Cited by 45Environmental Conservation and ManagementGeology and Environmental Impact StudiesEnvironmental Philosophy and Ethics

Environmental rehabilitation of damaged land

Open access
Mentis, Mike·2020·Forest Ecosystems

Abstract

Background: Much land is subject to damage by construction, development and exploitation with consequent loss of environmental function and services. How might the loss be recovered? Results: This article develops principles of environmental rehabilitation. Key issues include the following. Rehabilitation means restoring the previous condition. Whether or not to restore is not a technical but a value judgement. It is subject to adopting the sustainability ethic. If the ethic is followed under rule of law then rehabilitation must be done always to ‘the high standard’ which means handing down unimpaired environmental function and no extra land management. The elements of the former condition that it is intended to restore must be specified. Restoring these in any given case is the purpose of that rehabilitation project. The specified restoration elements must be easily measurable with a few simple powerful metrics. Some land damage is not fixable so restraint must be exercised in what construction, development and exploitation are permitted. If sustainability is adopted then cost benefit analysis is not a valid form of project appraisal because trading off present benefits against future losses relies on subjectively decided discount rates, and because natural capital is hard to price, indispensable, irreplaceable and non-substitutable. Elements often to be restored include agricultural land capability, landscape form and environmental function. Land capability is a widely used convention and, with landscape form, encapsulate many key land factors, and are easily measurable. Restoring soil and thereby environmental function provides the necessary base for an ecological pyramid. Conclusions: The need for rehabilitation is not to be justified by cost-benefit or scientific and technological proof, but rests on a value judgement to sustain natural capital for present and future generations. Decision on what activities and projects to permit should be based on what is physically and financially fixable on current knowledge. Business and government must be proactive, develop rehabilitation standards, work out how to meet the standards, design simple powerful metrics to measure performance against the standards, embark on continuous improvement, and report.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s40663-020-00233-4

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sustainable cultivation of lignocellulosic energy crops provides a financial return, while at the same time supporting the rehabilitation of degraded lands and restoring productivity.

    “Sustainable cultivation of lignocellulosic energy crops provides a financial return, while at the same time supporting the rehabilitation of degraded lands and restoring productivity (125).”

    From Restoring Degraded Lands (2021) · cites this paper as [125]

    The paper’s Lesson 3 (page unavailable) calls for restoring damaged land to its pre-project agricultural capability, and Lesson 8 describes pasture establishment as a way to restore soil function. These passages support the rehabilitation and productivity aspect, but do not establish that cultivating lignocellulosic energy crops achieves it or provides a financial return. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Bell RW (2002) Restoration of degraded landscapes: principles and lessons from case studies with salt-affected land and mine revegetation. CMU J 1(1):1-21
  2. Bell RW (2013) Land restoration. In: Jorgensen SE (ed) Encyclopedia of environmental management. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, USA CER (2019) The truth about Mpumalanga coal mines failure to comply with their water use licences. Centre for Environmental Rights, Cape Town
  3. De Klerk LP, Claasen M (2015) Proceedings of the workshop on South Africa mining-related landscape rehabilitation status quo: identifying research work required to close knowledge gaps. Report to Water Research Commission. CSIR report no.: CSIR/WR/2015/00/10/C Drucker PF (1967) The effective executive. Heinemann, London
  4. Hancock GR, Martin Duque JF, Willgoose GR (2019) Geomorphic design and modelling at catchment scale for best mine rehabilitation -The Drayton mine example (New South Wales, Australia). Environ Model Softw. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.12.003 · DOI
  5. Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin, London
  6. Macdonald SE, Landhäuser SM, Skousen J, Franklin J, Frouz J, Hall S, Jacobs DF, Quideau S (2015) Forest restoration following surface mining disturbance: challenges and solutions. New For 46:706-732. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11056-015-9506-4 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Mentis M (2015) Managing project risks and uncertainties. Forest Ecosyst 2:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-014-0026-z · DOI
  8. Murphy BW (2014) Soil organic matter and soil function -review of the literature and underlying data. Department of the Environment, Canberra Parkinson CN (1958) Parkinson's law: the pursuit of Progress. John Murray, London
  9. Parotta JA, Knowles OH (1999) Restoration of tropical moist forests on bauxite- mined land in the Brazilian Amazon. Restor Ecol 7(2):103-116
  10. Porter ME, van der Linde C (1998) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. In: Portr ME (Ed) On Competition. Harvard Business Review Book, Boston, pp351-375.
  11. Roux E (1969) Grass: a story of Frankenwald. Oxford University Press, Cape Town
  12. Taleb NN (2001) Fooled by randomness: the hidden role of chance in life and in the markets. Penguin Random House, London
  13. Tanner P, Möhr-Swart M (2007) Guidelines for the rehabilitation of mined land. Chamber of Mines of South Africa/Coal Tech, Johannesburg World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, USA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mentis, M.
Corresponding author
Mentis, Mike
Venue
Forest Ecosystems
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-04-06
Volume
7
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2095-6355 (ISSN-L)
  • 2197-5620
OpenAlex
W3029922925
Cited by
45
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
7.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Forest Ecosystems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Conservation and Management
  • Social Sciences › Law › Geology and Environmental Impact Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Environmental Philosophy and Ethics
Keywords
environmental rehabilitation, land damage, restoration, sustainability ethics, natural capital, land capability, landscape form, environmental functions, discount rate, rehabilitation standards, performance indicators, rule of law

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review