rein in the possible successional trajectories and increase the likelihood of the desired outcome. Sourcing land for restoration A study quantified climate change mitigation potentials of 'high-income' nations shifting diets – away from meat-consumption – and restoration of the spared land. They find that the hypothetical dietary change "could reduce annual agricultural production emissions of high-income nations' diets by 61% while sequestering as much as 98.3 (55.6–143.7) Gt equivalent, equal to approximately 14 years of current global agricultural emissions until natural vegetation matures", outcomes they call 'double climate dividend'. Sourcing material for restoration For most restoration projects it is generally recommended to source material from local populations, to increase the chance of restoration success and minimize the effects of maladaptation. However the definition of local can vary based on species. habitat and region. US Forest Service recently developed provisional seed zones based on a combination of minimum winter temperature zones, aridity, and the Level III ecoregions. Rather than putting strict distance recommendations, other guidelines recommend sourcing seeds to match similar environmental conditions that the species is exposed to, either now, or under projected climate change. For example, sourcing for Castilleja levisecta found that farther source populations that matched similar environmental variables were better suited for the restoration project than closer source populations. Similarly, a suite of new methods are surveying gene-environment interactions in order to identify the optimum source populations based on genetic adaptation to environmental conditions. Principles Rationale There are many reasons to restore ecosystems. Some include: Restoring natural capital such as drinkable water or wildlife populations Helping human communities and the ecosystems upon which they depend adapt to the impacts of climate change (through ecosystem-based adaptation) Mitigating climate change (e.g. through carbon sequestration) Helping threatened or endangered species Aesthetic reasons Moral reasons: human intervention has unnaturally destroyed many habitats, and there exists an innate obligation to restore these destroyed habitats Regulated use/harvest, particularly for subsistence Cultural relevance of native ecosystems to Native people The environmental health of nearby populations There exist considerable differences of opinion on how to set restoration goals and how to define their success. Ultimately specifying the restoration target or desired state of an ecosystem is a societal choice, informed by scientists and technocrats, but ultimately it is a policy choice. Selecting the desired goal can be politically contentious. Some urge active restoration (e.g. eradicating invasive animals to allow the native ones to survive) and