Presentation short abstract

Restoration of open biomes often prioritizes tree planting, yet motivations for restoration remain unclear. Interviews with grassland restoration practitioners in India revealed that afforestation was prioritized for livelihoods and climate mitigation when grasslands are considered underutilized.

Presentation long abstract

Tropical open natural ecosystems (ONEs), which include grasslands and savannas, are often misinterpreted as degraded forests. Many global restoration initiatives view ONEs as land available to increase tree cover. However, planting trees in ONEs can have harmful social and ecological outcomes. In India, ONEs are classified as “wastelands", a colonial legacy that has justified widespread afforestation. Alongside government afforestation programs, several organizations target ONEs for restoration. However, it is unclear how restoration organizations perceive ONEs and how these perceptions inform onground restoration. In particular, it is unclear how historical narratives of ONEs as degraded and ‘unused’, and current imperatives to mitigate climate change influence restoration. This study examines how perceptions of, and motivations for, the restoration of ONEs shape restoration activities. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 restoration practitioners across six non-profits and the Indian forest department working across multiple states in India. We found that although ONEs are recognized as grasslands, there is uncertainty regarding their identification. Perceptions of ONEs and motivations for the restoration of ONEs were often linked: restoration for habitat protection arose from viewing ONEs as grasslands and prioritized planting native grasses and participatory dialogue with local communities. In contrast, restoration focused on livelihoods and climate mitigation stemmed from perceiving ONEs as underutilized and prioritized agroforestry. Organizations that engaged in tree planting highlighted challenges due to grazing, fires, and lack of water. By disentangling these contrasting approaches, this study identifies areas for greater clarity and consensus that can improve outcomes for ONE restoration in India.