Tiago Shizen

Pacheco Toma

Elise Buisson

Taking cultural landscapes into account: implications for scaling up ecological restoration

Keywords: historical land use, landscape approach, landscape restoration, review, stakeholder participation, traditional practices

Conceptual frameworks for landscape restoration commonly take an approach focused on ecological (biotic and abiotic) aspects. Yet the recent initiatives demanding that restoration be scaled up to restore millions of hectares of degraded land often encounter socio-cultural challenges too, such as competing land-use interests and low stakeholder engagement. Thus, consideration also needs to be given to cultural landscapes, broadly defined as regions that reflect the long-term interactions between people and the environment. Based on a literature survey we here identify and then discuss features from cultural landscapes-ecological restoration research, which can be relevant to ecological restoration upscaling. Overall, research encompassing cultural landscapes is revealed as less narrowly-focused than that on landscape ecology linked with ecological restoration: our selected studies quite frequently considered social and landscape aspects in addition to ecological aspects. Geographically, research is strongly biased towards Europe and North America, although the most ambitious restoration targets are in the tropics. Taking cultural landscapes into account could enhance restoration by (1) moving towards a transdisciplinary approach thereby offsetting the overemphasis on ecological aspects, and (2) mitigating issues of land use and stakeholder engagement. Further research, paying special attention to the tropics, should aim at integrative approaches that would contribute to scaling up restoration, not only in single large-scale projects but also through the sum of small but concerted actions.

Introduction

Following numerous global calls for restoration of vast areas launched for 2020, such as Aichi targets, Bonn Challenge, REDD+, etc. [START_REF] Aronson | Ecosystem Restoration is Now a Global Priority: Time to Roll up our Sleeves[END_REF] and an initiative led by El Salvador, the UN declared 2021-2030 the Decade of Ecosystem Restoration (United Nations, 2019). The restoration of such extensive areas (restoration upscaling) will no doubt involve varied socioecological contexts and multiple stakeholders. This means that assessing completed restoration actions so goals can be compared with achievements [START_REF] Ruiz-Jaen | Restoration success: How is it being measured?[END_REF][START_REF] Wortley | Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature[END_REF] is no longer sufficient: landscape-scale restoration must also be implemented. Landscape-scale restoration, or simply landscape restoration, encompasses various ecosystem mosaics involving diverse land uses and normally at high spatial scales (e.g., watersheds). Restoration at this scale needs to go beyond "assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed" as proposed in the definition of ecological restoration [START_REF] Ser | The SER International primer on ecological restoration[END_REF]. While it has been long recognized that the sustainability of small-scale projects depends on taking their surroundings, i.e. the landscape context, into account [START_REF] Naveh | From Biodiversity to Ecodiversity: A Landscape-Ecology Approach to Conservation and Restoration[END_REF], most large-scale restoration initiatives have sought to restore large contiguous areas of the same ecosystem, mainly forests (e.g., [START_REF] Cao | Impact of China's Large-Scale Ecological Restoration Program on the Environment and Society in Arid and Semiarid Areas of China: Achievements, Problems, Synthesis, and Applications[END_REF][START_REF] Rodrigues | Large-scale ecological restoration of high-diversity tropical forests in SE Brazil[END_REF]. Often, however, such large-scale contiguous restoration is not feasible, for instance in landscapes characterized by numerous small to medium-sized properties with discontinuous degraded areas to be restored [START_REF] Powlen | Identifying the determinants of and barriers to landowner participation in reforestation in Costa Rica[END_REF]. Moreover, restoration at a single site to deal with local factors often reveals important higher-scale factors that need to be addressed [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF]. In some regions, restoration upscaling could only be achieved through a number of small-scale initiatives, ideally involving exchanging positive feedback and integrated into a favorable landscape context.

Achieving landscape restoration appears to depend on at least three factors. First, effective landscape restoration requires a better understanding of two types of landscape interrelationship: the links first between social, cultural and economic factors, and second between habitat mosaics and the flow of ecosystem services [START_REF] Ockendon | One hundred priority questions for landscape restoration in Europe[END_REF]. This points to a need for a transdisciplinary approach [START_REF] Jellinek | Integrating diverse social and ecological motivations to achieve landscape restoration[END_REF]. Second, conceptual frameworks for landscape restoration commonly focus on ecological aspects and overlook historical factors and references, both ecological and cultural [START_REF] Aronson | Conceptual Frameworks and References for Landscape-scale Restoration: Reflecting Back and Looking Forward[END_REF]. This suggests that the overly ecological slant needs to be redressed. Finally, landscape restoration faces considerable challenges, such as competing interests regarding land use, unstable political contexts and low stakeholder engagement [START_REF] Holl | Restoring tropical forests from the bottom up[END_REF]Latawiec et al., 2015). Each of these three factors has a strong social component that should be addressed. However, landscapes vary in the degree of social influence required for their creation and maintenance. [START_REF] Farina | The Cultural Landscape as a Model for the Integration of Ecology and Economics[END_REF] approaches this through interrelationships between what he calls natural, cultural (social included) and economic capitals, the three main drivers in landscapes. Thus, landscapes driven by cultural capital (i.e. long-term sociocultural mechanisms), or cultural landscapes, differ from landscapes that mainly result from economic capital influences (Farina, 2010, p. 123).

The literature adopts different terms for the cultural capital in landscapes and restoration, such as cultural ecosystems [START_REF] Evans | What about cultural ecosystems? Opportunities for cultural considerations in the "International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration[END_REF], cultural practices [START_REF] Wehi | Importance of including cultural practices in ecological restoration[END_REF], cultural ecosystem services [START_REF] Plieninger | The role of cultural ecosystem services in landscape management and planning[END_REF], socio-ecological systems [START_REF] Swart | Involving society in restoration and conservation[END_REF] and social-ecological restoration [START_REF] Fernández-Manjarrés | The emergence of the socialecological restoration concept[END_REF]. To a large extent, these studies indicate that considering cultural and/or social aspects may lead to more social engagement in restoration through an alignment of restoration actions and traditional land use, including the prevention of conflicts among stakeholder interests, resulting in increased effectiveness of restoration programs. However, often focused on ecosystems, they fail to adopt the landscape approach (i.e. "a multi-faceted integrated strategy that aims to bring together multiple stakeholders from multiple sectors to provide solutions at multiple scales", [START_REF] Reed | Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future[END_REF] that we believe is central to restoration upscaling. Taking the cultural landscape into account should boost ecological restoration (e.g., [START_REF] Moreira | Restoration principles applied to cultural landscapes[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Epilogue: Toward a Transdisciplinary Science of Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration[END_REF] by clearly integrating cultural capital and the landscape approach.

In practice, considering cultural landscapes (CL) in ecological restoration (ER) (hereafter CL-ER) implies highlighting the role of long-term relationships between societies and their landscapes. The ultimate aim is to maintain these relationships and to integrate them into restoration initiatives. In an ever-changing world, conserving CLs might appear unfeasible, while restoring them might seem sentimental. However, seen from a broader perspective, "landscapes of the past" can make multiple contributions. For a start, they provide information relevant to landscape management [START_REF] Antrop | Why landscapes of the past are important for the future[END_REF]. Additionally, recent trends in landscape change may favor CL maintenance. For instance, land use changes involve not only the intensification of deforestation but also its decrease, with the consequent recovery of forested areas [START_REF] Aide | Deforestation and Reforestation of Latin America and the Caribbean (2001-2010)[END_REF][START_REF] Beilin | Analysing how drivers of agricultural land abandonment affect biodiversity and cultural landscapes using case studies from Scandinavia, Iberia and Oceania[END_REF].

CL-ER has been endorsed directly [START_REF] Macdonald | Novel ecosystems: A bridging concept for the consilience of cultural landscape conservation and ecological restoration[END_REF][START_REF] Moreira | Restoration principles applied to cultural landscapes[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Epilogue: Toward a Transdisciplinary Science of Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration and the Cultural Evolution towards a Post-Industrial Symbiosis between Human Society and Nature[END_REF] and indirectly (through the use of the above-mentioned associated terms). It also appears fragmented in ER scientific, outreach and policy documents. However, CL-ER itself has not been systematically reviewed; while landscape ecology in ER was reviewed [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] such an approach lacks a clear focus on the cultural capital. Here, we review how the literature has reported the consideration of cultural landscapes in various ER contexts in an attempt to capture features from CL-ER research that are potentially relevant to ER upscaling. Specifically, we evaluated the sampled literature to: (1) determine the type of research undertaken on CL-ER (theoretical and practical, i.e. case studies), the different aspects covered by such research (social, spatial, ecological) and their geographical location; (2) compare our findings on bibliometric trends with a literature review on landscape ecology in ER [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF]; and (3) identify potential implications and future perspectives for taking CLs into account so as to scale up ER.

Methodology

We performed a literature survey of the CL-ER link in terms of: (1) number of papers per year and areas of research, to assess the topic development through time and disciplinary scope of coverage; (2) research type, scope, and aspects assessed; and (3) geographical location of the studies, to assess how and where research has been conducted. Specifically, we searched the literature through the ISI Web of Science platform, looking for papers published up to 2019 that clearly link cultural landscapes (CLs) and ecological restoration (ER). To access papers, we used the following search string: TOPIC: (restor* OR recover* OR rewet* OR reforest*) AND TOPIC: (cultural near/2 landscape) AND TOPIC: (ecolog* OR ecosyst*). Our approach was partly inspired by [START_REF] Kollmann | Integrating ecosystem functions into restoration ecology-recent advances and future directions[END_REF] for terms related to ER, adding terms associated with CLs. We found 168 entries spanning 1995-2019 of which 25 were excluded as proceedings papers or book chapters (quite often not accessible). Thereafter, abstracts were examined for the presence of both target subjects (CL and ER) and for their relationship (CL-ER). Papers that did not establish any relationship between CLs and ER in their abstract were discarded (34). We ended up with 109 papers spanning 1995-2019 that were examined in detail (see Table A.1, Appendix A for a list of selected papers).

For each paper, we accessed the following information: (1) publication year, research area and journal; (2) research type (theoretical/ practical), theoretical papers being reviews, opinions/ perspectives or proposing a theoretical framework, basing their assumptions on evidence from the literature, while practical papers involved data collection, either primary or secondary (documentary/ modeling analyses, e.g., using historical maps or data on species occurrences); (3) scope of the paper (general/ location-specific/ baseline/ evaluation), a subdivision of research type. Theoretical papers were divided into general (applicable to a broad range of situations) and location-specific (applicable to a specific site or region). Practical papers were divided into baseline (searching for a baseline or baseline elements that could contribute to future restoration actions) and evaluation (assessing the outcome of completed restoration actions); (4) aspects assessed in practical studies, categorized as ecological (vegetation dynamics, soil dynamics, vegetation types, modeling species, indicator species, biodiversity changes, carbon stock, conservation and management practices, and traditional practices), landscape (landscape scenarios, landscape connectivity, land-use history, selection of priority ER sites) and people (people's preferences on ER, people's general perceptions); ( 5) location of the study, categorized as general (not having a focal zone or country), zone (encompassing supranational regions not specifying countries), and continent/country, and also applied to theoretical papers with a general scope when such papers presented case studies (for locationspecific papers, the location was the site or region it addressed).

We assessed the research areas of screened studies and attributed them to at least one corresponding broad category from the ISI Web of Science (Arts & Humanities, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Physical Sciences, Social Sciences, and Technology), as shown in detail in Table A.2, Appendix A. When there was more than one research area in the same broad category, we counted it as a single record. We compare our results with a similar study on landscape ecology in ER, by performing the same research area assessment for 52 of the 54 studies screened by [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] and provided in their supplementary material (2 studies were not indexed in the database). We acknowledge methodological differences between our study and that from [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF], but this comparison was restricted to broad categories and with percentages.

The two studies not indexed in the database were probably captured from the Scopus database they also assessed, which we considered too low and uninfluential to general focal patterns.

Venn diagrams were made using the R package "eulerr" [START_REF] Larsson | Creating space for large-scale restoration in tropical agricultural landscapes[END_REF].

Results and discussion

Bibliometric overview

We reviewed 109 studies published from 1995 to 2019. It represents much less publications than other subjects related to ecological restoration, such as restoration success [START_REF] Wortley | Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature[END_REF] and restoration of ecosystem functions [START_REF] Kollmann | Integrating ecosystem functions into restoration ecology-recent advances and future directions[END_REF], but, when comparing the same time span, it is a number of publications similar to that found by [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] looking at links between landscape ecology in ER. The limited number of publications retrieved on CL-ER may be either a sign that CL-ER is being reported using other terms (e.g., socioecological systems, socioecological production landscapes, and semi-natural landscapes) or that it has not reached the scientific arena. Many restoration projects do not highlight links between environmental objectives and patterns of traditional resource use (economic or utilitarian benefits) [START_REF] Wehi | Importance of including cultural practices in ecological restoration[END_REF], and those that do highlight these links often fail to present their results as scientific outputs. While we did not assess the grey literature and acknowledge that this would have yielded more publications and reports, we believe that our review is still representative as we retrieved all the publications found on the subject. We found studies in 30 countries, compared, for instance, to the 9 and 49 countries covered in peerreviewed papers and grey literature, respectively, found by Reed et al. (2017) for integrated landscape approaches.

Type of research and aspects assessed

Theoretical (48%) and practical papers (52%) were rather balanced (Fig. 1). This suggests that CL-ER is being addressed based not only on opinions but also on practical evidence obtained from data collection, modelling and assessment of stakeholders' opinions. Theoretical studies approach the topic in different ways, ranging from merely briefly mentioning the importance of considering cultural aspects in ER, to more in-depth analysis of the importance of CL-ER research and application [START_REF] Kueffer | Reconciling conflicting perspectives for biodiversity conservation in the Anthropocene[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Towards a sustainable future for Mediterranean biosphere landscapes in the global information society[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Epilogue: Toward a Transdisciplinary Science of Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration and the Cultural Evolution towards a Post-Industrial Symbiosis between Human Society and Nature[END_REF][START_REF] Pfadenhauer | Some Remarks on the Socio-Cultural Background of Restoration Ecology[END_REF][START_REF] Weinstein | Ecological restoration and estuarine management: placing people in the coastal landscape[END_REF]). Yet a central theoretical study, in which the authors contrast ER focused on ecosystems and on CLs and propose ways of applying ER principles to CLs, is not included since it was published in a non-indexed journal [START_REF] Moreira | Restoration principles applied to cultural landscapes[END_REF].

However, we were able to capture another study of this kind, which compares the literature on CLs and ecosystem services and stresses the importance of linking them [START_REF] Schaich | Linking Ecosystem Services with Cultural Landscape Research[END_REF].

They advocate taking cultural services into account, and this is followed in several studies which either strengthen this recommendation [START_REF] Collier | Novel ecosystems and the emergence of cultural ecosystem services[END_REF][START_REF] Guo | Promoting ecosystem services through ecological planning in the Xianghe Segment of China's Grand Canal[END_REF][START_REF] Rey-Benayas | Restoration of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on Agricultural Land[END_REF][START_REF] Schirpke | Cultural ecosystem services of mountain regions: Modelling the aesthetic value[END_REF] or quantify cultural services to guide future restoration efforts [START_REF] Barbedo | Enhancing ecosystem services for flood mitigation: a conservation strategy for peri-urban landscapes?[END_REF][START_REF] Van Berkel | Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape[END_REF]. Still, there are fewer theoretical studies with a general scope (the present study would fit this category) than location-specific ones, suggesting that research is directed more toward specific local or regional issues in CL-ER. We examined the practical studies in more detail to identify the aspects actually being assessed in CL-ER research. We found widespread assessment of ecological aspects, consistent with what is reported by studies on the evaluation of restoration success [START_REF] Aronson | Are Socioeconomic Benefits of Restoration Adequately Quantified? A Meta-analysis of Recent Papers[END_REF][START_REF] Ruiz-Jaen | Restoration success: How is it being measured?[END_REF][START_REF] Wortley | Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature[END_REF]. Examples include diversity of plants [START_REF] Osland | Restoring diversity after cattail expansion: disturbance, resilience, and seasonality in a tropical dry wetland[END_REF] and insects [START_REF] García-Tejero | Land use changes and ground dwelling beetle conservation in extensive grazing dehesa systems of north-west Spain[END_REF][START_REF] Verdasca | Forest fuel management as a conservation tool for early successional species under agricultural abandonment: The case of Mediterranean butterflies[END_REF], vegetation dynamics through pollen and charcoal records [START_REF] Pellatt | Environmental change in Garry oak (Quercus garryana) ecosystems: the evolution of an eco-cultural landscape[END_REF] and topsoil characteristics [START_REF] García-Tejero | Land use changes and ground dwelling beetle conservation in extensive grazing dehesa systems of north-west Spain[END_REF]. Aspects related to landscapes (e.g., landscape scenarios and connectivity, and land-use history) and people's perceptions (e.g., general perceptions and preferences about ER) are also well represented (Fig. 2). Several studies develop landscape scenarios for future restoration [START_REF] Barbedo | Enhancing ecosystem services for flood mitigation: a conservation strategy for peri-urban landscapes?[END_REF][START_REF] Hainz-Renetzeder | Assessing the potential supply of landscape services to support ecological restoration of degraded landscapes: A case study in the Austrian-Hungarian trans-boundary region of Lake Neusiedl[END_REF] and also describe landscape history [START_REF] Pellatt | Environmental change in Garry oak (Quercus garryana) ecosystems: the evolution of an eco-cultural landscape[END_REF][START_REF] Van Mourik | Impact of human land use on soils and landforms in cultural landscapes on aeolian sandy substrates (Maashorst, SE-Netherlands)[END_REF] to provide baselines for CL restoration. Historical landscapes are investigated through aerial photography combined with local knowledge [START_REF] Rescia | Reformulating the socialecological system in a cultural rural mountain landscape in the Picos de Europa region (northern Spain)[END_REF], and additionally evaluated through people's perceptions of past social changes together with biodiversity and land-use changes [START_REF] Beilin | Analysing how drivers of agricultural land abandonment affect biodiversity and cultural landscapes using case studies from Scandinavia, Iberia and Oceania[END_REF]. Preferences on landscape scenarios are also evaluated, for instance in Swiss mountain areas [START_REF] Soliva | How do biodiversity and conservation values relate to landscape preferences? A case study from the Swiss Alps[END_REF]. However, we found less frequent reporting of a combined CL-ER approach to assessing the outcome of restoration actions (N=11; although it might be happening "on the ground", see [START_REF] Wehi | Importance of including cultural practices in ecological restoration[END_REF]). Interestingly, an example of a study of this kind encompasses various research categories, assessing people's perceptions and preferences regarding a floodplain restoration project and finding that restoration of historic landscapes is perceived positively [START_REF] Schaich | Local residents' perceptions of floodplain restoration measures in Luxembourg's Syr Valley[END_REF].

Trends in geographical distribution

Although the papers report studies performed on all long-term inhabited continents (thus excluding Antarctica), in 30 countries and three zones (Mediterranean, temperate and boreal forests, and temperate zone) we found that 65% of the studies were from Europe and North America (Fig. A.1;Table A.3,Appendix A). This appears to be a general pattern in ER research, as reported several times by literature reviews on ER (e.g., [START_REF] Kollmann | Integrating ecosystem functions into restoration ecology-recent advances and future directions[END_REF][START_REF] Wortley | Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature[END_REF]. It is not surprising that 50% of the studies are based in Europe, as the concept of cultural landscapes emerged there [START_REF] Kirchhoff | From Cultural Landscapes to Resilient Socialecological Systems: Transformation of a Classical Paradigm or a Novel Approach?[END_REF], so we expected to find more Europe-related research and practice in CL-ER. However, only one paper was found for France, where we know such projects have taken place or are on-going [START_REF] Liron | Enquête sociologique sur la perception du concept de paysage culturel et de son application auprès des praticiens de la restauration écologique[END_REF]. In addition to the literature search limitations described above, an explanation may be that CLs are often not mentioned because they are considered inherent to the European context, in line with the more holistic European view of the landscape concept. This might have reflected upon the clear difference in numbers of papers for the two types of research being only observed for Europe, where there has been twice as much practical research (Table A.3, Appendix A). This could be interpreted as an effect of the implementation of the European Landscape Convention, signed in 2000 and implemented in 2004 [START_REF] Déjeant-Pons | The European Landscape Convention[END_REF], which almost coincides with the increase in practical studies since 2006 (Fig. 1). Trends in CL-ER research in Europe and elsewhere are discussed in more detail below (section 4.2). Yet regions such as the Biancane badlands in Italy [START_REF] Marignani | Planning restoration in a cultural landscape in Italy using an object-based approach and historical analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Torri | The recurring cycles of biancana badlands: Erosion, vegetation and human impact[END_REF] and the Stubai Valley in Austria [START_REF] Fondevilla | Using a new PDP modelling approach for land-use and land-cover change predictions: A case study in the Stubai Valley (Central Alps)[END_REF][START_REF] Schirpke | Cultural ecosystem services of mountain regions: Modelling the aesthetic value[END_REF] are the focus of two studies each.

A good number of papers addressing CLs are from North America (16% of the studies), which is strange given that the SER Primer [START_REF] Ser | The SER International primer on ecological restoration[END_REF] states "the North American focus on restoring pristine landscapes makes little or no sense in places like Europe where cultural landscapes are the norm". However, cultural landscape preservation has been one of the US National Park Service missions for decades [START_REF] Page | National Park Service Cultural Landscapes Inventory Professional Procedures Guide[END_REF] and indigenous peoples have embraced restoration challenges [START_REF] Higgs | Nature by design: people, natural process, and ecological restoration[END_REF][START_REF] Martinez | Protected Areas, Indigenous Peoples, and The Western Idea of Nature[END_REF]. Indeed, in North America as in most places in the world, native peoples have shaped the landscapes (e.g., [START_REF] Keeley | Native American impacts on fire regimes of the California coastal ranges[END_REF][START_REF] Vale | Fire, Native Peoples, and the Natural Landscape[END_REF]. This mismatch frames a recent discussion over whether there is a "nature-culture dichotomization" [START_REF] Evans | What about cultural ecosystems? Opportunities for cultural considerations in the "International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration[END_REF] or a nexus [START_REF] Mcdonald | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus-a reply to Evans and Davis[END_REF] Additionally, representability of papers on CL-ER for continents such as Africa and Latin America, where large-scale restoration projects are being implemented, is strikingly low: for example, Brazil (Brazil's Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact, PRMA, 2016;[START_REF] Rodrigues | Large-scale ecological restoration of high-diversity tropical forests in SE Brazil[END_REF] is represented by only one study [START_REF] Barbedo | Enhancing ecosystem services for flood mitigation: a conservation strategy for peri-urban landscapes?[END_REF]. We did not find any studies mentioning South Africa (Working for Water programs) or Rwanda (Forest & Landscape Restoration program) [START_REF] Aronson | Ecosystem Restoration is Now a Global Priority: Time to Roll up our Sleeves[END_REF]. Interestingly, all but one [START_REF] Velázquez-Rosas | Traditional Ecological Knowledge as a tool for biocultural landscape restoration in northern Veracruz, Mexico: a case study in El Tajín region[END_REF] of the papers from Africa and Latin America involve a North American or a European researcher (based on institution affiliation). This is further discussed in section 4.2.

Comparing research on cultural landscapes and landscape ecology

We found that 2/3 of the studies (71 studies) fall exclusively into the broad category of life sciences (Fig. 3), the majority concerning ecology (Table A.2, Appendix A). Twenty-one percent (21% or 23 studies) of the studies fall into the social sciences category solely or in combination with other categories. Several studies fall exclusively into one of the other categories (one study solely in arts & humanities, Fig. 3). These proportions differ somewhat from the findings of [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] in their review on the landscape ecology perspective in ER, where the distribution among research areas (Table A.2, Appendix A) is even more skewed towards life sciences (44 studies or 85% of the studies exclusively in life sciences), particularly ecology, with only one study concerning the social sciences (Fig. 3

, Table A.2, Appendix A).
Moreover, 26 of our CL-ER studies (24%) encompass two to three broad research categories, contrasting with only eight (15%) such studies found in the [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] landscape ecology in ER review (Fig. 3). In our review, one set of papers stood out by encompassing three or more broad research categories, and these papers contained unusual features. For instance, the research included within an ER approach subjects like changes at the landscape level [START_REF] Pelorosso | Stability analysis for defining management strategies in abandoned mountain landscapes of the Mediterranean basin[END_REF], sometimes associated with diversified parameters for ER planning [START_REF] Marignani | Planning restoration in a cultural landscape in Italy using an object-based approach and historical analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Meurk | A landscape ecological framework for indigenous regeneration in rural New Zealand-Aotearoa[END_REF] or social-ecological systems [START_REF] Rescia | Reformulating the socialecological system in a cultural rural mountain landscape in the Picos de Europa region (northern Spain)[END_REF], and perceptions by local residents [START_REF] Schaich | Local residents' perceptions of floodplain restoration measures in Luxembourg's Syr Valley[END_REF]. On the other hand, the sole study common to both our review and the Leite et al. review is classified under the Environmental Sciences & Ecology research category (i.e. Life Sciences broad category) and explores management techniques, including one traditional technique ("fangueo") used in this case to enhance biodiversity [START_REF] Osland | Restoring diversity after cattail expansion: disturbance, resilience, and seasonality in a tropical dry wetland[END_REF]. Regarding journal of publication, 43% were published in 12 journals (three or more papers) out of a total of 66 journals (Table A.4, Appendix A). Although our review differs from that of [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] in total number of papers (109 vs. 54), CL-ER research clearly appears to be more evenly represented over a range of journals. This points to a broader disciplinary scope for research on CL-ER compared with landscape ecology in ER (Fig. 3).

Implications for ecological restoration upscaling

Since CLs are landscapes characterized by a social influence in their creation and maintenance, stakeholders play an important role in the achievement of restoration outcomes.

Landscape restoration relies on the collective engagement of multiple stakeholders [START_REF] Jellinek | Integrating diverse social and ecological motivations to achieve landscape restoration[END_REF], through CL-ER as we propose here, with the ultimate aim of scaling up restoration so that it shifts from single isolated to multiple concerted initiatives (Fig. 4). Our literature survey afforded a comprehensive overview of how CL-ER research has been performed, and we now point to the main challenges for the restoration of CLs and landscapes in general (Fig. 4): [START_REF] Page | National Park Service Cultural Landscapes Inventory Professional Procedures Guide[END_REF] building a transdisciplinary approach, especially to balance the overemphasis on ecological aspects; and, for major world regions, (2) coping with competing interests regarding land use, with unstable political contexts, and with low stakeholder engagement. Fig. 4. Overview of challenges, evidence from our review, and direct implications to ecological restoration upscaling gathered from considering cultural landscapes in ecological restoration (CL-ER). Yellow forms correspond to challenges related to assessing more than ecological aspects; Blue forms correspond to challenges related to where CL-ER is being considered.

Potential benefits from fostering transdisciplinarity through CL-ER research could imply that it is worth considering cultural landscapes in restoration worldwide.

Towards transdisciplinarity

ER has strong ecological foundations, which is fairly reasonable in view of its definition [START_REF] Ser | The SER International primer on ecological restoration[END_REF]). Yet much more is being demanded from the discipline, and it can no longer remain restricted to ecology with a strong focus on natural capital (Fig. 4). Ecology needs to be integrated with other disciplines to support the quest for sustainability, as repeatedly suggested [START_REF] Aronson | Restoration Ecology and the Path to Sustainability[END_REF][START_REF] Jellinek | Integrating diverse social and ecological motivations to achieve landscape restoration[END_REF][START_REF] Naveh | Epilogue: Toward a Transdisciplinary Science of Ecological and Cultural Landscape Restoration[END_REF]. Landscape restoration clearly requires transdisciplinarity, even regarding the conceptual basis of both landscape (Wu and Hobbs, 2007) and restoration ecology [START_REF] Andel | Restoration Ecology: The New Frontier[END_REF]. This applies even more to CLs and their long-term mechanisms based on inter-relationships between natural, cultural and economic capitals. In fact, we found that the representability of research areas is less biased towards life sciences when research is focused on CL-ER (as in our study) than on landscape ecology in ER (as in [START_REF] Leite | Landscape ecology perspective in restoration projects for biodiversity conservation: A review[END_REF] (Fig. 3). For instance, the establishment of reserves can generate conflicts that could be attenuated if integrative and more holistic approaches were implemented, as suggested for a Norwegian case [START_REF] Daugstad | A case of conflicts in conservation: Two trenches or a three-dimensional complexity?[END_REF]. In another example, one study evaluating ER actions in a floodplain restoration project in Luxembourg and presenting results on people's perceptions comprises five research areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Geography; Physical Geography; Public Administration; Urban Studies [START_REF] Schaich | Local residents' perceptions of floodplain restoration measures in Luxembourg's Syr Valley[END_REF]. Being transdisciplinary allows different perspectives to be combined in a manner likely to enhance ER upscaling.

Ideally, landscape restoration goes beyond ecological aspects, i.e. biotic and abiotic factors related to ecosystem functioning (e.g., [START_REF] Holl | Restoring tropical forests from the bottom up[END_REF][START_REF] Macdonald | Novel ecosystems: A bridging concept for the consilience of cultural landscape conservation and ecological restoration[END_REF], because it involves stakeholders with competing interests regarding land use and different degrees of engagement. Therefore a concerted effort on their part is required when scaling up ER.

Moreover, cultural aspects are essentially integrated into stakeholder engagement and landscape approaches through the recognition of traditional practices, often embodied within concepts related to CLs, such as cultural ecosystems (e.g., [START_REF] Evans | What about cultural ecosystems? Opportunities for cultural considerations in the "International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration[END_REF], cultural practices (e.g., [START_REF] Wehi | Importance of including cultural practices in ecological restoration[END_REF], or cultural ecosystem services (e.g., [START_REF] Plieninger | The role of cultural ecosystem services in landscape management and planning[END_REF]. CL-ER research tackles this through the assessment of people's perceptions and landscape features (Fig. 2), which implies in contributing more towards transdisciplinarity and, ultimately, to ER upscaling (Fig. 4). Interestingly, of the 57 studies evaluated for three categories of assessed aspects (i.e. ecological, landscape, people), only 16 (28%) are restricted to ecological aspects, while more than half (N=31, 54%) assess a combination of aspects from two or even from all of our three categories. One study stands out, assessing aspects within all three categories and performed in three countries: Portugal, Sweden and Australia [START_REF] Beilin | Analysing how drivers of agricultural land abandonment affect biodiversity and cultural landscapes using case studies from Scandinavia, Iberia and Oceania[END_REF]. The authors assessed plant species diversity (ecology), historical changes in land cover (landscape) and farmers' perspectives on landscape, land use or abandonment, and their current and future activities (people). They found that the drivers of agricultural land abandonment (viewed as an opportunity for ER) in the study areas are related to social and historical contexts.

Towards a more realistic consideration of historical land use outside Europe

Ambitious restoration aims have been established worldwide, and for regions facing important issues such as unstable political and socioeconomic contexts, sometimes directly related to ER [START_REF] Ceccon | The socioecological complexity of ecological restoration in Mexico[END_REF][START_REF] Fernández-Manjarrés | The emergence of the socialecological restoration concept[END_REF], as well as conflict of interests regarding land use. For instance, there are regional agreements for Africa (AFR100) (WRI, 2019). However, we found only two CL-ER studies in Africa and only one fits our category of practical studies (Fig. A.1,Table A.3,Appendix A). This is not surprising: the general trend is for ER research to be biased towards northern countries (e.g., [START_REF] Kollmann | Integrating ecosystem functions into restoration ecology-recent advances and future directions[END_REF][START_REF] Wortley | Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature[END_REF]). Yet the lack of research where it is needed most is an important issue that should be seriously addressed, as already recommended for conservation [START_REF] Wilson | Conservation Research Is Not Happening Where It Is Most Needed[END_REF].

In Europe, there are well-established continent-wide regulations and directives, such as the European Landscape Convention and the Habitats Directive (European Commission, 2017;[START_REF] Ockendon | One hundred priority questions for landscape restoration in Europe[END_REF], which consider CLs. Moreover, Natura 2000, the European ecological network of protected areas and a pillar of the EU's Biodiversity Strategy, highlights and enhances the links between cultural and natural heritage (European Commission, 2017). However, this is not common in other parts of the world, with the exception of the United States [START_REF] Page | National Park Service Cultural Landscapes Inventory Professional Procedures Guide[END_REF]. Native Americans and indigenous people worldwide have managed landscapes through traditional practices implemented over millennia (e.g., [START_REF] Martinez | Protected Areas, Indigenous Peoples, and The Western Idea of Nature[END_REF]. Thus, it is reasonable that cultural capital (i.e. CL) should be taken into account in regions where such longterm social mechanisms still operate, acknowledging that such consideration is not specific to Europe (Fig. 4). For instance, recent studies on the Chilean Espinal call for consideration of CLs in ER, after concluding that reinstating the traditional silvopastoral system is likely to yield conservation benefits for that cultural landscape [START_REF] Root-Bernstein | Rewilding-inspired transhumance for the restoration of semiarid silvopastoral systems in Chile[END_REF][START_REF] Root-Bernstein | The Chilean Espinal: Restoration for a Sustainable Silvopastoral System[END_REF], especially if combined with an affirmative image of this landscape as a cultural landscape [START_REF] Root-Bernstein | Ecosystem engineering in the degu, Octodon degus, and applications for conservation[END_REF].

We should also bear in mind those situations where a minimum essential standard of living needs to be restored [START_REF] Fernández-Manjarrés | The emergence of the socialecological restoration concept[END_REF]. The Primer on Ecological Restoration [START_REF] Ser | The SER International primer on ecological restoration[END_REF], states that for many regions in Africa, Asia and Latin America "ecological restoration is untenable unless it manifestly bolsters the ecological base for human survival." For such regions, approaches centered on ecosystem-services (e.g., focused on carbon and invasive species control) should be applied with caution, since they can often be disconnected from local social issues. Integrative approaches such as CL-ER can be preferable, offering trade-offs between sociocultural and ecological needs. This is illustrated by a case study on the control of coconut trees in the Indian Ocean archipelago of Chagos, where a compromise between removal and management of coconut trees was proposed as the most conciliatory option for conservationists and Chagossians [START_REF] Jeffery | Ecological restoration in a cultural landscape: conservationist and Chagossian approaches to controlling the 'coconut chaos' on the Chagos Archipelago[END_REF]. In tropical countries, taking CLs into account could thus contribute to a wider perspective in ER, allying landscape and cultural approaches. A more limited perspective not taking CLs into account could otherwise result in conflicts and reduced chances of ER sustainability, which could undermine upscaling efforts.

Conclusions

We reviewed the literature on how CLs are given consideration in ER research and explored two possible implications for taking CLs into account in ER to scaling up restoration.

First, CL-ER research shows signs of expanding towards a somewhat wider range of disciplines, which amounts to a move towards transdisciplinarity. This is aligned with the recurrent call for a more holistic approach in ER, and in particular for consideration of aspects other than the purely ecological, aimed at restoration upscaling for multiple-use landscapes under long-term cultural influence. Second, scant consideration has been given to historical land use in regions with less scientific coverage, where there is often an assumption of fewer local cultural influences.

Transcending traditional perspectives in historical land use could enhance restoration upscaling, through trade-offs between dynamism, local needs and heritage. This is of particular interest for tropical regions, usually characterized by unstable contexts (social, economic and political) while at the same time often the focus of international agreements on restoration with ambitious targets.

Environnementaux) "Application du concept de paysages culturels à la restauration écologique en Europe" and by CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de PEssoal de nível Superior -Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel) Postdoc PDE scholarship#88881.120235/2016-01 (TSPT).

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Number of papers per year linking cultural landscapes and ecological restoration (N=109), grouped by type of research into theoretical or practical, and by scope into general (applicable to a broad range of situations) or location-specific (applicable to a specific site or region) as well as into baseline (seeking a baseline or baseline elements that could contribute to future restoration actions) or evaluation (assessing the outcome of restoration actions already performed). Total percentages for the different paper categories are shown in the pie upper left.

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Venn diagram of the aspects assessed by practical studies (N=57). Numbers before the slash or alone indicate the number of baseline studies (seeking a baseline or baseline elements that could contribute to future restoration actions); numbers after the slash indicate the number of studies on evaluation of restoration actions (assessing the outcome of restoration actions already performed).

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Venn diagrams of research areas in broad categories for (A) 109 papers from the present literature survey on cultural landscapes and ecological restoration, and (B) 52 papers from a literature review on the landscape ecology perspective in ecological restoration (Leite et al., 2013). Numbers indicate the number of studies in each broad category or their combinations. Papers fitting in more than one research area in the same broad category were counted as a single record.

  in SER documents referring to cultural ecosystems and landscapes.

	Land Use Policy 120 (2022) 106233 // https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106233
	10

  Land Use Policy 120 (2022) 106233 // https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106233 14

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Marjorie Sweetko for reviewing the English. This study was funded by by fédération de recherche ECCOREV (Ecosystèmes Continentaux et Risques

Appendix A.

Supporting information Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in the online version at doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106233.


Edwige Chauvergne
email: edwige.chauvergne@inria.fr

Understanding the Challenges of Immersive Authoring for End-Users

Keywords: centered computing → Virtual reality Virtual reality, end-users, onboarding

Over the years, virtual reality (VR) gains in popularity. Although VR becomes more affordable, VR content creation is restricted to expert developers which limits both its expansion and adoption. Enabling the authoring of VR experiences to non-developers would empower end-users and allow them to design their own VR applications. To do so, it is however necessary to support the onboarding process in VR. In this paper, we present our work and research direction planned for this PhD. We implemented a prototype for immersive authoring of interactive experiences, investigated VR onboarding, and provided a framework. Finally, we plan on exploring the authoring of data-driven storytelling.

CCS CONCEPTS

• Human-

INTRODUCTION

The use of virtual reality (VR) is rising. On one side VR headsets have become more affordable, and on the other side, VR applications have multiplied. As VR is no longer reserved for experts in the domain, there is a need to support the authoring of interactive VR experiences by non-developers. The immersive authoring of such interaction by demonstration appears as a promising method for endusers. Yet, before being able to produce content, end-users need to learn how to use VR in general and the VR applications they use. This onboarding process to new VR applications requires assistance tools. Finally, Immersive Analytics benefits from an immersive three-dimensional environment to explore and analyze data. Yet, visualizations still mainly remain objects that users examine. Authoring tools for data-driven storytelling would support the creation of new types of visualization and examination processes. In this paper, we summarize our work on end-user authoring of interactive virtual reality experiences, as well as VR onboarding. Then, we introduce our future research direction regarding the authoring of immersive data-driven storytelling.

AUTHORING INTERACTIVE EXPERIENCES IN VIRTUAL REALITY THROUGH DEMONSTRATION

Enabling the prototyping and authoring of immersive VR experiences allows non-developers to appropriate the use of VR and create new content. Enabling development to non-experts has been broadly explored on desktop, using for instance visual programming like Scratch 1 . However, to author 1 https://scratch.mit.edu/ such interactive prototypes without code in VR is still an open research question. Various methods have been investigated such as simplified desktop interfaces [START_REF] Yigitbas | VREUD -An End-User Development Tool to Simplify the Creation of Interactive VR Scenes[END_REF], visual programming [START_REF] Zhang | FlowMatic: An Immersive Authoring Tool for Creating Interactive Scenes in Virtual Reality[END_REF], and authoring by demonstration [START_REF] Beever | LevelEd VR: A virtual reality level editor and workflow for virtual reality level design[END_REF][START_REF] Ng | Situated Game Level Editing in Augmented Reality[END_REF][START_REF] Wang | GesturAR: An Authoring System for Creating Freehand Interactive Augmented Reality Applications[END_REF]. However, these approaches do not handle yet the creation of complex interactive experiences. Immersive authoring by demonstration appears as a promising creation process for end-users as its users directly manipulate objects in context and can immediately visualize and experience the created interactions. In order to better understand the challenges to the immersive authoring of interactive experiences by demonstration, we implemented an authoring tool, created two use cases, and organized a feedback session [START_REF] Edwige Chauvergne | Editer des expériences interactives et immersives en utilisant la programmation par démonstration[END_REF].

We implemented a prototype for an authoring tool on HTC Vive using Unity. Using this tool, users can record actions. As they start the recording, they can directly manipulate objects in the virtual environment to demonstrate actions. Users can create eleven types of actions using three different recording modes. After recording actions, users can link actions as triggers and effects (see Figure 1) and possibly inspect actions to modify trajectories. Finally, users can directly test the interactions they authored by activating a test mode. In order to identify the main challenges in both our prototype and VR authoring by demonstration in general we created two use cases and organized a feedback session. The two use cases were an escape game scenario and a game inspired by Beat Saber 2 . Finally, the feedback session involved 2 https://beatsaber.com/ six participants (4 female, 2 male) and consisted of a demonstration of the Escape game scenario, a training phase in which participants were asked to author two short interactive experiences, and a free authoring phase, followed by a NASA-TLX questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. Based on the use cases' observations and the feedback sessions' results we identified five main challenges for authoring interactive experiences by demonstration, depicted in figure 2. LEARNING VIRTUAL REALITY Renz et al [START_REF] Renz | Improving the Onboarding User Experience in MOOCs[END_REF] define the onboarding process as the sum of methods and elements helping a new user to become familiar with a digital product. During the user study, we noticed that assisting participants through the onboarding process happened to be difficult.VR is still new to many users and still lacks conventions which creates many discrepancies between applications. As VR application multiply, they are expected to become more powerful and thus, to some extent, more complex. Using these complex applications involves going through a learning phase even for regular VR users. Thus, onboarding is necessary for VR, yet Ashtari et al [START_REF] Ashtari | Creating Augmented and Virtual Reality Applications: Current Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities[END_REF] mention the fact that users need to go through a long and cumbersome onboarding process during user testing, which not only is time-consuming but also adds a significant cognitive charge to users, making it important to increase research in this domain.

This onboarding process can take several forms. Learners can follow a tutorial which usually is either a 2D video on desktop or a tutorial integrated into the VR application. The onboarding can also be supervised by an expert instructor. This type of onboarding is less accessible than tutorials, however, it benefits from high flexibility.

Based on Bach and Scapin's ergonomic criteria [START_REF] Bach | Critères Ergonomiques pour les Interactions Homme-Environnements Virtuels : définitions, justifications et exemples[END_REF], we reviewed 21 immersive VR tutorials from a broad range of applications. This review allowed us to identify three main challenges for tutorials: 1) Intelligibility, 2) Feedback and feedforward, and 3) Adaptability and accessibility.

In order to get an overview of the challenges and practices in instructor-based VR onboarding we interviewed 15 experts. 11 of these experts performed VR onboarding in a research context and 4 of them for application training purposes. Based on the transcriptions of the interviews, we performed a thematic analysis [START_REF] Braun | Using thematic analysis in psychology[END_REF] and identified three main themes: 1) the novelty of virtual reality, 2) the lack of awareness, and 3) the communication barrier in virtual reality. Based on our tutorial review and our expert interviews we created a framework for general onboarding and provided guidelines for general and instructor-based onboarding [START_REF] Edwige Chauvergne | User Onboarding in Virtual Reality: An investigation of current practices[END_REF]. Our framework comprises eight dimensions and is depicted in figure 3. We expect this framework to become a support to researchers and onboarding designers as (1) it has descriptive power, (2) it can be used to compare designs, and (3) it supports generating new designs using the Zwicky box method [START_REF] Ritchey | Fritz Zwicky, Morphologie and Policy Analysis[END_REF]. However, this framework is not meant to be prescriptive, as further research is required to understand which design better fits a situation. We also provided a set of guidelines for general onboarding (see figure 4) meant for both tutorials and instructor-based onboarding, and a second set of guidelines specific to instructor-based onboarding (see figure 5).

G1 Instructions need to remain available G2 Provide corrective feedback G3 Support the use of visual cues G4 Use multiple instruction modalities G5 Favor context-based onboarding We believe that authoring tools for end-users would support the appearance of new types of visualizations. Current visualizations in immersive analytics mostly rely on objects representing the data enabling users to visualy quantify and interpret the data. Yet, VR is a promising tool to enable new ways of representing and interpreting the data and promoting empathic reactions.

Data-driven storytelling is the practice of using narratives based on data in order to convey information to a non-expert public. To continue this Ph.D., we first plan on exploring the use of data point embodiment in data-driven storytelling as an example of a new visualization method that could be authored. Embodiment has been used in previous studies to raise empathy as it helps its users to take a different perspective. However, such embodied experiences do not share any quantitative data such as the scale of a problem. On the opposite, data-driven storytelling based on traditional graphical visualization supports the understanding of quantitative data, yet raising empathy is more complicated as people become a point among others. In traditional graphical visualization, the user only sees the visualization from outside and does not embody anything. With data point embodiment, users become a data point and thus embody a person from the data.

We aim at implementing an authoring tool for this kind of visualization. However, we first need to study its impact on the users' experience. We plan on implementing a data point embodiment experience with two possible scenarios, the Titanic's sinking, and the Mediterranean refugee crisis. Then, we wish to study the impact of this type of visualization through a user study.

We expect this experience to support both empathy raising and data understanding. We hypothesized that embodied experience raises more empathy than the data point embodiment but fewer data understanding. We also expect traditional visualization to better support data understanding but to raise fewer empathy. We expect this type of visualization to become a bridge between data understanding and raising empathy.

CONCLUSION

Making VR headsets affordable and broadly available is only the first step to supporting the use of VR by end-users in various domains. Research and improvements are required to support the onboarding and authoring of interactive experiences. We hope this PhD will provide some guidelines to reach this goal. Although this work targets virtual reality, a broad range of our work is suitable for augmented reality. Indeed, VR and AR share several particularities and challenges such as the difficulty for outsiders to understand what the user is experiencing.

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Events are visualized with a floating bubble. In this simple example the Collision of the sphere with the user's hand, makes the cube become invisible (Hide)

C1

  Handling impossible demonstrations C2 Demonstration of abstract concepts C3 Processing ambiguities C4 Creating and visualizing logic C5 Providing assistance to users

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Main challenges in immersive authoring of interactive experiences by demonstration

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: Framework for general VR onboarding.

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 4: Guidelines for general onboarding G6 Do not rush the hardware and inputs onboarding G7 Experts need at least a mirrored view G8 Instruction is not collaboration

Figure 5 :

 5 Figure 5: Guidelines for instructor-based onboarding

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank my two supervisors, Arnaud Prouzeau and Martin Hachet, who provide great advise and support during this Ph.D, as well as the Potioc Team.