with plants to different socio-ecological contexts, and a comparative approach can help accelerate this process.
Author contributions
All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.
Funding
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The seminar “Comparative ecological change and restoration in dryland woodlands: identifying common problems and novel solutions in the Southern Cone of South America and the Sahel of Africa” was held at and funded by the University of Chicago Center in Paris, in 2021, and by grant number TJF18 from the FACE Foundation/ Thomas Jefferson Fund/ Make Our Planet Great Again to MR-B. Our discussions informed this paper.
Acknowledgments
We thank all the participants in the seminar “Comparative ecological change and restoration in dryland woodlands.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Abiodun T. F., Oluwasegun A. J., Adebola A. F. (2020). Environmental problems, insecurity in the Sahel region and implications for global security. Ibadan J. Peace Dev. 10, 165–180.
Addo-Danso S. D., Guuroh R. T., Oduro K. A., Abukari H., Foli E. G. (2020). “Forest landscape restoration implementation in Ghana as a socioeconomic opportunity,” in Forest Landscape Restoration and Social Opportunities in the Tropical World. Eds. Severino R. R. P., Santos C. S., Prescott C. (Tokyo, Japan: CEPAN), 29–51.
André V., Pestaña G., Rossi G. (2003). Foreign representations and local realities. Mountain Res. Dev. 23, 149–155. doi: 10.1659/0276-4741(2003)023[0149:FRALR]2.0.CO;2
Antonelli A., Zizka A., Carvalho F. A., Scharn R., Bacon C. D., Silvestro D., et al. (2018). Amazonia is the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, 6034–6039. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1713819115
Asare R. A., Kyei A., Mason J. J. (2013). The community resource management area mechanism: a strategy to manage African forest resources for REDD+. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 201220311. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0311
Assèdé E. S. P., Azihou F. A., Biaou S. S. H., Mariki S. B., Geldenhuys C. J., Sinsin B. (2021). Managing woodland development stages in Sudanian dry woodlands to meet local demand in fuelwood. Energy Sustain. Dev. 61, 129–138. doi: 10.1016/j.esd.2021.01.006
Ballouche A. (2019). Ordinaires, dégradés ou patrimoniaux? La part des héritages dans les paysages de savane en Afrique de l’Ouest. Projets de paysage. Rev. scientifique sur la conception l’aménagement l’espace 21).
Balza U., Baldi R., Rodríguez-Planes L., Ojeda R., Schiavini A. (2023). Scientific evidence does not support the translocation of guanacos in Argentina. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 5, e13031. doi: 10.1111/csp2.13031
Benjaminsen T. A., Hiernaux P. (2019). From desiccation to global climate change: A history of the desertification narrative in the West African Sahel 1900-2018. Global Environ. 12, 206–236. doi: 10.3197/ge.2019.120109
Bestelmeyer B. T. (2014). Deforestation of “Degraded” rangelands: the Argentine Chaco enters the next stage of the anthropocene. Rangelands 36, 36–39. doi: 10.2111/Rangelands-D-14-00026.1
Bestelmeyer B. T., Okin G. S., Duniway M. C., Archer S. R., Sayre N. F., Williamson J. C., et al. (2015). Desertification, land use, and the transformation of global drylands. Front. Ecol. Environ. 13, 28–36. doi: 10.1890/140162
Biaou S. S. H. (2009). Tree recruitment in West African dry woodlands: The interactive effects of climate, soil, fire and grazing (Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University and Research).
Boadu A. A., Asase A. (2017). Documentation of herbal medicines used for the treatment and management of human diseases by some communities in southern Ghana. Evidence-Based Complementary Altern. Med. 2017. doi: 10.1155/2017/3043061
Boakye M. K. (2018). Influence of ethnicity on cultural use of pangolins in Ghana and its implications on their conservation. Ethnobiology Conserv. 7.
Borrero A. A. (2022). The historical and archaeological evidence for southern Cone human-environment interaction. PNAS 112, e2201496119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2201496119
Brandt M., Mbow C., Diouf A. A., Verger A., Samimi C., Fensholt R. (2015). Ground-and satellite-based evidence of the biophysical mechanisms behind the greening Sahel. Global Change Biol. 21, 1610–1620. doi: 10.1111/gcb.2015.21.issue-4
Bühne H., Pettorelli N., Hoffmann M. (2022). The policy consequences of defining rewilding. Ambio 51(1), 93–102.
Campbell I., Behrens K., Hesse C., Chaon P. (2021). Habitats of the World: A Field Guide for Birders, Naturalists, and Ecologists (Bamenda and Buea, Cameroon: Princeton University Press).
Carrillo J. D., Forasiepi A., Jaramillo C., Sánchez-Villagra M. R. (2015). Neotropical mammal diversity and the Great American Biotic Interchange: spatial and temporal variation in South America's fossil record. Front. Genet. 5, 451. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2014.00451
Carta A., Peruzzi L., Ramírez-Barahona S. (2022). A global phylogenetic regionalization of vascular plants reveals a deep split between Gondwanan and Laurasian biotas. New Phytol. 233, 1494–1504. doi: 10.1111/nph.v233.3
Carver S., Convery I., Hawkins S., Beyers R., Eagle A., Kun Z., et al. (2021). Guiding principles for rewilding. Conservation Biology 35(6), 1882–1893.
Chirwa P. W., Mahamane L. (2017). Overview of restoration and management practices in the degraded landscapes of the Sahelian and dryland forests and woodlands of East and southern Africa. South. Forests 1, 8. doi: 10.2989/20702620.2016.1255419
Chuven J., Newby J., Monfort S., Mertes K., Wacher T., Al Dhaheri S., et al. (2018). “Reintroduction of the scimitar-horned oryx in to the Ouadi Rime-Ouadi Achim Game Reserve, Chad,” in Global reintroduction perspective: 2018. Case studies from around the globe. Ed. Soorae P. S. (IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Environment Agency, Abu Dhabi, UAE), 165–169.
Combès I., Villar D., Lowrey K. (2009). Comparative studies and the South American Gran Chaco. Tipití: J. Soc. Anthropology Lowland South America 7, 3.
Cordero S., Gálvez F., Fontúrbel F. E. (2021). Multiple anthropogenic pressures lead to seed dispersal collapse of the southernmost palm Jubaea Chilensis. Front. Ecol. Evol. 9, 719566. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2021.719566
Costa T. (2021). Environmental paradoxes: perceptions of the environment in the Argentinian Southern Chaco. J. Contemp. Archaeology 8, 325–341.
Couvreur T. L., Dauby G., Blach-Overgaard A., Deblauwe V., Dessein S., Droissart V., et al. (2021). Tectonics, climate and the diversification of the tropical African terrestrial flora and fauna. Biol. Rev. 96, 16–51. doi: 10.1111/brv.12644
Covey R. A. (2020). Inca Apocalypse: The Spanish Conquest and the Transformation of the Andean World (USA: Oxford University Press).
Cypher R. A. (2022). Belonging in the Pampas: Ecologies of Conquest and Survival in Argentina's Heartland (Santa Cruz: University of California).
Davis D. K. (2007). Resurrecting the granary of Rome: environmental history and French colonial expansion in North Africa (Vol. 58) (Athens, Ohio, United States: Ohio University Press).
Delay E., Ka A., Niang K., Touré I., Goffner D. (2022). Coming back to a Commons approach to construct the Great Green Wall in Senegal. Land Use Policy 115, 106000.
de las Mercedes Guerisoli M., Mauro I., Teta P., Valenzuela A. E., Mirol P., Defossé G. E., et al. (2023a). Reflexiones acerca del “reasilvestramiento” en la Argentina. Mastozoología Neotropical 30, 1–12.
de las Mercedes Guerisoli M., Schiaffini M. I., Teta P., Valenzuela A. E., Mirol P., Nori J., et al. (2023b). Threatened conservation scientists: The aftermath of an eye-opening publication on rewilding. Biol. Conserv. 287, 110322.
del Giorgio O., Robinson B. E., de Waroux Y. L. P. (2022). Impacts of agricultural commodity frontier expansion on smallholder livelihoods: An assessment through the lens of access to land and resources in the Argentine Chaco. J. Rural Stud. 93, 67–80. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.05.014
Delrio W., Lenton D., Musante M., Nagy M., Papazian A., Pérez P. (2010). Discussing indigenous genocide in Argentina: past, present, and consequences of Argentinean state policies toward native peoples. Genocide Stud. Prev. 5, 138–159. doi: 10.3138/gsp.5.2.138
Durigan G., Pilon N. A., Souza F. M., Melo A. C., Re D. S., Souza S. C. (2022). Low‐intensity cattle grazing is better than cattle exclusion to drive secondary savannas toward the features of native Cerrado vegetation. Biotropica 54 (3), 789–800.
Ellison A. M. (2019). Foundation species, non-trophic interactions, and the value of being common. iScience 13, 254–268. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2019.02.020
Enquist B. J., Abraham A. J., Harfoot M. B., Malhi Y., Doughty C. E. (2020). The megabiota are disproportionately important for biosphere functioning. Nat. Commun. 11, 699. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-14369-y
Fairhead J., Leach M. (1996). Misreading the African landscape: society and ecology in a forest-savanna mosaic (No. 90) (Cam-bridge University Press).
Fairhead J., Leach M. (2003). Reframing deforestation: global analyses and local realities: studies in West Africa (London, UK: Routledge).
FAO (2016). Building Africa’s Great Green Wall: restoring degraded drylands for stronger and more resilient communities (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation).
Fletcher N. L., Bawa S. M., Soulé M. (2022). Impacts of terrorism on biodiversity management in West Africa Sahel: A review. Res. Ecol. 4, 30–41. doi: 10.30564/re.v4i3.4930
Garbarino M., Marzano R., Shaw J. D., Long J. N. (2015). Environmental drivers of deadwood dynamics in woodlands and forests. Ecosphere 6 (3), 1–24. doi: 10.1890/ES14-00342.1
Garreaud R. D., Molina A., Farias M. (2010). Andean uplift, ocean cooling and Atacama hyperaridity: A climate modeling perspective. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 292 (1-2), 39–50.
Goffner D., Sinare H., Gordeon L. J. (2019). The Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel Initiative as an opportunity to enhance resilience in Sahelian landscapes and livelihoods. Regional Environ. Change 19, 1417–1428. doi: 10.1007/s10113-019-01481-z
Gouwakinnou G. N., Biaou S., Vodouhe F. G., Tovihessi M. S., Awessou B. K., Biaou H. S. (2019). Local perceptions and factors determining ecosystem services identification around two forest reserves in Northern Benin. J. Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 15, 1–12. doi: 10.1186/s13002-019-0343-y
Grau H. R., Torres R., Gasparri N. I., Blendinger P. G., Marinaro S., Macchi L. (2015). Natural grasslands in the Chaco. A neglected ecosystem under threat by agriculture expansion and forest-oriented conservation policies. Journal of Arid Environments 123, 40–46.
Grünzweig J. M., De Boeck H. J., Rey A., Santos M. J., Adam O., Bahn M., et al. (2022). Dryland mechanisms could widely control ecosystem functioning in a drier and warmer world. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1064–1076. doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01779-y
Guerrero-Gatica G., Root-Bernstein M. (2019). Challenges and limitations for scaling up to a rewilding project: scientific knowledge, best practice, and risk. Biodiversity 20, 132–138. doi: 10.1080/14888386.2019.1632741
Guida-Johnson B., Zuleta G. A. (2013). Land-use land-cover change and ecosystem loss in the Espinal ecoregion, Argentina. Agriculture Ecosyst. Environ. 181, 31–40. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2013.09.002
Güneralp B., Lwasa S., Masundire H., Parnell S., Seto K. C. (2017). Urbanization in Africa: challenges and opportunities for conservation. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 015002. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa94fe
Hall C. M., James M., Baird T. (2011). Forests and trees as charismatic mega-flora: implications for heritage tourism and conservation. J. heritage tourism 6, 309–323. doi: 10.1080/1743873X.2011.620116
Hämäläinen A., Runnel K., Mikusiński G., Himelbrant D., Fenton N. J., Lõhmus P. (2023). “Living trees and biodiversity,” in boreal forests in the face of climate change: Sustainable Management (Springer International Publishing, Cham), 145–166.
Harambour-Ross A. (2012). “Borderland sovereignties,” in Postcolonial Colonialism and State Making in Patagonia. Argentina and Chile 1840s–1922 (Stoney Brook, New York, United States: Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook).
Hoag C. (2022). The fluvial imagination: on Lesotho’s water-export economy (Oakland, California, United States: University of California Press), 237.
Hobbs R. J., Higgs E., Hall C. M., Bridgewater P., Chapin F. S. III, Ellis E. C., et al. (2014). Managing the whole landscape: Historical, hybrid, and novel ecosystems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12, 557–564. doi: 10.1890/130300
Holmgren M., Hirota M., van Nes E. H., Scheffer M. (2013). Effects of interannual climate variability on tropical tree cover. Nature 3, 755–758. doi: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1906
Horvath R. J. (1972). A definition of colonialism. Curr. anthropology 13, 45–57. doi: 10.1086/201248
IUCN (2021). The benefits and risks of rewilding. Available online at: https://iucn.org/resources/issues-brief/benefits-and-risks-rewilding (Accessed October 1, 2024)
Joa B., Winkel G., Primmer E. (2018). The unknown known–A review of local ecological knowledge in relation to forest biodiversity conservation. Land Use Policy 79, 520–530. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.001
Johnson C. N., Prior L. D., Archibald S., Poulos H. M., Barton A. M., Williamson G. J., et al. (2018). Can trophic rewilding reduce the impact of fire in a more flammable world? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 373, 20170443.
Kay C. (2002). Chile’s neoliberal agrarian transformation and the peasantry. J. agrarian Change 2, 464–501. doi: 10.1111/joac.2002.2.issue-4
Koech G., Winowiecki L. A., Westermann O., Bourne M., Wamawungo D., Carsan S., et al. (2020). Regreening Africa: A bottom-up transformation of degraded lands (Tropenbos International, Wageningen, the Netherlands: ETFRN News).
Kunst C., Navall M., Ledesma R., Silberman J., Anríquez A., Coria D., et al. (2016). “Silvopastoral systems in the western Chaco region, Argentina,” in Silvopastoral systems in southern South America. Eds. Peri P. L., Dube F., Varella A. (Springer International Publishing, Cham), 63–87.
Lahmar R., Bationo B. A., Lamso N. D., Guéro Y., Tittonell P. (2012). Tailoring conservation agriculture technologies to West Africa semi-arid zones: building on traditional local practices for soil restoration. Field Crops Res. 132, 158–167. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.09.013
Lalou R., Sultan B., Muller B., Ndonky A. (2019). Does climate opportunity facilitate smallholder farmers’ adaptive capacity in the Sahel? Palgrave Commun. 5, 1–11.
Larrasoaña J. C., Roberts A. P., Rohling E. J. (2013). Dynamics of green Sahara periods and their role in hominin evolution. PloS One 8, e76514. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076514
Leach M., Mearns R. (1996). The lie of the land: Challenging received wisdom in african environmental change (London: James Currey/ International African Institute).
Le Polain de Waroux Y., Garrett R. D., Heilmayr R., Lambin E. F. (2016). Land-use policies and corporate investments in agriculture in the Gran Chaco and Chiquitano. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 4021–4026. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1602646113
Lipper L., Dutilly-Diane C., McCarthy N. (2010). Supplying carbon sequestration from West African rangelands: opportunities and barriers. Rangeland Ecol. Manage. 63, 155–166. doi: 10.2111/REM-D-09-00009.1
Loncon E. (2023). Azmapu: Aportes de la filosofía Mapuche para el cuidado del lof y la madre tierra (Santiago, Chile: Editorial Planeta Chilena).
Macchi L., Grau H. R. (2012). Piospheres in the dry Chaco. Contrasting effects of livestock puestos on forest vegetation and bird communities. J. Arid Environments 87, 176–187. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.06.003
Maisharou A., Chirwa P. W., Larwanou M., Babalola F., Ofoegbu C. (2015). Sustainable land management practices in the Sahel: review of practices, techniques and technologies for land restoration and strategy for up-scaling. Int. Forestry Rev. 17, 1–19. doi: 10.1505/146554815816006974
Majaliwa M. M., Hughey L. F., Stabach J. A., Songer M., Whyle K., Alhashmi A. E. A., et al. (2022). Experience and social factors influence movement and habitat selection in scimitar-horned (Oryx dammah) reintroduced into Chad. Movement Ecol. 10, 47. doi: 10.1186/s40462-022-00348-z
Mazzini F., Relva M. A., Malizia L. R. (2018). Impacts of domestic cattle on forest and woody ecosystems in southern South America. Plant Ecol. 219, 913–925. doi: 10.1007/s11258-018-0846-y
Meserve P. L., Kelt D. A., Milstead W. B., Gutiérrez J. R. (2003). Thirteen years of shifting top-down and bottom-up control. BioScience 53, 633–646. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0633:TYOSTA]2.0.CO;2
Monthe F. K., Migliore J., Duminil J., Bouka G., Demenou B. B., Doumenge C., et al. (2019). Phylogenetic relationships in two African Cedreloideae tree genera (Meliaceae) reveal multiple rain/dry forest transitions. Perspect. Plant Ecology Evol. Systematics 37, 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ppees.2019.01.002
Mortimore M. (2016). Changing Paradigms for People-Centred Development in the Sahel. In: Behnke R., Mortimore M. (eds) The End of Desertification? Springer Earth System Sciences. (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer), P. 65–98.
Mortimore M., Turner B. (2005). Does the Sahelian smallholder's management of woodland, farm trees, rangeland support the hypothesis of human-induced desertification? J. Arid Environments 63, 567–595. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.03.005
Mugelé R. (2018). La Grande Muraille Verte: géographie d’une utopie environnementale au Sahel (Paris, France: Thèse de doctorat de géographie, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne), 322p.
Mutillod C., Buisson E., Mahy G., Jaunatre R., Bullock J. M., Tatin L., et al. (2024). Ecological restoration and rewilding: two approaches with complementary goals? Biol. Rev. 99, 820–836. doi: 10.1111/brv.13046
Navarro R. M., Henríquez N. C., Cornejo J. A. (2005). The Economic and Social Context of Monoculture Tree Plantations in Chile (Montevideo: World rainforest Movement).
Norberg M. B. (2019). The Political Economy of Agrarian Change in Latin America: Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay (London, UK: Springer).
Nwangwu C., Mbah P. O., Ike C. C., Otu O. A., Ezugworie C. (2020). Transhumant pastoral economy and human security in Nigeria: Whither Civil Society Organisations? J. Asian Afri. Stud. 55, 1033–1053. doi: 10.1177/0021909620905042
Ogden R., Chuven J., Gilbert T., Hosking C., Gharbi K., Craig M., et al. (2020). Benefits and pitfalls of captive conservation genetic management: Evaluating diversity in scimitar-horned oryx to support reintroduction planning. Biol. Conserv. 241, 108244. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108244
Overbeck G. E., Vélez-Martin E., da Silva Menezes L., Anand M., Baeza S., Carlucci M. B., et al. (2022). Placing Brazil's grasslands and savannas on the map of science and conservation. Perspect. Plant Ecology Evol. Systematics 56, 125687. doi: 10.1016/j.ppees.2022.125687
Pausata F. S. R., Gaetani M., Messori G., Berg A., de Souza D. M., Sage R. F., et al. (2020). The Greening of the Sahara: Past changes and future implications. One Earth Rev. 2, 235–248. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2020.03.002
Peinetti H. R., Bestelmeyer B. T., Chirino C. C., Vivalda F. L., Kin A. G. (2024). Thresholds and alternative states in a Neotropical dry forest in response to fire severity. Ecol. Appl. 34, e2937. doi: 10.1002/eap.v34.2
Pennington R. T., Dick C. W. (2004). The role of immigrants in the assembly of the South American rainforest tree flora. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359 (1450), 1611–1622.
Pettorelli N., Barlow J., Stephens P. A., Durant S. M., Connor B., Schulte to Bühne H., et al. (2018). Making rewilding fit for policy. J. Appli. Ecol. 55, 1114–1125. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13082
Root-Bernstein M., Galetti M., Ladle R. J. (2017a). Rewilding South America: ten key questions. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 15, 271–281. doi: 10.1016/j.pecon.2017.09.007
Root-Bernstein M., Guerrero-Gatica M., Pina L., Bonacic C., Svenning J. C., Jaksic F. M. (2017b). Rewilding-inspired transhumance for the restoration of semiarid silvopastoral systems in Chile. Regional Environ. Change 17, 1381–1396. doi: 10.1007/s10113-016-0981-8
Root-Bernstein M., Mugelé R. Circulations of data and images in the Great Green Wall restoration project. Eds. Rottenburg R., Ehrenstein V. (Technoscapes. Brill). In press.
Root-Bernstein M., Silva B. (2022). Informe sobre técnicas de plantación de árboles para reforestación resistente a cambio climático (Santiago de Chile: Kintu).
Root-Bernstein M., Valenzuela R., Huerta M., Armesto J., Jaksic F. (2017c). Acacia caven nurses endemic sclerophyllous trees along a successional pathway from silvopastoral savanna to forest. Ecosphere 8, e01667. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2017.8.issue-2
Root-Bernstein M., Vargas B. H., Bondoux A., Guerrero-Gatica M., Zorondo-Rodríguez F., Huerta M., et al. (2022). Silvopastoralism, local ecological knowledge and woodland trajectories in a category V-type management area. Biodiversity Conserv. 31, 543–564. doi: 10.1007/s10531-021-02349-7
Rozzi R. (2015). Implications of the Biocultural Ethic for Earth Stewardship. In Rozzi R., Chapin F. S., Callicott J. B., Pickett S. T.A., Power M. E., Armesto J. J., et al., 113–136. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-12133-8
Sacande M., Muir G. (2022). Restoring Sahelian landscapes with people and plants: insights from large-scale interventions. Restor. Ecol. 30, e13656. doi: 10.1111/rec.13656
Schweiger A. H., Svenning J. C. (2020). Analogous losses of large animals and trees, socio- ecological consequences, and an integrative framework for rewilding-based megabiota restoration. People Nat. 2, 29–41. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10066
Sili M. (2018). Rural dynamics in Latin American countries: A contemporary analysis. J. Rural Dev. 37, 441–456. doi: 10.25175/jrd/2018/v37/i3/139516
Spiegelenberg F. (2022). Spatial Justice and Large-Scale Land Transformation: A study of spatial justice for transhumant pastoralists in the case of the Great Green Wall (Sweden: MSc Thesis, Linköpings universitet).
Squeo F. A., Estévez R. A., Stoll A., Gaymer C. F., Letelier L., Sierralta L. (2012). Towards the creation of an integrated system of protected areas in Chile: achievements and challenges. Plant Ecol. Diversity 5, 233–243. doi: 10.1080/17550874.2012.679012
Stuart A. J. (2015). Late Quaternary megafaunal extinctions on the continents: a short review. Geological J. 50, 338–363. doi: 10.1002/gj.v50.3
Svenning J. C., Munk M., Schweiger A. (2019). Trophic rewilding: ecological restoration of top-down trophic interactions to promote self-regulating biodiverse ecosystems. Rewilding, 73–98. doi: 10.1017/9781108560962
Swift J. (1996). “Desertification: narratives, winners & Losers,” in The Lie of the Land: Challenging received wisdom on the African environment. Eds. Leach M., Mearns R. (Bloomington, Indiana, US: Indiana University Press), 73–90.
Tálamo A., Barchuk A. H., Garibaldi L. A., Trucco C. E., Cardozo S., Mohr F. (2015). Disentangling the effects of shrubs and herbivores on tree regeneration in a dry Chaco forest (Argentina). Oecologia 178, 847–854.
Tálamo A., Martínez Gálvez M. F., Trigo C. B., Pérez Viscarra S., Alauie A. E., Mauricio N. R. (2021). Ganadería, regeneración y restauración: experiencias desde el bosque chaqueño. Multequina 30, 199–209.
Thomas N., Nigam S. (2018). Twentieth-century climate change over Africa: Seasonal hydroclimate trends and Sahara Desert expansion. J. Climate 31, 3349–3370. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0187.1
Van Huis A. (2017). Cultural significance of termites in sub-Saharan Africa. J. Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 13, 1–12. doi: 10.1186/s13002-017-0137-z
van Huis A. (2022). Cultural significance of locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets in sub-Saharan Africa. J. Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 18, 24. doi: 10.1186/s13002-022-00524-w
Van Uytvanck J., Verheyen K. (2014). “Grazing as a tool for wood-pasture restoration and management,” in European wood-pastures in transition (Routledge, Oxon/New York), 149–167.
Veldman J. W. (2010). The nature of savannas that replace dry forests in Chiquitania, Bolivia (University of Florida: PhD Thesis).
Veldman J. W., Buisson E., Durigan G., Fernandes G. W., Le Stradic S., Mahy G., et al. (2015). Toward an old-growth concept for grasslands, savannas, and woodlands. Front. Ecol. Environ. 13, 154–162. doi: 10.1890/140270
Wakild E. (2015). Parks, people, and perspectives: Historicizing conservation in Latin America. Protecting wild: Parks wilderness foundation Conserv., 41–52.
Webb J. L. (1995). Desert frontier: Ecological and economic change along the Western Sahel 1600-1850 (Madison, Wisconsin, US: Univ of Wisconsin Press).
Yadav H., Phartyal S. S., Iwachido Y., Sasaki T. (2024). Regional assessment of diversity and distribution of native tree species in South Asia. Biodiversity Conserv. 33, 379–396. doi: 10.1007/s10531-023-02756-y
Keywords: Southern Cone, Sahel, rewilding, megaflora, savanna, woodland
Citation: Root-Bernstein M, Addo-Danso SD and Bestelmeyer B (2024) A perspective on restoration with foundation plants across anthropogenic dry forests of the Southern Cone and the Sahel. Front. Ecol. Evol. 12:1176747. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2024.1176747
Received: 28 February 2023; Accepted: 24 September 2024;
Published: 28 October 2024.
Edited by:
Fernanda Michalski, Universidade Federal do Amapá, BrazilReviewed by:
Martin Konvicka, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, CzechiaCopyright © 2024 Root-Bernstein, Addo-Danso and Bestelmeyer. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Meredith Root-Bernstein, meredith.root-bernstein@mnhn.fr