You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2014. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Restoration of degraded land is recognized by the international community as an important way of enhancing both biodiversity and ecosystem services, but more information is needed about its costs and benefits. In Cambridgeshire,
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K; Institute for Life Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, U.K
2 Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K
3 RSPB Centre for Conservation Science, RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, U.K
4 BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K
5 United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, U.K
6 National Trust, Wicken Fen National Nature Reserve, Wicken, Cambridgeshire, U.K
7 Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, U.K; Centre for Landscape and Climate Research and Department of Geography, University of Leicester, Leicester, U.K
8 Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland, Botany Department, The Natural History Museum, London, U.K
9 Department of Geography, School of Sciences, Staffordshire University, Science Centre, Stoke-on-Trent, U.K
10 Animal and Environment Research Group, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, U.K