The presence of the keywords resilience, complexity, case study, and know-how in the scientific articles dealing with large-scale ecosystem restoration and the potential to link the LER and long-term ecological research approaches

After introducing the analytical framework, we formulated and answered three questions: How are the keywords resilience, complexity, case study, and know-how present in the scientific articles dealing with large-scale ecosystem restoration?How are the keywords resilience, complexity, case study, and know-how present in the scientific articles dealing with long-term ecological research?Have there been any attempts to link LER with LTER? Then, we report the results of a mapping of the scientific literature about large-scale ecosystem restoration (LER). Using a complex search syntax in Web of Science to reach as many relevant articles as possible we found 710 articles on LER (core set A, directly from the search), and an extended set of 17658 (including articles citing the core A). The LER core set diminished to 120 articles (B) when filtered with keywords related to resilience and complexity, to 56 articles (C) when filtered with the keyword “case study”, and to 2 articles when filtered by “know-how”. A complementary complex search for know-how and nature restoration obtained a core set of 22 articles (D, 660 in the extended set). We then analyzed the core and extended sets A, B, C, and D with CiteSpace, obtained data about articles by countries, processed them by geographical regions, and computed indicators of the presence of target keywords in the LER literature for each region. Based on the calculated indicators, English-speaking countries and the EU cluster separately (with a relatively lower ratio of case studies and a larger ratio of literature about resilience, complexity, and the need for know-how) from Asian countries (with an inverse pattern). Other geographical regions are between these extremes or have a smaller total contribution to the literature. A template to trigger the communication of case studies outside the flux of scientific literature and thus increase the exchange of the needed know-how for LER is finally proposed. For comparison, we present the literature analysis dealing with long-term ecological research. The conclusions are: To Question 1 The small percentage of literature about LER dealing with know-how suggests the restoration industry’s maturity is not very advanced.English-speaking countries and the EU cluster separately (with a relatively lower ratio of case studies and a larger ratio of literature about resilience, complexity, and the need for know-how) from Asian countries (with an inverse pattern). Other geographical regions are between these extremes or have a smaller contribution to the literature.The literature content concerns the resilience of natural processes, with a few clusters pointing out knowledge exchange and actionable science. To Question 2 Although the body of literature about LTER is distinct, the pattern after filtering it with keywords related to resilience and know-how is similar to that of the LER literature. This suggests similar issues related to the complexity of organizations' ecosystems.Similarly to LER, the LTER literature about resilience deals mostly with natural processes. To Question 3 The intersection between the resilience bodies of literature in LER and LTER leads to two articles. One is from 1998 (USA), and the idea of linking the LER and LTER was revived in 2023 in Australia. The qualitative investigation shows isolated other published ideas in 2019 (UK and Kenya) and the most recent in 2024 (EU, with the emergence of the new restoration law).NSF has already funded the topic of restoration in the LTER program, one of which is a LER (large-scale marsh restoration in Plum Island) We recommend: At stake is accelerating the restoration industry’s maturity development process.For internal learning loops, one needs to enhance the circulation of all types of know-how by reporting case studies and the circulation of experts; for grassroots learning loops, one needs stronger cooperation with local communities; and for top-down learning loops, strategic cooperation with LTER ecosystems, when feasible, might be useful to influence the public programs of interest and mobilize funds in a synergic way. This research was partially funded by the Fulbright-Romania Grant 867/2024 provided to the first author.