Open Advanced Search
Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day.
Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.
Learn More →
Mountain Watch: How LT(S)ER Is Safeguarding Southern Africa’s People and Biodiversity for a Sustainable Mountain Future
Mountain Watch: How LT(S)ER Is Safeguarding Southern Africa’s People and Biodiversity for a...
Carbutt, Clinton;Thompson, Dave I.
land Review Mountain Watch: How LT(S)ER Is Safeguarding Southern Africa’s People and Biodiversity for a Sustainable Mountain Future 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 Clinton Carbutt * and Dave I. Thompson Scientiﬁc Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, P.O. Box 13053, Cascades 3202, South Africa School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, South Africa South African Environmental Observation Network, Ndlovu Node, Scientiﬁc Services, Kruger National Park, Private Bag X1021, Phalaborwa 1390, South Africa; firstname.lastname@example.org School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Private Bag X03, Wits 2050, South Africa * Correspondence: carbuttC@ukzn.ac.za Abstract: Southern Africa is an exceptionally diverse region with an ancient geologic and climatic history. Its mountains are located in the southern hemisphere mid-latitudes at a tropical–temperate interface, offering a rare opportunity to contextualise and frame our research from an austral per- spective so as to balance the global narrative around sustainable mountain futures for people and biodiversity. Limited Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) was initiated more than a century ago in South Africa to optimise catchment management through sound water policy. The South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON) has resurrected many government LTER programmes and added observatories representative of the country’s heterogeneous zonobiomes, including its mountain regions. LTER in other southern African mountains is largely absent. The current rollout Citation: Carbutt, C.; Thompson, D.I. of the Expanded Freshwater and Terrestrial Environmental Observation Network (EFTEON) and the Mountain Watch: How LT(S)ER Is Southern African chapters of international programmes such as the Global Observation Research Safeguarding Southern Africa’s Initiative in Alpine Environments (GLORIA), RangeX, and the Global Soil Biodiversity Observation People and Biodiversity for a Network (Soil BON), as well as the expansion of the Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN), Sustainable Mountain Future. Land is ushering in a renaissance period of global change research in the region, which takes greater 2021, 10, 1024. https://doi.org/ cognisance of its social context. This diversity of initiatives will generate a more robust knowledge 10.3390/land10101024 base from which to draw conclusions about how to better safeguard the well-being of people and Academic Editors: Rob Marchant and biodiversity in the region and to balance livelihoods and environmental sustainability in our complex, Aida Cuni-Sanchez third-world socio-ecological mountain systems. Received: 6 August 2021 Keywords: alpine and montane ecosystems; austral perspective; environmental sustainability; global Accepted: 26 September 2021 change; long-term research; mountain observatories; multi-disciplinary research; social context; Published: 30 September 2021 socio-ecological coupling; Southern Africa Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional afﬁl- 1. Introduction iations. Southern Africa is the southernmost region of Africa. This region is located in the mid-latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere at a tropical–temperate interface, resulting in a heterogeneous landscape and a dynamic climate characterised by strongly seasonal precipitation zones . It has an exceptionally long geologic and climatic history  Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. with its Barberton Greenstone Belt in the Makhonjwa Mountains of north-eastern South Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Africa credited as the oldest mountain range on Earth (ca. 3.2 Ga) [2,3]. Two mountain This article is an open access article complexes dominate the region, the Great Escarpment and the Cape Fold Belt. The former distributed under the terms and is a 5000 km semi-continuous, passive erosional remnant of a receding continental margin conditions of the Creative Commons stretching from Angola through Namibia, South Africa, Lesotho, Eswatini, Zimbabwe, and Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Mozambique [2,4] (Figure 1), and bisects the coastal belt from the colder and more seasonal creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ interior . The Great Escarpment arose from the rifting of the Gondwana super-continent 4.0/). Land 2021, 10, 1024. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10101024 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/land Land 2021, 10, 1024 2 of 27 and consists mostly of various sedimentary layers of the Triassic Karoo Supergroup overlain by younger basaltic lavas of the Early Jurassic at its highest elevations [6,7]. It covers an elevation range from 1200–3482 m a.s.l. The signiﬁcantly older Cape Fold Belt (or Cape Fold Mountains) is a 1300 km fold-and-thrust belt formed by the collision and subductive convergence of tectonic plates during the assembly of Gondwana, and is of Late Paleozoic age. It consists of sedimentary rock layers, mostly quartzitic sandstones and shales of the Cape Supergroup [6,8,9], which form a series of primarily east–west parallel ranges hemmed in between the Great Escarpment and the south-western and southern coastlines Land 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 26 of South Africa, covering an elevation range from almost sea level to 2325 m a.s.l. (Figure 1). Figure 1. The location of the dominant mountain complexes and associated mountain observatories in Southern Africa. Observatories Figure 1. The location of the dominant mountain complexes and associated mountain observatories in Southern Africa. deployed by the South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON, red stars) in the Cape Fold Belt: CB—Cederberg, Observatories deployed by the South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON, red stars) in the Cape Fold Cederberg Mtns; TM—Table Mountain, Cape Peninsula Mtns; JH—Jonkershoek, Boland Mtns; BK—Baviaanskloof, Baviaans and Belt: CB—Cederberg, Cederberg Mtns; TM—Table Mountain, Cape Peninsula Mtns; JH—Jonkershoek, Boland Mtns; Kouga Mtns. Great Escarpment: CMB—Compassberg, Sneeuberge; CP—Cathedral Peak, Maloti-Drakensberg; MK—Mariepskop, Mpumalanga Drakensberg; HB—Haenertsburg, Wolkberg section of the Limpopo Drakensberg. Proposed Expanded Freshwater BK—Baviaanskloof, Baviaans and Kouga Mtns. Great Escarpment: CMB—Compassberg, Sneeuberge; CP—Cathedral Peak, and Terrestrial Environmental Observation Network landscapes (EFTEON, blue stars): GCT—Greater Cape Town; GRG—Garden Maloti-Drakensberg; MK—Mariepskop, Mpumalanga Drakensberg; HB—Haenertsburg, Wolkberg section of the Limpopo Route Gateway; CP—Cathedral Peak, Northern Maloti-Drakensberg. Lesotho LTSER node (black star): MS—Mont-aux-Sources, in- Drakensberg. Proposed Expanded Freshwater and Terrestrial Environmental Observation Network landscapes (EFTEON, cludes the planned Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments (GLORIA) and Mountain Invasion Research Net- blue stars): GCT—Greater Cape Town; GRG—Garden Route Gateway; CP—Cathedral Peak, Northern Maloti-Drakensberg. work (MIREN) sites. Current MIREN site (yellow star): SP—Sani Pass (extending to Kotisephola Pass). See Table A1 for site details. Sites relating to the Brotherton Fire Experiment, Nutrient Network, Soil Biodiversity Observation Network (planned), and MIREN Lesotho LTSER node (black star): MS—Mont-aux-Sources, includes the planned Global Observation Research Initiative in (planned) are also/will be located at CP. M-D—Maloti-Drakensberg (indicated by cross-hatching). The “dashed” portion of the Great Alpine Environments (GLORIA) and Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN) sites. Current MIREN site (yellow Escarpment refers to the Drakensberg section outside of the Maloti-Drakensberg. Not all mountain observatories are located on the star): SP—Sani Pass (extending to Kotisephola Pass). See Table A1 for site details. Sites relating to the Brotherton Fire escarpment edge. The less obvious extremities of the Great Escarpment in Angola and eastern Zimbabwe/western Mozambique are Experiment, Nutrient Network, Soil Biodiversity Observation Network (planned), and MIREN (planned) are also/will be not shown. located at CP. M-D—Maloti-Drakensberg (indicated by cross-hatching). The “dashed” portion of the Great Escarpment refers 2. Aims, Materials and Methods to the Drakensberg section outside of the Maloti-Drakensberg. Not all mountain observatories are located on the escarpment edge. The less obvious extremities of We the pre Gr sent eat tEscarpmen he first synth t in esi Angola s of the and mount eastern ain ob Zimbabwe/western servatories in southern Mozambique Africa anar d e the collective value of long-term research from the region. The primary aim of this novel not shown. synthesis was to demonstrate the value of a diverse suite of process-orientated LT(S)ER initiatives in Southern Africa’s mountain regions, framed by making reference to their contribution to human well-being, appropriate management of biodiversity, and environ- mental sustainability. A synthesis of this nature also generates broader statements gleaned by insight. A secondary aim, therefore, was to identify the strengths and weak- nesses in Southern Africa’s mountain-based LT(S)ER framework, and to make recommen- dations to enhance adaptive capacity and resilience to global change. For the first time, Land 2021, 10, 1024 3 of 27 Southern Africa’s mountains account for almost half of the world’s broad zonobiomes and a third of the world’s global circulation systems . They traverse a wide climatic gradient that includes subtropical arid (Namibia), Mediterranean (Cape region of South Africa), warm-temperate (eastern South Africa and Lesotho), and semi-arid tropical (An- gola, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe) climate types. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted that the region will be heavily impacted by climate warming , placing greater emphasis on our mountains as a biodiversity refugia [12,13]. Increased frequency and intensity of droughts and ﬂoods, increasing temperatures, and decreased rainfall are speciﬁcally predicted, thus deﬁning southern Africa as a climate hotspot due to its existing vulnerabilities, poor adaptive capacity, under-development, and marginali- sation . Knowledge on the governance of climate change at a macro-regional level is lacking . The rich biodiversity and ecosystem services of our mountains lend themselves to ecosystem-based adaptation  and nature-based solutions that encompass conservation, sustainable development, and restoration to reduce social and environmental vulnerabil- ities. Such approaches are critical as we foresee a greater demand for natural resources from our mountain regions , as well as greater competition for these resources amongst sectors of society ; such increasing pressures on mountain people and natural resources are typical of the developing world [19–22]. However, interventions aimed at balancing sustainable management of mountain-derived resources and human well-being should have a sound scientiﬁc basis in both the natural and social sciences [23,24]. Therefore, some of the most critical data for identifying and quantifying environ- mental changes, understanding long-term ecosystem dynamics for effective ecosystem management, understanding socio-ecological systems, informing environmental policies, and supporting global policy agendas, are those attached to long time-series from long- term ecological research (LTER) at local, regional, and global scales [25–28]. LTER is especially important for understanding episodic events (e.g., droughts and ﬂoods) and processes such as desertiﬁcation, land degradation, and climate change, which do not operate over short-terms or small-scales [29–31]. Therefore, researchers need to establish high-quality, long-term collaborative and multi-disciplinary research networks aimed at understanding these drivers and patterns of environmental change in a coordinated and multi-site approach [25,26,32]. Two of the world’s exemplary global LTER initiatives are the International Long-Term Ecological Research Network (ILTER) and the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON) [29,31,33]. The building blocks for LTER networks are site-based platforms or “observatories” such as Niwot Ridge (1980–present) in the Colorado Rockies (USA), Cairngorms National Park (2013–present) in Scotland, and Val di Mazia/Matschertal (2008–present) in the Italian Alps . LTER is sometimes expanded to include the human dimension, which acknowledges close coupling between social and biophysical processes. Environmental problem solving should therefore view natural and human systems as a single entity through long-term socio-ecological research (LTSER) [35–37]. 2. Aims, Materials and Methods We present the ﬁrst synthesis of the mountain observatories in southern Africa and the collective value of long-term research from the region. The primary aim of this novel synthesis was to demonstrate the value of a diverse suite of process-orientated LT(S)ER initiatives in Southern Africa’s mountain regions, framed by making reference to their contribution to human well-being, appropriate management of biodiversity, and environ- mental sustainability. A synthesis of this nature also generates broader statements gleaned by insight. A secondary aim, therefore, was to identify the strengths and weaknesses in Southern Africa’s mountain-based LT(S)ER framework, and to make recommendations to enhance adaptive capacity and resilience to global change. For the ﬁrst time, we con- textualise the signiﬁcance of our LT(S)ER from an austral perspective for the international mountain community. Land 2021, 10, 1024 4 of 27 This synthesis was based on an extensive and comprehensive literature review, as well as in-person institutional knowledge, given that both authors are personally involved in a number of these initiatives. Relevant published peer-reviewed scientiﬁc literature was sourced through Google®, Google Scholar®, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink. Unpub- lished institutional grey literature, particularly from research institutions and governmental departments, and university theses were also consulted. This synthesis included key histor- ical publications dating back to 1948, as well as the full spectrum of relevant literature up to 2021. A total of 164 references were consulted, most of which were then grouped into the focal areas relevant to this study. The literature was heavily focused towards the study area, namely the mountain regions of Southern Africa, but international publications were also cited where studies were relevant or comparisons needed to be made. A comprehensive and diverse set of LT(S)ER initiatives was selected based on objective selection criteria, as follows: (1) representations of the winter, summer, and all-year rainfall regions of Southern Africa; (2) research spanning a range of scales from local plot-scales to landscape-scales; (3) reference to above- and below-ground ecological processes; (4) research representing time frames ranging from earlier pioneering initiatives with signiﬁcant historical value and long-term data sets to newer initiatives that address contemporary challenges not evident in the past (post-2000); (5) programmes championed by government and academic institu- tions; (6) inclusion of both montane and alpine elevations; and (7) the need to provide both scientiﬁc and practical demonstrative value to ensure a sustainable mountain future. These initiatives are discussed thematically in chronological order. We do not place emphasis on “how long is long-term” as some LT(S)ER initiatives are planned or recently established. They must be long-term by intention at establishment and repeatedly measured. Some of the initiatives refer to long-term monitoring as part of the gradient towards LTER or as part of the LTER framework. Our geographical focus is centred on two of Southern Africa’s dominant mountain complexes, the Great Escarpment and the Cape Fold Belt. Despite the difﬁcultly in deﬁning and delineating mountains leading to different approaches , we followed the Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment deﬁnition of mountains based on ruggedness criteria . 3. Discussion 3.1. Value of Historical and Current LTER Initiatives 3.1.1. Adaptive Management of Mountain Catchments for Water Security Water is an essential resource that sustains almost all life on Earth. Southern Africa’s water towers support millions of people in the region [40,41]. While climate scenarios show a signiﬁcant decline in available water resources, socio-economic trajectories show an increase in water demand . A supply shortfall in a water-scarce region may have social, economic, and environmental repercussions. It is therefore essential to safeguard and monitor our strategic mountain catchments to ensure a steady supply of clean wa- ter. South Africa has a history of long-term eco-hydrological research because mountain catchments were earmarked for large-scale afforestation using alien tree species, but the effects of this land use on water supply were unknown [43,44]. The country adopted a multiple-catchment design using entire catchments as experimental units to accommodate physiographic complexity, regarded as a world ﬁrst . Jonkershoek Valley LTER (“Jonkershoek”; 1935–1992 and 2010–present; with some rainfall gauging commencing in 1925; South Africa) is Africa’s longest running catchment experiment . It is located in a Mediterranean shrubland (“fynbos”) catchment of the winter-rainfall Cape Floristic Region near Stellenbosch in the Boland Mountains of the Cape Fold Belt (Figure 1). It replaced South Africa’s ﬁrst LTER attempt at Jessievale in the Northern Drakensberg Escarpment (1910–1924), which failed due to lack of funding and poor management [47–49]. Jonkershoek uses gauged afforested catchments (and one natural fynbos catchment as the control) to ascertain the effects of afforestation on stream ﬂow [50–52] (Table A1). Additionally, ﬁre treatments and wild ﬁres have been Land 2021, 10, 1024 5 of 27 used historically to investigate the effects of ﬁre on nutrient budgets  and hydrological responses [54,55]. Success at Jonkershoek led to similar LTER in the summer-rainfall Cathedral Peak Research Catchments (“Cathedral Peak”; 1948–1995 and 2012–present; South Africa), part of the greater Cathedral Peak Research Area in the Maloti-Drakensberg region of the Great Escarpment [44,52,56] (Figures 1 and 2). Gauged ﬁrst-order catchments measure how stream ﬂow in concert with sediment and nutrient exports are impacted by ﬁre regimes in mesic montane grassland, and historically included a grazing and an afforestation treatment with alien trees [56–60] (Table A1). These examples go far beyond demonstrating the signiﬁcant impact of afforestation on streamﬂow and water yield. Wider application by scientists and policy makers to inform national catchment management and water policy in South Africa is arguably the ﬁnest example of science-driven policy from LTER in the country. These catchment experiments form the core of globally signiﬁcant interdisciplinary research programmes that have shaped many environmental policies and practices relating to afforestation, biodiversity, ﬁre, and water . These policies were deconstructed from the late 1980s in favour of the National Water Act, which instead governs water-user rights among competitors. This Act looks past the sustainable management of catchments as ecosystems , but may be ﬂexible enough for an adaptive management approach to climate change mitigation . Policy changes often have deleterious knock-on effects. This LTER ceased because the nationally run catchment management programme was decentralised and handed over to conservation agencies in their respective provinces in the late 1980s, who failed to understand its value . Fortunately, the LTER platforms at Jonkershoek and Cathedral Peak were resurrected from 2010 and 2012, respectively, under the gamut of the South African Environmental Observation Network (Table A1). They have evolved from long- term eco-hydrological monitoring platforms  to global change observatory catchments, encouraging more multi-disciplinary research using high-tech instrumentation . Their value lies in understanding which land uses and management practices best support and optimise water supply in these sensitive and critical water supply areas, together with understanding the potential negative global change impacts. This knowledge is essential to building a resilient water tower and ensuring an adaptive management approach to water conservation in a water-limited region . 3.1.2. Fire Management and Policy That Optimizes Grassland Biodiversity, Resilience and Water Production Unlike the vast treed montane landscapes in many parts of the world [63,64], Southern Africa’s mountains are covered largely by ancient, old-growth grasslands and shrublands. These highly ﬂammable ecosystems have co-evolved with ﬁre for hundreds of thousands of years [21,65], making ﬁre one of the main ecological drivers and management tools . Management objectives aimed at maintaining the stability of montane grasslands therefore need to incorporate their dynamic nature in response to ﬁre . Application of ﬁre at the correct frequency and season is essential for optimising grassland biodiversity and condition, which minimises erosion and sediment losses to maintain a steady supply of clean water and maximise storage of soil organic carbon to mitigate climate change [68,69]. To understand these dynamics long-term, the Brotherton Fire Experiment (1981–1992 and 2015–present; South Africa; Figure 2) at Cathedral Peak in the Maloti-Drakensberg was established as a small-scale mesocosm-type ﬁre experiment using 1-, 2-, 5-, and 12- year ﬁre-return interval treatments to complement the larger research catchment-scale ﬁre experiment discussed previously [69–71]. The experiment is generally sampled biennially, but occasionally on an ad hoc basis [71–73]. In 2004, a multi-disciplinary team of scientists used the ﬁre experiment to convince the management authority of its importance by including a broader suite of biodiversity elements and the potential for climate change research . Land 2021, 10, 1024 6 of 27 Land 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 26 (B) (A) (D) (C) (F) (E) (G) (H) Figure 2. Photographic representation of LTER in Southern Africa’s mountain regions: (A) Maloti-Drakensberg, Great Escarp- Figure 2. Photographic representation of LTER in Southern Africa’s mountain regions: (A) Maloti-Drakensberg, Great ment; (B) Cape Fold Belt; (C) Research Catchment II at Cathedral Peak (above dashed line) after the removal of alien trees; (D) Escarpment; (B) Cape Fold Belt; (C) Research Catchment II at Cathedral Peak (above dashed line) after the removal of alien V-notched gauging weir used to measure stream flow; (E) Brotherton Fire Experiment; (F) Nutrient Network site; (G) Campbell trees; (D) V-notched gauging weir used to measure stream ﬂow; (E) Brotherton Fire Experiment; (F) Nutrient Network site; Scientific automatic weather station; (H) MIREN site at Sani Pass straddling South Africa and Lesotho. All photos by C. Car- (G) Campbell Scientiﬁc automatic weather station; (H) MIREN site at Sani Pass straddling South Africa and Lesotho. All butt. photos by C. Carbutt. Land 2021, 10, 1024 7 of 27 The original aim was to assess the effects of pyrodiversity (varied ﬁre frequency and seasonality treatments) on mesic montane grass structure (basal cover) and composition (diversity) , but has been expanded to test the effects of ﬁre on forb species composition and diversity , soil properties and landscape functioning , invertebrate diversity and abundance , and multi-decadal changes in grass and forb species composition in concert [69,70]. It also hosts a warming experiment using open-top chambers . All of these metrics are important indicators of grassland health  and biodiversity value . Data from the long-term ﬁre experiment are used to inform optimal burning practices in the Maloti-Drakensberg, established as regular biennial burning in the dormant season , supplemented with smaller patch burns at slightly longer ﬁre-return intervals . Biennial burns in late winter or early spring maintain grass bud banks and important grass species at desired levels of abundance [69,78] to ensure a long-term desired state of grassland equilibrium and stability that can resist change and maintain healthy and resilient grassland communities [69,78,79] and water towers [67,69]. Slightly longer ﬁre-return intervals enhance plant diversity . It has also been shown that excessively longer ﬁre return intervals (5–13 years) will shift grassland species composition and decrease vegetation cover, leading to greater soil exposure . Although ﬁre has rarely been included in experimental climate change research , the ﬁre experiment will also provide a valuable means to detect and understand future responses to climate change as plant species are likely to shift their ranges, seasonal growth patterns, and responses to ﬁre under changing mountain climates [69,76]. Understanding how montane grasslands will respond to climate change and associated changes in a ﬁre regime is essential for protecting its profound biodiversity and functional value . Such knowledge is now being entrenched as standard policy in the Integrated Management Plan and Fire Management Plan of the Maloti-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site (in which this LTER site is located)  and in the management of mesic grasslands in general . Such a ﬁre experiment could also potentially inform the safest conditions under which to conduct controlled burning of ﬁre-breaks and ﬁre suppression, to limit the spread of life-threatening extreme ﬁre events common to the Maloti-Drakensberg . 3.1.3. Resuscitating the National Government LTER Platform in South Africa LTER rose to greater prominence in the South African scientiﬁc community in the mid-1990s, driven by renewed global interest in measuring anthropogenic climate change and concern for the socio-economic impacts of environmental stressors at scales and complexities not seen before. A national workshop in 1999 discussed prompts by the ILTER to establish a similar research network in South Africa, with particular focus on climate change and ecology [30,44,82–84]. The mandate of this emergent government-funded South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON; 2002–present) is to understand human-induced global change impacts on the environment and ecosystem services and provide meaningful data for policy makers to manage South Africa’s natural capital sustainably in a changing world . SAEON maintains a network of platforms in both terrestrial and marine environments across South Africa. These platforms constitute long-tern research sites where repeated observations, experimental treatments, and related data are permanently maintained. SAEON is part of the Environmental Observatories Network (EON) and shares links with the Environmental Long-Term Observatories Network of Southern Africa (ELTOSA), designed to synergise LTER at a regional level, and the ILTER [82,86]. SAEON has partnered with academic institutions and other research facilities to rapidly engage an already institutionalised network to achieve a quick uptake in both scale and time. It makes use of historical platforms as well as establishing its own. SAEON operates as a number of research nodes distributed across the country’s various zonobiomes, each anchoring participatory sites that serve as research stations and environmental change observatories. There are eight SAEON mountain observatories (four in the Cape Fold Belt and four in the Great Escarpment; Figure 1 and Table A1). SAEON has been instrumental at resurrect- Land 2021, 10, 1024 8 of 27 ing earlier ﬂoundering government LTER programmes, for example at Jonkershoek and Cathedral Peak. 3.1.4. Early Detection of Mountain Invasive Alien Plants and Understanding Species Redistributions Invasive alien plants are among the foremost threats to biodiversity on the planet [87,88]. The mountain regions of Southern Africa have not been spared this fate [89–92]. Some areas are accessible by road passes and are therefore highly susceptible to invasions due to anthropogenic disturbance and sustained propagule pressure [91,93,94]. This invasion threat necessitated a long-term intervention, and presented the opportunity for local actors to collaborate with the international Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN), established in 2005 as an initiative of the Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment [89,95]. MIREN initially monitored the impacts of non-native plant invasions in mountains across the globe , but has expanded its focus to include the broader effects of global change on plant species’ redistributions in mountain regions [27,96]. A sub-component, RangeX, seeks to understand the mechanisms and impacts of plants expanding their ranges due to climate warming . These international programmes, with almost 30 participatory sites, are poorly represented in the Southern Hemisphere. Only eight sites are collectively represented by the Australian Alps, Southern African Maloti-Drakensberg, and South American Andes (Argentina, Chile, and Ecuador) . Africa in particular is poorly represented; the second MIREN site is located in the Atlas Mountains of Morocco . The region’s ﬁrst MIREN site, in the Maloti-Drakensberg, was established at Sani Pass, connecting South Africa with Lesotho (2007–present; Figure 2, Table A1) [89,91], and was later extended up into Kotisephola Pass in Lesotho . Expansion of the MIREN network in the region is currently being facilitated through the Afromontane Research Unit of the University of the Free State at three sites ranging from montane to alpine elevations: Witsieshoek Pass and Sentinel trail, Cathedral Peak (Mike’s and Organ Pipes Passes), and additional sites at Sani Pass in the Maloti-Drakensberg . This LTER serves as an effective early detection strategy to mitigate the threat posed by alien plants  and helps understand how invasive alien plants and other range-expanding species are impacting biodiversity and ecosystem functions along elevation gradients, which, as competitors, are inﬂuencing species’ responses to climate change through the establishment of novel communities [101,102]. 3.1.5. Understanding the Effects of Nutrient Enrichment on Biodiversity and Livelihoods The Anthropocene is marked in part by rapid changes to global nutrient budgets and the abundance and identity of consumers . To quantify these global impacts, the Nutrient Network (NutNet; 2005–present) [104,105] has spread from the USA to about 130 grassland-dominated sites across the world . This collaborative, distributed LTER network uses standardised methods to examine the relationship between two fundamental ecosystem properties on which ecosystem- and human-health both depend, namely di- versity and productivity [105,107,108]. A primary effect of climate change on mountain ecosystems is shifts in species’ distributions, diversity, and system productivity [109,110]. A mechanistic understanding of the diversity productivity relationship is therefore funda- mental to understanding how species dynamics shape community processes [103,111,112], which in turn can predict the conditions under which species can either buffer or exacerbate global change . The NutNet site at Cathedral Peak in the montane belt of the Maloti-Drakensberg (2018–present; South Africa; Figure 2) is one of only two high-elevation sites in Africa, and is the only NutNet site within the geographical scope of this study. Similar to other LTER programmes covered in this synthesis, NutNet is poorly represented in the Southern Hemisphere, Africa, and the region. A NutNet site in the Maloti-Drakensberg is highly relevant because a long-term nutrient addition experiment manipulating multiple nutrients will be highly informative in a nutrient-limited system. Although basalt-derived soils of the Maloti-Drakensberg are intrinsically nutrient-rich (especially total carbon and nitrogen), Land 2021, 10, 1024 9 of 27 they have a low nutrient availability due to highly constrained microbial activity mediated by cool temperatures and other soil-related factors . Climate warming, leading to en- hanced microbial activity and therefore increased nutrient availability, is expected to have a deleterious impact on the nutrient-limited ﬂora of the Maloti-Drakensberg . Addi- tionally, atmospheric deposition of nitrogen and sulphur leading to ecosystem acidiﬁcation is a further cause for concern. For example, Cathedral Peak in the Maloti-Drakensberg – + has the highest annual wet deposition ﬂuxes of nitrogen (NO and NH ) and sulphur 3 4 2– (SO ) of any sites monitored in eastern South Africa . High rainfall and recirculation patterns characteristic of a background site located downwind of large industrial areas are the most likely factors . It is important to establish an additional site in the alpine belt of the Maloti-Drakensberg as the effects of nutrient enrichment through warming and deposition on a nutrient-limited alpine ﬂora at this elevation are unknown. Furthermore, as some of our mountains are important rangelands supporting the livelihoods of shepherds practicing transhumance pastoralism , it is also important to gauge the potential effects of nutrient enrichment on the dynamics of grazed herbaceous systems. 3.2. Value of LT(S)ER Initiatives Under Development 3.2.1. Understanding How Climate Warming Will Affect Sensitive Alpine Habitat: An Austral Perspective Although the alpine biome is represented across all continents and latitudes , it only covers about 3% of the Earth’s terrestrial surface outside Antarctica . Since 2001, the Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments (GLORIA), acknowl- edging the highly sensitive nature of alpine systems and their vulnerability to climate warming [118,119], established long-term alpine observatories across the globe for the comparative study of climate change impacts on mountain vegetation and its biodiver- sity [120,121]. A clear pattern has emerged in the distribution of GLORIA sites across the globe. Most are concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere (especially Europe, North America, and the Himalayas) . While this may be in part due to the global alpine biome being far more represented in the Northern than the Southern Hemisphere , it also speaks to other factors such as historical bias, disparity in funding, and a historical disconnectedness between Northern and Southern actors. Interrogation of the Dynamic Ecological Information Management System (DEIMS) [34,122] revealed only 3% represen- tation of alpine LTER-type sites from the Southern Hemisphere (viz. Australia, Bolivia and Ecuador; it is not known why the two New Zealand GLORIA sites do not appear in this database). This imbalance undermines the ability of GLORIA (and other LTER programmes) to generate representative data across all zonobiomes and global circulation systems. There are only two active GLORIA sites in Africa, in the Rwenzori Mountains and Mt. Elgon , both of which are located in Uganda in the Northern Hemisphere. The upper reaches (ca. 2800–3482 m a.s.l.) of the Maloti-Drakensberg host the only alpine environment in Southern Africa  and the only alpine environment south of Mount Hanang in Tanzania, East Africa. It is small on a global scale (<12,000 km )  and poorly known from an international perspective. For example, key global alpine analyses did not include the alpine Drakensberg [125,126]. An exception included its inselberg alpine summits , which unfortunately are not representative of the “mainland” escarpment plateau due to their small size, and because of their almost free-standing nature, are spared the threats of livestock grazing, alien plants, and plant harvesting . Africa’s tropical and southern alpine systems are highly divergent biologically , and therefore necessitate separate LTER initiatives to measure potentially dissimilar re- sponses to global change. Attempts were made by Prof. Stefan Grab from Wits University and the ﬁrst author from 1999–2004 to redress the absence of GLORIA sites in Southern Africa and the paucity of sites in the Southern Hemisphere. Lesotho, supporting 90% of Southern Africa’s alpine habitats , was chosen for this purpose. Support was provided in 2004 by a small New Zealand delegation from the University of Otago. The summits of Kotisephola Pass and Black Mountain were scouted in particular due to their accessibility. No suitable sites were located due to security concerns for equipment and inability to fulﬁl Land 2021, 10, 1024 10 of 27 the multi-summit approach  due to topographic constraints. New localities are being sought by the Afromontane Research Unit of the University of the Free State, most likely in their planned Mont-aux-Sources LTSER node in the north-eastern Maloti-Drakensberg. Alternative possibilities in the Maloti-Drakensberg being considered are Letšeng diamond mine (Lesotho) and Ben Macdhui (Tifﬁndell Ski Resort; South Africa) . In addition to understanding the effects of climate warming on a poorly known alpine ﬂora, GLORIA sites in Southern Africa will ensure a more comprehensive and robust network by adding representations from the subtropic-alpine biome and maritime subtropical monsoon re- gional climate system in the mid-latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere, currently highly under-represented in the GLORIA network. 3.2.2. Soil Knowledge for the Management and Conservation of Soil Resources to Sustain Livelihoods and Safeguard Biodiversity Soils are signiﬁcant storehouses of global terrestrial biodiversity, which fulﬁl multi- ple critical ecosystem functions and services such as climate regulation, nutrient cycling, and food production [129–131]. Few long-term global soil biodiversity studies have been undertaken, leading to a lack of policies to support soil biodiversity conservation and governance [130,131]. Sustainable livelihoods in Southern Africa’s mountains will depend heavily on well managed and conserved soil systems to support crop and livestock produc- tion. Unfortunately, populated areas in the Maloti-Drakensberg, for example, are degraded and not sustainably managed for food security [17,21]. Soil biodiversity is therefore under pressure from human activities . Long-term studies relating to soil structure, fertility, and biodiversity are essential to optimising food production and ensuring environmental sustainability in the region. However, soil studies in the mountains of Southern Africa are limited, generally small-scale, and mostly non-repetitive . The recently launched global Soil Biodiversity Observation Network (Soil BON), a thematic LTER network within GEO BON, aims to understand how changes to soil biodiversity and ecosystem function may affect the ability of people to sustainably manage and conserve soil resources to support livelihoods and safeguard soil biodiversity . It is essential that the region is linked to this critically important international LTER programme and has a number of representative sites in its mountains. For this reason, a Soil BON site has been proposed for Cathedral Peak in the Maloti-Drakensberg, where paired sampling sites along a land use and degradation gradient ranging from protected area to communal land can be established. 3.2.3. Moving Towards Systems-Based, Landscape-Scaled LTSER The region has an extremely poor track record with mountain-based LTSER, a great injustice given how important these mountains are to people. Perhaps the reason is be- cause most long-term research in our mountains has historically taken place in sacrosanct protected areas managed for conservation, without having to take cognisance of a social context. People were simply fenced out. The world has changed signiﬁcantly, and social dynamics are requiring formal integration given the complex social issues around land tenure, communal land practices, and degradation, as well as greater need for sustainability, food security, and more holistic management of socio-ecological systems. Southern Africa’s third-world context necessitates a sensitive and strategic approach to addressing change in its mountain regions. Embracing its social environment through social engagement , public-assisted monitoring , and the crafting of innovative solutions for mountain futures  are key features to consider in future LTSER, given that mountains and their associated ecosystem services are critical for people [24,41,135,136] and are cradles of cul- tural and ethnic diversity [137,138]. The ﬁrst pioneering form of mountain LTSER in South Africa took place in the impoverished rural Okhombe and Obonjaneni communities in the upper Tugela catchment of the northern Maloti-Drakensberg . Individual projects were highly varied, ranging from erosion control monitoring of degraded catchments to implementing and monitoring intercropping systems for enhanced ecosystem services and food security . There is a key need for South Africa to capacitate and support Land 2021, 10, 1024 11 of 27 LTSER initiatives with its neighbours, particularly where mountains are shared by adjacent countries (e.g., South Africa–Lesotho). SAEON’s highly networked infrastructure footprint has paved the way for a new ecosystems-based, socio-ecological initiative currently being established through the Ex- panded Freshwater and Terrestrial Environmental Observation Network (EFTEON; South Africa). This LTSER infrastructure comprises six socio-ecological “landscapes” accom- modating gradients of land transformation to clarify the complex relationships between ecosystems and socio-dynamic systems under climate change . Three EFTEON land- scapes encompassing mountain environments are being established. The northern Maloti- Drakensberg EFTEON landscape proposes to make use of Cathedral Peak (Table A1), already a designated focal research and monitoring site in a protected area, as the “anchor tenant” from which to extend research infrastructure into lowland areas of both commer- cial and subsistence agriculture. The socio-economic and environmental importance of the Cathedral Peak area together with its geographic complexity and sensitivity to cli- mate change inherent in a mountainous area makes it the ideal candidate for large-scale systems-based research . Speciﬁcally, steep transformation gradients from almost pris- tine protected areas to degraded and impoverished community areas [142,143], a long historical record of meteorological and hydrological data [56,144], and its location in a transition area from C to C grassland and grassland/savanna count heavily in its favour 3 4 for LTSER . The second proposed EFTEON landscape, the Greater Cape Town (GCT) landscape, will link the Atlantic Ocean with the Boland Mountains Strategic Water Source Area in the Cape Fold Belt, covering steep climate and vegetation gradients in the Fynbos Biome. This environmental gradient traverses a rich socio-cultural footprint, which includes urban, agricultural, and natural land use types. The Table Mountain National Park (“Table Moun- tain”) and Jonkershoek observatories are proposed components of this landscape  (Table A1). This landscape offers a direct link to the BioGrip Cape Point Atmospheric Mon- itoring (Global Atmospheric Watch) and Cape Town South African Population Research Infrastructure Network sites . The third proposed EFTEON landscape of relevance is the Garden Route Gateway (GRG), which will be centred on short-reach, high-energy river systems draining the Baviaans and Kouga Mountains of the Cape Fold Belt into the Indian Ocean through an area of rapid urbanisation and agricultural intensiﬁcation. The Baviaanskloof observatory is a proposed component of this landscape (Table A1). Both the GCT and GRG landscapes present source-to-sea opportunities involving upstream and downstream systems, which link terrestrial mountain catchments with marine ecosystems . 3.3. What about the Rest of Southern Africa? South Africa has the most active and comprehensive LTER networks in the region. Other Southern African countries have limited long-term meteorological (rainfall and air temperature) and hydrological monitoring but it is not mountain-focused (see [146–150]). Two exceptions relate to Lesotho: a high-elevation rainfall and temperature series  and the MIREN programme (discussed previously). This almost absence of mountain LTER outside of South Africa is largely due to the region’s remote and inaccessible complex terrain, shortage of institutional and human capacity, lack of funding, theft and vandalism of equipment, and poor data management systems [62,83,151,152]. One key intervention intended to facilitate LTER across Southern African countries was the ELTOSA network established in 2001. It aimed to connect member country EONs to study ecosystems and environmental issues traversing political borders [30,82,83], but has failed to materialize. A recent global review shows only South Africa and Namibia hosting LTER in the region—based on DEIMS, July 2017 . The Namibian site, however, bears no relevance, as its research station is located in the Namib Desert. Failure to successfully implement a transnational network highlights the challenges of undertaking LTER in the region, hampered by pervasive funding constraints and lack of institutional capacity (both Land 2021, 10, 1024 12 of 27 human and infrastructure) [30,82]. Fortunately, the African Mountain Research Foundation (AMRF), progeny of the International Mountain Society, was recently established to catalyse and extend LTSER beyond South Africa into the mountain regions of Angola, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, and Zimbabwe. It is essentially a fund- raising arm to establish LTSER with the Afromontane Research Unit of the University of the Free State as its beneﬁciary . Previously, AfroMont (Research Network on Global Change in African Mountains) supported collaborative research in African mountains, but is now largely defunct. 3.4. Local Knowledge with Global Signiﬁcance This synthesis has enabled us to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of our mountain observatory networks (Table 1) and to underscore the collective value of our mountain-based LT(S)ER in terms of how it safeguards people and biodiversity for a sus- tainable mountain future. It also allowed us to contextualise and frame the signiﬁcance of our mountain-based LT(S)ER from an austral perspective for the Northern Hemisphere- dominated international mountain community. This opportunity is essential to balancing the global narrative around how mountain people and biodiversity may be impacted by a rapidly changing world and can hopefully present workable solutions which may beneﬁt other mountainous countries facing similar challenges. Insights gained from our LT(S)ER offer a unique perspective due to our local mountain context, outlined as follows: (1) our mountains are not very high in elevation by global standards and do not occur at high latitudes. They therefore have no permanent snow and ice, no upper-alpine and nival zones, and no glaciers, suggesting that detecting changes may require a more subtle and nuanced approach (only periglacial signatures are present at the highest elevations). (2) Our mountains are not covered with montane forests and lack the characteristic alpine treeline tracking the 6 C seasonal mean isotherm between alpine and montane belts [63,64], which as a thermal “marker” sensitive to climate warming can be used as an indicator of change. In Southern Africa’s Maloti-Drakensberg, a more obscure treeline ecotone is depressed by almost a 1000 m due to a precipitous escarpment; this discontinuous treeline ecotone separates the upper-montane and lower- montane belts . Changes here may not be as easily detected compared with the alpine treeline at higher elevation. (3) True to the global trend of mountain plant diversity peaking in the mid-latitudes , our mountains are hyper-diverse palaeo-centres of plant diversity and endemism. This diversity is largely accounted for by expansive and ancient old-growth grasslands and shrublands [124,154–156]. In contrast, our montane forests are small patches (1–10 ha) on south- and south-east facing slopes and in steep- sided valleys; they are species-poor with low levels of endemism [124,157]. (4) There are few examples of mountains located in the Southern Hemisphere mid-latitudes (together with the Australian Alps and central South American Andes), strategically positioned at a temperate tropical interface, where warming and precipitation changes are expected. (5) The Great Escarpment and Cape Fold Belt are the region’s most signiﬁcant climate regulators–topographic inﬂuences that exert strong regional and micro-scale controls on precipitation, humidity, airﬂow and temperature . (6) Our mountains include Africa’s only non-tropical, Southern Hemisphere alpine habitat, and its small area and relatively benign relief by global alpine standards may offer alpine species under climate change fewer opportunities to migrate due to a limited mosaic of micro-habitats and thermal niches (see ). (7) Our mountains are characterised by strong moisture/aridity, temperature, and aspect gradients, and include almost half of the world’s zonobiomes and a third of the world’s global circulation systems. (8) Our montane grasslands are beginning to show different responses to climate change when compared with Northern Hemisphere systems . (9) Our mountains are some of the oldest on the planet with interesting and complex geologic and geomorphic histories, with less of the “continental” inﬂuence experienced by Northern Hemisphere mountains. (10) Our mountains have their own unique Quaternary glaciation history  and are believed to have been affected by late Land 2021, 10, 1024 13 of 27 Quaternary climatic ﬂuctuations [5,160]. (11) Our mountains host a sovereign country (“the Mountain Kingdom of Lesotho’” entirely enclaved by South Africa; this is the only Southern Hemisphere example of an enclaved country and the only country in the world occurring in its entirety above 1000 m a.s.l. . A nation accommodated entirely within a mountain context places extreme pressure on its natural resources—Lesotho’s mountains are occupied by pastoralists with heavy dependence on communal rangelands, leading to landscape degradation and unsustainable resource use . (12) In addition, there are still many learning opportunities to be experienced and lessons to be shared amongst a diverse suite of stakeholders in the building of a multi-disciplinary, multi-scale community of practice  to undergird adaptation and resilience policy. Table 1. Strengths and weaknesses of Southern Africa’s mountain observatory networks and LT(S)ER, as identiﬁed in this synthesis. Features Strengths Weaknesses There is a long history of LT(S)ER in the Despite a long history, LT(S)ER is relatively LT(S)ER history mountains of South Africa dating back to some limited and currently overseen by a small 111 years. community of organisations and researchers. The earliest LTER in South Africa was all mountain-based eco-hydrology because it was However, because of this one-dimensional Historical focus needed to inform catchment management legacy, purer forms of ecological LTER suffered practices and water policy, highly relevant to a historically. water-scarce country. LT(S)ER is evolving towards multi-disciplinary This evolution has been a slow transition from Adaptive changes global change observation science. long-term monitoring platforms. There is a diverse range of LT(S)ER Having a diverse range of initiatives can also programmes in southern Africa. This diversity spread resources very thin, resulting in poorly provides a larger and more robust knowledge replicated networks of each LT(S)ER type. Diversity of LT(S)ER initiatives base from which to draw conclusions about There are some LT(S)ER types represented by how to better safeguard people’s well-being, solitary sites rather than the preferred appropriately manage biodiversity, and ensure distributed, coordinated, multi-site networks. environmental sustainability. There is little to no LT(S)ER taking place in the mountains of Angola, Lesotho, Mozambique, These countries still have an enormous Namibia, and Zimbabwe. LT(S)ER in Southern opportunity to design and capacitate the types Africa is therefore unbalanced and not of LT(S)ER networks that will serve their LT(S)ER capacity in Southern African representative of the Great Escarpment. Africa purposes to great effect, generating both countries (excluding South Africa) in general is lacking mountain observatories, quality science and the outcomes needed to which contrasts markedly with its high address livelihood challenges in their population densities and socio-economic mountain regions. needs against a backdrop of accelerating environmental change . Notwithstanding South Africa’s signiﬁcant strides at LTER, the spread of sites in the country is not fully representative of its diverse mountain regions which traverse large moisture/aridity, aspect, and temperature gradients and consequentially a range of South Africa has the most comprehensive zonobiomes. The limited and uneven LT(S)ER networks in the region and the best distribution of mountain observatories is also a LT(S)ER capacity in South Africa equipped mountain observatories. It therefore global trend . An example is the heavy has a key role to play in capacitating and reliance on Cathedral Peak in the supporting its regional neighbours. Maloti-Drakensberg. This behemoth of LT(S)ER in Southern Africa’s mountains accounts for the Research Catchments, the Brotherton Fire Experiment, a NutNet site and is proposed as a signiﬁcant component of the forthcoming EFTEON LTSER landscape, as well as proposed MIREN and Soil BON sites. Land 2021, 10, 1024 14 of 27 Table 1. Cont. Features Strengths Weaknesses Southern Africa, Africa, and the Southern Hemisphere are poorly represented in international LTER programmes. LT(S)ER has A number of collaborative partnerships with suffered from a “silo mentality”, whereby international LT(S)ER programmes are researchers have historically been working in International connectivity emerging, opening up signiﬁcant isolation within the region and divorced from opportunities for collaboration, lesson-sharing, Northern Hemisphere colleagues and and learning. programmes. The Cape Fold Belt in particular lacks connection to such programmes, particularly MIREN and Soil BON. There are still many research gaps and There has been a historical bias towards opportunities for scholarly study at all levels certain spheres of study and certain taxonomic (graduate, post-graduate, and scholar). There groups—faunas, soil biodiversity, and Focal areas is an opportunity for better integration of below-ground systems—are less studied than faunal, ﬂoral and soil-based LTER components ﬂoras and above-ground systems at high towards more systems-based research. elevation. Better use must be made of Southern Africa’s alpine region, which remains very under studied. Multiple alpine observatories are required for the GLORIA, MIREN, NutNet, RangeX, and Soil BON programmes, particularly in the colder and drier recesses of Southern Africa has an alpine region that has Elevational representation the south-eastern Maloti-Drakensberg. All great potential to host global change LT(S)ER. observatories, with the exception of the long-term automated weather station on an alpine inselberg summit near Vulture’s Retreat (3010 m a.s.l.), are montane (this site also hosts a long-term vegetation monitoring platform through ﬁxed cameras; Table A1). 4. Conclusions Southern Africa has the opportunity to host comprehensive mountain observatory net- works that will contribute towards a more holistic and robust global network of mountain observatories inclusive of all relevant sciences. We conclude with a few recommendations to further capacitate Southern Africa’s ability to manage its mountain systems sustainably and in a way that builds resilience to global change: (1) LT(S)ER should have its own unique ﬂavour formulated around the region’s socio-ecological realities, context, agendas, and policy frameworks. (2) The nations of the region not engaging in LT(S)ER should be encour- aged to invest in a research infrastructure framework to advance their scientiﬁc footprint and skills base, and more importantly to understand global change impacts. (3) The smaller mountain complexes not part of the Great Escarpment, such as the Lebombo Mountains, Soutpansberg and Waterberg, may also warrant some attention in the future to ensure a more comprehensive understanding of our mountain systems. (4) The socio-ecological and socio-economic dimensions involving sustainable livelihoods, resource use, ethnic diversity, and culture linked to mountains need to be urgently incorporated in to LTER initiatives (LTSER). The establishment of the EFTEON landscapes in 2021 is a large step towards achieving this end. (5) Effective, clean governance is critically important to ensure sustain- ability, conserve natural resources and safeguard human well-being . (6) Furthermore, global collaborations are key to tackling pressing global change issues that traverse spatial and temporal scales and require multi-disciplinary inputs across many ﬁelds. SAEON and the Afromontane Research Unit in particular are ensuring collaboration within the broader scientiﬁc community, with growing international partnerships emerging in the past few years. A few suggestions to foster deeper international connections include the hosting of appropriately themed mountain conferences (such as the ﬁrst Southern African Mountain Conference 2022), focused workshops, greater use of digital resources to host online events, Special Issue journal publications, increasing the global visibility of international networks to grow membership across all hemispheres and disciplines, sabbaticals taken abroad, Land 2021, 10, 1024 15 of 27 and more generally the reciprocal exchange of visiting delegations between countries. A good opportunity for synergistic interactions exists between the proposed Northern Maloti-Drakensberg EFTEON landscape and the Mont-aux-Sources LTSER site. (7) LT(S)ER in South Africa should continue to receive funding given its long LTER history, previous ﬁnancial investments, long-term data legacies, and active strides being taken to advance its scientiﬁc infrastructural footprint. (8) LT(S)ER should be adaptive in nature, always seeking to remain relevant and supple enough to meet changing research questions and needs. It should also be designed with the end user in mind to inform “evidence-based policy”  primed for implementation. (9) Future placement of LT(S)ER sites to close knowledge gaps will require novel approaches, given that they may have to be located in remote and inaccessible areas that are difﬁcult to establish and administer. (10) We have demonstrated the value of our LT(S)ER along thematic lines of research, however, they may obscure and limit our ability to characterise and mitigate global change impacts until they have been integrated through a holistic approach . Our greatest challenge will be to integrate data from multiple thematic programmes into a single, clear mountain-speciﬁc adaptation policy for implementation. Smaller, focused steps will therefore be required to achieve this end. As we already have water and ﬁre policy informed by multi-decadal catchment and burning experiments respectively, a “nutrient policy” should also be established in the future that incorporates management interventions addressing the nutrient-enrichment impacts of global change on our mountain grasslands. (11) The current establishment of mountain observatories relating to the GLORIA, RangeX, Soil BON, MIREN, and AMRF programmes and the proposed EFTEON landscapes makes for an exciting new chapter of LT(S)ER in Southern Africa and an invaluable contribution to the international moun- tain community. This renaissance period is timeous given the many perils and pressures facing our mountain people and biota in the Anthropocene. It is therefore essential that LTSER generating high-quality data is conducted in the mountain regions of this uniquely positioned region of the Earth, whose context is largely unreplicated in other mountain regions of the world. This is our mountain watch for a sustainable Southern African mountain future. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.C.; writing—original draft preparation, C.C.; writing— review and editing, D.I.T. and C.C.; Figure 1, D.I.T. and C.C.; Figure 2 and Table 1, C.C.; Table A1, D.I.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: The authors did not receive special funding for this study. However, this paper is an expansion of an oral presentation delivered by the ﬁrst author at a workshop (“Contribution of Long- term Ecological Research Programs in Mountains to Global Policy Agendas and UN Conventions”) hosted by the Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment in Champex, Switzerland. The organisers are thanked for sponsoring this workshop. Acknowledgments: We thank Tim O’Connor for a critical review of the ﬁrst draft. Ralph Clark (Afromontane Research Unit) is thanked for permission to mention the African Mountain Research Foundation. Rion Lerm (SAEON) is thanked for assistance with Figure 1. We thank two anonymous reviewers for constructive inputs. Conﬂicts of Interest: The authors declare no conﬂict of interest. Land 2021, 10, 1024 16 of 27 Appendix A Table A1. Summary of the mountain observatories in Southern Africa. Atmospheric and hydrological research is included in the broader LTER framework to showcase the full suite of parameters measured long-term. Key environmental change drivers and response variables * are indicated for each observatory . Date ranges start with the earliest instrumentation/infrastructure for at least one of the data parameters listed. Mid-range dates are shown where the South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON) resurrected earlier data collection. Data collection and recording frequency vary with changes in stations, instrumentation, or custodianship of the research platform. Elevation range at each observatory reﬂects the spread of data collection activities, not necessarily the topographic extremes (with the exception of the Mont-aux-Sources and Sani Pass sites). Elevation Range Site and Afﬁliation Mountain Range and Country Management Authority Biome and Rainfall Zone Recorded Parameters and Attributes (m a.s.l.) Cape Fold Belt Atmospheric parameters (2011–2015–current): air temperature, vapour pressure deﬁcit, atmospheric pressure, precipitation, wind speed and direction Hydrological parameters (2012–current): groundwater and surface water elevation, depth and temperature, estimated streamﬂow Baviaanskloof Ecological parameters: vegetation surveyed in Intersection of Albany SAEON Fynbos node; proposed Baviaans and Kouga Mountains, Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism 1991/1992 and 2011/2012 Thicket, Succulent Karoo, 174–985 component of the Garden Route South Africa Agency Land use/cover; disturbance; water abstraction Fynbos; winter rainfall Gateway EFTEON landscape * Hydrological functioning; biodiversity Baviaanskloof is afﬁliated with the Global Ecosystem Research Infrastructure (GERI) and the International Long-Term Ecological Research Network (ILTER). It is a LivingLands landscape and falls within the UNESCO Cape Floral Region Protected Areas World Heritage Site Atmospheric parameters (2015–current): air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, precipitation, solar radiation, atmospheric Cederberg Cederberg Mountains, South Fynbos, Succulent Karoo; pressure CapeNature 1310–1576 SAEON Fynbos node Africa winter rainfall Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés surveyed in the 1980s, targeted ﬂoral species monitoring Climate change; Disturbance * Biodiversity Land 2021, 10, 1024 17 of 27 Table A1. Cont. Elevation Mountain Range and Biome and Rainfall Site and Afﬁliation Management Authority Recorded Parameters and Attributes Range Country Zone (m a.s.l.) Six gauged research catchments (ﬁve afforested with Pinus radiata + one control) Atmospheric parameters (1925–2013/2014–current): atmospheric pressure, precipitation, air temperature, fog, vapour pressure, dew point temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, net radiation, leaf wetness; (2019–current): CO and H O ﬂux, short- and long-wave incoming and Jonkershoek Valley outgoing radiation, albedo, soil heat ﬂux (”Jonkershoek”) Hydrological parameters (1935–1992; SAEON Fynbos node; Boland Mountains, South Fynbos, Afrotemperate 2010–current): runoff amount, surface water CapeNature 239–1214 proposed component of the Africa forest; winter rainfall level, quality and temperature; (2013–current): Greater Cape Town EFTEON soil moisture landscape Ecological parameters: plant species turnover Climate change; land use/cover; disturbance; alien organisms * Hydrological functioning; Biogeochemical cycling Jonkershoek is afﬁliated with the GERI, ILTER and the TRY plant trait and BioTIME global databases and falls within the UNESCO Cape Floral Region Protected Areas World Heritage Site Land 2021, 10, 1024 18 of 27 Table A1. Cont. Elevation Mountain Range and Biome and Rainfall Site and Afﬁliation Management Authority Recorded Parameters and Attributes Range Country Zone (m a.s.l.) Atmospheric parameters (1962–2013–current): precipitation, air temperature, fog, atmospheric pressure, net radiation, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, leaf wetness, and soil Table Mountain National temperature Park Hydrological parameters (2013–current): soil (”Table Mountain”) Cape Peninsula Mountains, Fynbos, Afrotemperate moisture SAEON Fynbos node; South African National Parks 40–966 South Africa forest; winter rainfall Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés proposed component of the surveyed in 1966, 1999 and 2010 Greater Cape Town EFTEON Climate change; land use/cover; alien landscape organisms * Hydrological functioning; biodiversity Falls within the UNESCO Cape Floral Region Protected Areas World Heritage Site Great Escarpment Land 2021, 10, 1024 19 of 27 Table A1. Cont. Elevation Mountain Range and Biome and Rainfall Site and Afﬁliation Management Authority Recorded Parameters and Attributes Range Country Zone (m a.s.l.) Fifteen gauged research catchments (13–190 ha); one excluded from ﬁre; one historically afforested with Pinus patula and one historically grazed by cattle Atmospheric parameters (1949–1995; 2012–current): atmospheric pressure, precipitation, dew point, relative humidity, air temperature, vapour pressure deﬁcit, suspended solids, wind speed and direction, net radiation; (2019–current): CO and H O ﬂux, 2 2 short- and long-wave incoming and outgoing radiation, albedo, and soil heat ﬂux Hydrological parameters (1948–1995; Cathedral Peak Research 2013–current): surface water level, quality, Ezemvelo KwaZulu-Natal Catchments temperature and volume, soil moisture Wildlife (”Cathedral Peak”) Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés (previously Natal Parks SAEON Grasslands– Maloti-Drakensberg Grassland; summer surveyed in 1975 and 1985 and by SAEON 1820–2463 Board, Department of Wetlands–Forests node; Mountains, South Africa rainfall in 2013 3010** Forestry/Forestek/ Council proposed component of the Climate change; land use/cover; disturbance for Scientiﬁc and Industrial northern Maloti-Drakensberg * Hydrological functioning; biodiversity; Research) EFTEON landscape biogeochemical cycling ** Long-term automated weather station and ﬁxed camera vegetation monitoring site on an alpine inselberg summit near Vulture’s Retreat Cathedral Peak is afﬁliated with the GERI and ILTER. The site falls within the UNESCO Maloti-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site The Research Catchments are located within the Cathedral Peak Research Area which also hosts the multi-decadal Brotherton Fire Experiment (BFE), a Nutrient Network (NutNet) site as well as planned Soil Biodiversity Observation Network (Soil BON) and Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN) sites Land 2021, 10, 1024 20 of 27 Table A1. Cont. Elevation Mountain Range and Biome and Rainfall Site and Afﬁliation Management Authority Recorded Parameters and Attributes Range Country Zone (m a.s.l.) Atmospheric parameters (2016–current): precipitation, air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, net radiation, Compassberg Protected Nama-Karoo, atmospheric pressure, leaf wetness, and soil Compassberg Sneeuberge, South Africa Environment Group and Grassland; temperature 1200–2502 SAEON Arid Lands node SAEON autumn rainfall Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés surveyed in 2014 and 2016 Climate change * Biodiversity Atmospheric parameters (2014–current): air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, precipitation, net radiation, atmospheric pressure, and fog Limpopo Drakensberg Limpopo Department of Grassland, Savanna, Haenertsburg Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés (Wolkberg section), South Economic Development, Afrotemperate forest; 1350–1459 SAEON Ndlovu node surveyed triennially 2007–current, targeted Africa Environment and Tourism summer rainfall ﬂoral species monitoring, high-resolution aerial imagery Climate change; land use/cover; disturbance * Biodiversity Atmospheric parameters (2000–current): air temperature, precipitation, fog Hydrological parameters (2019–current): water level, quality, temperature and volume Department of Forestry, Ecological parameters: vegetation relevés Fisheries and the surveyed triennially 2018–current, Mariepskop Mpumalanga Drakensberg, Grassland; Environment/ high-resolution aerial imagery, ﬁsh composition 710–1947 SAEON Ndlovu node South Africa summer rainfall Mpumalanga Tourism and (2012/2013, 2021) Parks Agency Climate change; land use/cover; disturbance; water abstraction *Hydrological functioning; biodiversity Gazetted for inclusion in the Blyde River Canyon Nature Reserve Land 2021, 10, 1024 21 of 27 Table A1. Cont. Elevation Mountain Range and Biome and Rainfall Site and Afﬁliation Management Authority Recorded Parameters and Attributes Range Country Zone (m a.s.l.) ca. 1200 km ; establishment in progress; will include Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments (GLORIA) and Mountain Invasion Research Network Mont-aux-Sources LTSER Site Ezemvelo KwaZulu-Natal (MIREN)/RangeX sites Afromontane Research Unit, Maloti-Drakensberg, South Wildlife and Ingonyama Trust Grassland; Alien plants; climate change; land-use change; 1300–3282 University of the Free State Africa and Lesotho (South Africa); Basutho Royal summer rainfall degradation; disturbance  Houses (Lesotho) * Biodiversity; Livelihoods The site falls partly within the UNESCO Maloti-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site (Royal Natal section) MIREN sites established in 2007 along steep elevational gradients. Additional MIREN sites Sani Pass (South Africa) and Ezemvelo KwaZulu-Natal to be added by the Afromontane Research Unit Kotisephola Pass (Lesotho) Wildlife (South Africa); Maloti-Drakensberg, South Grassland; Alien plants; Disturbance 1500–2874 Stellenbosch University; Lesotho Government and Africa and Lesotho summer rainfall * Biodiversity 2874–3200 University of Johannesburg; Basutho Royal House The MIREN sites fall partly within the UNESCO University of Pretoria [89,91] (Lesotho) Maloti-Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site (Cobham section) Land 2021, 10, 1024 22 of 27 References 1. Kylander, M.E.; Holm, M.; Fitchett, J.; Grab, S.; Cortizas, A.M.; Norström, E.; Bindler, R. Late glacial (17,060–13,400 cal yr BP) sedimentary and paleoenvironmental evolution of the Sekhokong Range (Drakensberg), Southern Africa. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0246821. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 2. Grab, S.W.; Knight, J. Landscapes and landforms of South Africa–an overview. In Landscapes and Landforms of South Africa. World Geomorphological Landscapes; Grab, S.W., Knight, J., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 1–9. 3. De Wit, M.J. The deeptime treasure chest of the Makhonjwa Mountains. S. Afr. J. Sci. 2010, 106, 1–2. [CrossRef] 4. Clark, V.R.; Barker, N.P.; Mucina, L. The Great Escarpment of southern Africa: A new frontier for biodiversity exploration. Biodivers. Conserv. 2011, 20, 2543–2561. [CrossRef] 5. Stewart, B.A.; Mitchell, P.J. Late Quaternary palaeoclimates and human-environment dynamics of the Maloti-Drakensberg region, southern Africa. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2018, 196, 1–20. [CrossRef] 6. McCarthy, T.; Rubridge, B. The Story of Earth and Life, 1st ed.; Struik Publishers: Cape Town, South Africa, 2005; pp. 1–360. 7. Knight, J.; Grab, S.W. The Drakensberg escarpment: Mountain processes at the edge. In Landscapes and Landforms of South Africa. World Geomorphological Landscapes; Grab, S.W., Knight, J., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 47–55. 8. Shone, R.W.; Booth, P.W.K. The Cape Basin, South Africa: A review. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 2005, 43, 196–210. [CrossRef] 9. Blewett, S.C.J.; Phillips, D. An overview of Cape Fold Belt geochronology: Implications for sediment provenance and the timing of orogenesis. In Origin and Evolution of the Cape Mountains and Karoo Basin; Linol, B., de Wit, M.J., Eds.; Springer: Switzerland, 2016; pp. 44–55. 10. Global Distribution of GLORIA Sites. Available online: https://www.gloria.ac.at/network/global-distribution/ (accessed on 3 May 2021). 11. IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Dokken, D.J., Mach, K.J., Mastrandrea, M.D., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 1–32. 12. Bentley, L.K.; Robertson, M.P.; Barker, N.P. Range contraction to a higher elevation: The likely future of the montane vegetation in South Africa and Lesotho. Biodivers. Conserv. 2019, 28, 131–153. [CrossRef] 13. Perrigo, A.; Hoorn, C.; Antonelli, A. Why mountains matter for biodiversity. J. Biogeogr. 2019, 47, 315–325. [CrossRef] 14. Nahamo, L.; Matchaya, G.; Mabhaudhi, T.; Nhlengethwa, S.; Nhemachena, C.; Mpandeli, S. Cereal production trends under climate change: Impacts and adaptation strategies in southern Africa. Agriculture 2019, 9, 30. [CrossRef] 15. Cattivelli, V. Climate adaptation strategies and associated governance structures in mountain areas. The case of the alpine areas. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2810. [CrossRef] 16. Jiménez Hernández, A. Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Handbook; International Union for the Conservation of Nature: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 1–33. 17. Adelabu, D.B.; Clark, V.R.; Bredenhand, E. Potential for sustainable mountain farming: Challenges and prospects for sustainable smallholder farming in the Maloti-Drakensberg Mountains. Mt. Res. Dev. 2020, 40, A1–A11. [CrossRef] 18. Nsengiyumva, P. African mountains in a changing climate: Trends, impacts, and adaptation solutions. Mt. Res. Dev. 2019, 39, 1–8. [CrossRef] 19. Körner, C. Mountain biodiversity, its causes and function. Ambio 2004, 33, 11–17. [CrossRef] 20. Carbutt, C. The Drakensberg Mountain Centre: A necessary revision of southern Africa’s high-elevation centre of plant endemism. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019, 124, 508–529. [CrossRef] 21. Carbutt, C. The imperiled alpine grasslands of the Afrotropic realm. In Imperiled: The Encyclopedia of Conservation. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences; Goldstein, M.I., DellaSala, D.A., Eds.; Elsevier Inc: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 1–13. 22. Wehrli, A. Why mountains matter for sustainable development. Mt. Res. Dev. 2014, 34, 405–409. [CrossRef] 23. Beniston, M. Climatic change in mountain regions: A review of possible impacts. In Climate Variability and Change in High Elevation Regions: Past, Present & Future; Diaz, H.F., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 5–31. 24. Payne, D.; Spehn, E.M.; Snethlage, M.; Fischer, M. Opportunities for research on mountain biodiversity under global change. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2017, 29, 40–47. [CrossRef] 25. Knapp, A.K.; Smith, M.D.; Hobbie, S.E.; Collins, S.L.; Fahey, T.J.; Hansen, G.J.A.; Landis, D.A.; La Pierre, K.J.; Melillo, J.M.; Seastedt, T.R.; et al. Past, present and future roles of long-term experiments in the LTER network. BioScience 2012, 62, 377–389. [CrossRef] 26. Lindenmayer, D.B.; Likens, G.E.; Andersen, A.; Bowman, D.; Bull, C.M.; Burns, E.; Dickman, C.R.; Hoffmann, A.A.; Keith, D.A.; Liddell, M.J.; et al. Value of long-term ecological studies. Austral Ecol. 2012, 37, 745–757. [CrossRef] 27. Kueffer, C.; Daehler, C.; Dietz, H.; McDougall, K.; Parks, C.; Pauchard, A.; Rew, L. The Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN). Linking local and global scales for addressing an ecological consequence of global change. GAIA 2014, 23, 263–265. [CrossRef] 28. Mirtl, M.; Borer, E.T.; Djukic, I.; Forsius, M.; Haubold, H.; Hugo, W.; Jourdan, J.; Lindenmayer, D.; McDowell, W.H.; Muraoka, H.; et al. Genesis, goals and achievements of Long-Term Ecological Research at the global scale: A critical review of LTER and future directions. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 626, 1439–1462. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Land 2021, 10, 1024 23 of 27 29. Hobbie, J.E.; Carpenter, S.R.; Grimm, N.B.; Gosz, J.R.; Seastedt, T.R. The US Long Term Ecological Research Programme. BioScience 2003, 53, 21–32. [CrossRef] 30. Pauw, J.C.; Henschel, J.R.; Sitoe, A.A.; Chimphamba, J.B.; Kanyanga, J.K.; Ringrose, S. Ecological Networking in Southern Africa: The ELTOSA Experience. In Proceedings of the AIDCCD Active Exchange of Experience on Indicators and Development of Perspectives in the Context of UNCCD, Role of Information Circulation Systems in Scientiﬁc and Practical Approaches to Combat Desertiﬁcation, Windhoek and Ondangwa, Namibia, 2–7 April 2006; pp. 70–80. 31. Dirnböck, T.; Haase, P.; Mirtl, M.; Pauw, J.; Templer, P.H. Contemporary International Long-Term Ecological Research (ILTER)– from biogeosciences to socio-ecology and biodiversity research. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2019, 19, 309–311. [CrossRef] 32. Parr, T.W.; Sier, A.R.J.; Battarbee, R.W.; Mackay, A.; Burgess, J. Detecting environmental change: Science and society–perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century. Sci. Total Environ. 2003, 310, 1–8. [CrossRef] 33. Haase, P.; Tonkin, J.D.; Stoll, S.; Burkhard, B.; Frenzel, M.; Geijzendorffer, I.R.; Häuser, C.; Klotz, S.; Kühn, I.; McDowell, W.H.; et al. The next generation of site-based long-term ecological monitoring: Linking essential biodiversity variables and ecosystem integrity. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 613, 1376–1384. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 34. Dynamic Ecological Information Management System–Site and Data Registry. Available online: https://www.deims.org/search/ sites (accessed on 13 May 2021). 35. Redman, C.L.; Grove, J.M.; Kuby, L.H. Integrating social science into the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network: Social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems 2004, 7, 161–171. [CrossRef] 36. Haber, H.; Winiwarter, V.; Andersson, K.; Ayres, R.U.; Boone, C.; Castillo, A.; Cunfer, G.; Fischer-Kowalski, M.; Freudenburg, W.R.; Furman, E.; et al. From LTER to LTSER: Conceptualizing the socio-economic dimension of Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 13. [CrossRef] 37. Dick, J.; Orenstein, D.E.; Holzer, J.M.; Wohner, C.; Achard, A.-L.; Andrews, C.; Avriel-Avni, N.; Beja, P.; Blond, N.; Cabello, J.; et al. What is socio-ecological research delivering? A literature survey across 25 international LTSER platforms. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 622, 1225–1240. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 38. Körner, C.; Urbach, D.; Paulsen, J. Mountain deﬁnitions and their consequences. Alp. Bot. 2021. [CrossRef] 39. Körner, C.; Paulsen, J.; Spehn, E.M. A deﬁnition of mountains and their bioclimatic belts for global comparison of biodiversity data. Alp. Bot. 2011, 121, 73–78. [CrossRef] 40. Taylor, S.J.; Ferguson, J.H.W.; Engelbrecht, F.A.; Clark, V.R.; Van Rensburg, S.; Barker, N. The Drakensberg Escarpment as the great supplier of water to South Africa. In Mountain Ice and Water: Investigations of the Hydrologic Cycle in Alpine Environments; Greenwood, G.B., Shroder, J.F., Jr., Eds.; Elsevier: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 1–46. 41. Clark, V.R.; Vidal, J.D.; Grundy, I.M.; Fakarayi, T.; Childes, S.L.; Barker, N.P.; Linder, H.P. Bridging the divide between intuitive social-ecological value and sustainability in the Manica Highlands of southern Africa (Zimbabwe-Mozambique). Ecosyst. Serv. 2019, 39, 100999. [CrossRef] 42. Johannsen, I.M.; Hengst, J.C.; Goll, A.; Höllermann, B.; Diekkrüge, B. Future of water supply and demand in the Middle Drâa Valley, Morocco, under climate and land use change. Water 2016, 8, 313. [CrossRef] 43. Conley, A.H.; Midgley, D.C. National water management in the Republic of South Africa–towards a consultative partnership with diverse users in a semi-arid country. J. Hydrol. 1988, 100, 473–487. [CrossRef] 44. Bennett, B.; Kruger, F. Forestry and Water Conservation in South Africa: History, Science and Policy; Australian National University Press: Canberra, Australia, 2015; pp. 1–269. 45. Hewlett, J.D.; Pienaar, L. Design and Analysis of the Catchment Experiment. In Proceedings of the a Symposium on Use of Small Watersheds in Determining Effects of Forest Land Use on Water Quality; White, E.H., Ed.; University of Kentucky: Lexington, KY, USA, 1973; pp. 88–106. 46. Slingsby, J.A.; de Buys, A.; Simmers, A.D.A.; Prinsloo, E.; Forsyth, G.G.; Glenday, J.; Allsopp, N. Jonkershoek: Africa’s oldest catchment experiment–80 years and counting. Hydrol. Process. 2021, 35, e14101. [CrossRef] 47. Parry, M.S. The softwood plantations of the East Transvaal and Swaziland. East Afr. Agric. J. 1952, 17, 188–200. [CrossRef] 48. Showers, K. Prehistory of Southern African forestry: From vegetable garden to tree plantation. Environ. Hist. 2010, 16, 295–322. [CrossRef] 49. Kruger, F.J.; Bennett, B.M. Wood and water: An historical assessment of South Africa's past and present forestry policies as they relate to water conservation. Trans. R. Soc. S. Afr. 2013, 68, 163–174. [CrossRef] 50. Wicht, C.L. Hydrological research in South African forestry. J. S. Afr. For. Assoc. 1948, 16, 4–21. [CrossRef] 51. Wicht, C.L. The validity of conclusions from South African multiple watershed experiments. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Forest Hydrology, Penn State University, Pennsylvania, USA, 29 August–10 September 1965; Lull, W.E., Sopper, W.H., Eds.; Pergamon Press: Oxford, UK, 1967; pp. 749–760. 52. Scott, D.F.; Prinsloo, F.W.; Moses, G.; Mehlomakulu, M.; Simmers, A.D.A. A Re-analysis of the South African Catchment Afforestation Experimental Data, Water Research Commission Report No. 810/1/00; Water Research Commission: Pretoria, South Africa, 2000; pp. 1–138. 53. Van Wyk, D.B. Inﬂuences of prescribed burning on nutrient budgets of mountain fynbos catchments in the S.W. Cape, Republic of South Africa. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Environmental Consequences of Fire and Fuel Management in Mediterranean- type Ecosystems, San Diego, CA, USA, June 1981; USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-58. U.S. Department of Agriculture: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1982. Land 2021, 10, 1024 24 of 27 54. Scott, D.F.; Van Wyk, D.B. The effects of wildﬁre on soil wettability and hydrological behaviour of an afforested catchment. J. Hydrol. 1990, 121, 239–256. [CrossRef] 55. Scott, D.F. The hydrological effects of ﬁre in South African mountain catchments. J. Hydrol. 1993, 150, 409–432. [CrossRef] 56. Nänni, U.W. Forest hydrological research at the Cathedral Peak Research Station. S. Afr. For. J. 1956, 27, 2–35. [CrossRef] 57. Nänni, U.W. The effect of afforestation on streamﬂow at Cathedral Peak. S. Afr. For. J. 1970, 74, 6–12. 58. Bosch, J.M. Treatment effects on annual and dry period streamﬂow at Cathedral Peak. S. Afr. For. J. 1979, 108, 29–38. [CrossRef] 59. Bosch, J.M.; Hewlett, J.D. A review of catchment experiments to determine the effect of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. J. Hydrol. 1982, 55, 3–23. [CrossRef] 60. Van Wyk, D.B. The effects of catchment management on sediment and nutrient exports in the Natal Drakensberg. In Proceedings of the Second South African National Hydrology Symposium, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, September 1985; Schulze, R.E., Ed.; Agricultural Catchments Research Unit Report No. 22, 1986. pp. 266–274. 61. Stuart-Hill, S.I.; Schulze, R.E. Does South Africa’s water law and policy allow for climate change adaptation? Clim. Dev. 2010, 2, 128–144. [CrossRef] 62. Toucher, M.L.; Clulow, A.; Van Rensburg, S.J.; Morris, F.; Gray, B.; Majozi, S.; Everson, C.; Jewitt, G.P.W.; Taylor, M.A.; Mfeka, S.; et al. Establishment of and Demonstration of the Potential of the Cathedral Peak Research Catchments as a Living Laboratory, Water Research Commission Report No. 2236/1/16; Water Research Commission: Gezina, South Africa, 2016; pp. 1–150. 63. Körner, C. Alpine Treelines: Functional Ecology of the Global High Elevation Tree Limits, 1st ed.; Springer: Basel, Switzerland, 2012; pp. 1–220. 64. Bader, M.Y.; Llambí, L.D.; Case, B.S.; Buckley, H.L.; Toivonen, J.M.; Camarero, J.J.; Cairns, D.M.; Brown, C.D.; Wiegand, T.; Resler, L.M. A global framework for linking alpine-treeline ecotone patterns to underlying processes. Ecography 2021, 44, 265–292. [CrossRef] 65. Bond, W.J. Open Ecosystems: Ecology and Evolution Beyond the Forest Edge, 1st ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2019; pp. 1–192. 66. Uys, R.G.; Bond, W.J.; Everson, T.M. The effect of different ﬁre regimes on plant diversity in southern African grasslands. Biol. Conserv. 2004, 118, 489–499. [CrossRef] 67. Everson, T.M.; Everson, C.S.; Morris, C.D. How stable is the tuft structure of a mesic Drakensberg grassland under various burning regimes? Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2021, 38, 14–22. [CrossRef] 68. Nänni, U.W. Veld management in the Natal Drakensberg. S. Afr. For. J. 1969, 68, 5–15. [CrossRef] 69. Morris, C.D.; Everson, C.S.; Everson, T.M.; Gordijn, P.J. Frequent burning maintained a stable grassland over four decades in the Drakensberg, South Africa. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2021, 38, 39–52. [CrossRef] 70. Gordijn, P.J.; O’Connor, T.G. Multidecadal effects of ﬁre in a grassland biodiversity hotspot: Does pyrodiversity enhance plant diversity? Ecol. Appl. 2021, e02391. 71. Gordijn, P.; Krüger, S. Brotherton Burning Trial Surveillance Plan; Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife and South African Environmental Observation Network: Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 2019; pp. 1–21. 72. Morris, C.D.; Dicks, H.M.; Everson, T.M.; Everson, C.S. Brotherton Burning Trial: Effect of Treatment on Species Composition and Diversity; Range and Forage Institute, Agricultural Research Council: Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 1999. 73. Short, A.D. Guest editorial–special feature: Revisiting the Brotherton burning trial. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2007, 24, iii–v. [CrossRef] 74. Manson, A.D.; Jewitt, D.; Short, A.D. Effects of season and frequency of burning on soils and landscape functioning in a moist montane grassland. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2007, 24, 9–18. [CrossRef] 75. Uys, C.; Hamer, M. The effect of long-term ﬁre treatments on invertebrates: Results from experimental plots at Cathedral Peak, South Africa. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2007, 24, 1–7. [CrossRef] 76. te Beest, M.; Kleinjan, A.; Tuijnman, V.; Findlay, N.; Mvelase, T.; le Roux, E.; Tedder, M.; Gordijn, P.; van Rensburg, S.J. Grass functional trait responses to experimental warming and ﬁre in Afromontane grasslands. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2021, 38, 88–101. [CrossRef] 77. Tainton, N.M. Veld Management in South Africa, 1st ed.; University of Natal Press: Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 1999; pp. 1–472. 78. Everson, C.S.; Everson, T.M.; Morris, C.D. The population dynamics of four grass species in relation to burning in the KwaZulu- Natal Drakensberg. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2021, 38, 23–38. [CrossRef] 79. Ott, J.P.; Klimešová, J.; Hartnett, D.C. The ecology and signiﬁcance of below-ground bud banks in plants. Ann. Bot. 2019, 123, 1099–1118. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 80. Krüger, S.C. The challenge of wilderness ﬁre stewardship in a time of change. A South African perspective. Int. J. Wilderness 2006, 12, 44–47. 81. SANBI. Grazing and Burning Guidelines: Managing Grasslands for Biodiversity and Livestock Production; Lechmere-Oertel, R.G., Ed.; South African National Biodiversity Institute: Pretoria, South Africa, 2014; pp. 1–42. 82. Henschel, J.R.; Pauw, J.C. Environmental Observatories: LTER á-la-Africa. In Rebirth of Science in Africa: A Shared Vision for Life and Environmental Sciences; Baijnath, H., Singh, Y., Eds.; Umdaus Press: Pretoria, South Africa, 2002; pp. 149–159. 83. Henschel, J.R.; Pauw, J.C.; Banyikwa, F.; Brito, R.; Chabwela, H.; Palmer, T.; Ringrose, S.; Santos, L.; Sitoe, A.; Van Jaarsveld, A. Developing the Environmental Long-term Observatories Network of Southern Africa (ELTOSA). S. Afr. J. Sci. 2003, 99, 100–108. Land 2021, 10, 1024 25 of 27 84. Van Jaarsveld, A.S.; Pauw, J.C.; Mundree, S.; Mecenero, S.; Coetzee, B.W.T.; Alard, G.F. South African Environmental Observation Network: Vision, design and status. S. Afr. J. Sci. 2007, 103, 289–294. 85. Van Rensburg, S.J. (South African Environmental Observation Network, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa). Personal communica- tion. 2019. 86. Mecenero, S. An inventory of long-term environmental datasets in South Africa. Grassroots 2005, 5, 18–19. 87. Simberloff, D. Effects and distribution of introduced species. In Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, 3rd ed.; Levin, S.A., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2001; pp. 517–529. 88. Richardson, D.M.; van Wilgen, B.W. Invasive alien plants in South Africa: How well do we understand the ecological impacts? S. Afr. J. Sci. 2004, 100, 45–52. 89. Kalwij, J.M.; Robertson, M.P.; Van Rensburg, B.J. Human activity facilitates altitudinal expansion of exotic plants along a road in montane grassland, South Africa. Appl. Veg. Sci. 2008, 11, 491–498. [CrossRef] 90. Carbutt, C. The emerging invasive alien plants of the Drakensberg Alpine Centre, southern Africa. Bothalia 2012, 42, 71–85. [CrossRef] 91. Kalwij, J.M.; Robertson, M.P.; Van Rensburg, B.J. Annual monitoring reveals rapid upward movement of exotic plants in a montane ecosystem. Biol. Invasions 2015, 17, 3517–3529. [CrossRef] 92. Popp, M.R.; Kalwij, J.M. Abiotic conditions shape the relationship between indigenous and exotic species richness in a montane biodiversity hotspot. Plant Ecol. 2021, 213, 757–767. 93. Pauchard, A.; Kueffer, C.; Dietz, H.; Daehler, C.C.; Alexander, J.; Edwards, P.J.; Arévalo, J.R.; Cavieres, L.A.; Guisan, A.; Haider, S.; et al. Ain’t no mountain high enough: Plant invasions reaching new elevations. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 479–486. [CrossRef] 94. Pollnac, F.W.; Rew, L.J. Life after establishment: Factors structuring the success of a mountain invader away from disturbed roadsides. Biol. Invasions 2014, 16, 1689–1698. [CrossRef] 95. Dietz, H.; Kueffer, C.; Parks, C.G. MIREN: A new research network concerned with plant invasion into mountain areas. Mt. Res. Dev. 2006, 26, 80–81. [CrossRef] 96. Haider, S.; Kueffer, C.; Bruelheide, H.; Seipel, T.; Alexander, J.M.; Rew, L.J.; Arévalo, J.R.; Cavieres, L.A.; McDougall, K.L.; Milbau, A.; et al. Mountain roads and non-native species modify elevational patterns of plant diversity. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2018, 27, 667–678. [CrossRef] 97. Mountain Invasion Research Network–RangeX. Available online: https://www.mountaininvasions.org/rangex (accessed on 30 July 2021). 98. Mountain Invasion Research Network–Sites. Available online: https://www.mountaininvasions.org/sites-1 (accessed on 25 May 2021). 99. Gwate, O.; Clark, V.R. (Afromontane Research Unit, University of the Free State, Free State, South Africa). Personal communica- tion. 2021. 100. Kalwij, J.M.; Steyn, C.; Le Roux, P.C. Repeated monitoring as an effective early detection means: First records of naturalised Solidago gigantea Aiton (Asteraceae) in southern Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2014, 93, 204–206. [CrossRef] 101. Alexander, J.M.; Diez, J.M.; Levine, J.M. Novel competitors shape species’ responses to climate change. Nature 2015, 525, 515–518. [CrossRef] 102. Alexander, J.M.; Diez, J.M.; Hart, S.P.; Levine, J.M. When climate reshufﬂes competitors: A call for experimental macroecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2016, 31, 831–841. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 103. Borer, E.T.; Grace, J.B.; Harpole, W.S.; MacDougall, A.S.; Seabloom, E.W. A decade of insights into grassland ecosystem responses to global environmental change. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2017, 1, 1–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 104. Stokstad, E. Open-source ecology takes root across the world. Science 2011, 334, 308–309. [CrossRef] 105. Borer, E.T.; Harpole, W.S.; Alder, P.B.; Lind, E.M.; Orrock, J.L.; Seabloom, E.W.; Smith, M.D. Finding generality in ecology: A model for globally distributed experiments. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 65–73. [CrossRef] 106. Nutrient Network: A Global Research Cooperative–Participating Sites. Available online: https://www.nutnet.org/ﬁeld_sites (accessed on 9 June 2021). 107. Willig, M.R. Biodiversity and productivity. Science 2011, 333, 1709–1710. [CrossRef] 108. Wragg, P.D. Multiple nutrients control threatened grassland vegetation in eastern South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2017, 112, 225–236. [CrossRef] 109. Hiltner, U.; Brа¨uning, A.; Gebrekirstos, A.; Huth, A.; Fischer, R. Impacts of precipitation variability on the dynamics of a dry tropical montane forest. Ecol. Model. 2016, 320, 92–101. [CrossRef] 110. Ponce-Reyes, R.; Plumptre, A.J.; Segan, D.; Ayebare, S.; Fuller, R.A.; Hugh, P.; Possingham, H.P.; Watson, J.E.M. Forecasting ecosystem responses to climate change across Africa’s Albertine Rift. Biol. Conserv. 2017, 209, 464–472. [CrossRef] 111. Tilman, D.; Reich, P.B.; Knops, J.; Wedin, D.; Mielke, T.; Lehman, C. Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 2001, 294, 843–845. [CrossRef] 112. Grace, J.B.; Anderson, T.M.; Smith, M.D.; Seabloom, E.; Andelman, S.J.; Meche, G.; Weiher, E.; Allain, L.K.; Jutila, H.; Sankaran, M.; et al. Does species diversity limit productivity in natural grassland communities? Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10, 680–689. [CrossRef] 113. Carbutt, C.; Edwards, T.J.; Fynn, W.R.S.; Beckett, R.P. Evidence for temperature limitation of nitrogen mineralisation in the Drakensberg Alpine Centre. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2013, 88, 447–454. [CrossRef] Land 2021, 10, 1024 26 of 27 114. Carbutt, C.; Edwards, T.J. Plant-soil interactions in lower-upper montane systems and their implications in a warming world: A case study from the Maloti-Drakensberg Park, southern Africa. Biodiversity 2015, 16, 262–277. [CrossRef] 115. Mompati, M.K. Atmospheric Deposition of Sulphur and Nitrogen over Eastern South Africa. Master ’s Thesis, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa, 2019. 116. Körner, C. Alpine Plant Life: Functional Plant Ecology of High Mountain Systems, 2nd ed.; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2003; pp. 1–349. 117. Testolin, R.; Attorre, F.; Jiménez-Alfaro, B. Global distribution and bioclimatic characterization of alpine biomes. Ecography 2020, 43, 1–10. [CrossRef] 118. Gottfried, M.; Pauli, H.; Futschik, A.; Akhalkatsi, M.; Barancok, ˇ P.; Benito, A.J.L.; Coldea, G.; Dick, J.; Erschbamer, B. Continent- wide response of mountain vegetation to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2012, 2, 111–115. [CrossRef] 119. Pauli, H.; Gottfried, M.; Dullinger, S.; Abdaladze, O.; Akhalkatsi, M.; Benito, A.; José, L.; Coldea, G.; Dick, J.; Erschbamer, B. Recent Plant Diversity Changes on Europe's Mountain Summits. Science 2012, 336, 353–355. [CrossRef] 120. Grabherr, G.; Gottfried, M.; Pauli, H. GLORIA: A Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments. Mt. Res. Dev. 2000, 20, 190–191. [CrossRef] 121. Pauli, H.; Gottfried, M.; Lamprecht, A.; Niessner, S.; Rumpf, S.; Winkler, M.; Steinbauer, K.; Grabherr, G. ; coordinating authors & editors. The GLORIA Field Manual–Standard Multi-Summit Approach, Supplementary Methods and Extra Approaches, 5th ed.; GLORIA-Coordination, Austrian Academy of Sciences and University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences: Vienna, Austria, 2015; pp. 1–137. 122. Wohner, C.; Peterseil, J.; Poursanidis, D.; Kliment, T.; Wilson, M.; Mirtl, M.; Chrysoulakis, N. DEIMS-SDR—A web portal to document research sites and their associated data. Ecol. Inform. 2019, 51, 15–24. [CrossRef] 123. Pauli, H. (Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria). Personal communication. 2021. 124. Carbutt, C.; Edwards, T.J. The ﬂora of the Drakensberg Alpine Centre. Edinb. J. Bot. 2004, 60, 581–607. [CrossRef] 125. Verrall, B.; Pickering, C.M. Alpine vegetation in the context of climate change: A global review of past research and future directions. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 748, 141344. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 126. Testolin, R.; Carmona, C.P.; Attorre, F.; Borchardt, P.; Bruelheide, H.; Dolezal, J.; Finckh, M.; Haider, S.; Hemp, A.; Jandt, U.; et al. Global functional variation in alpine vegetation. J. Veg. Sci. 2021, 32, e13000. [CrossRef] 127. Testolin, R.; Attorre, F.; Borchardt, P.; Brand, R.F.; Bruelheide, H.; Chytrý, M.; De Sanctis, M.; Dolezal, J.; Finckh, M.; Haider, S.; et al. Global patterns and drivers of alpine plant species richness. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2021, 30, 1218–1231. [CrossRef] 128. Brand, R.F.; Scott-Shaw, C.R.; O’Connor, T.G. The alpine ﬂora on inselberg summits in the Maloti-Drakensberg Park, KwaZulu- Natal, South Africa. Bothalia 2019, 49, a2386. [CrossRef] 129. Bardgett, R.D.; van der Putten, W.H. Belowground diversity and ecosystem functioning. Nature 2014, 515, 505–511. [CrossRef] 130. Cameron, E.K.; Martins, I.S.; Lavelle, P.; Mathieu, J.; Tedersoo, L.; Gottschall, F.; Guerra, C.A.; Hines, J.; Patoine, G.; Siebert, J.; et al. Global gaps in soil biodiversity data. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2018, 2, 1042–1043. [CrossRef] 131. Guerra, C.A.; Heintz-Buschart, A.; Sikorski, J.; Chatzinotas, A.; Guerrero-Ramírez, N.; Cesarz, S.; Beaumelle, L.; Rillig, M.C.; Maestre, F.T.; Delgado-Baquerizo, M.; et al. Blind spots in global soil biodiversity and ecosystem function research. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 3870. [CrossRef] 132. Soil Biodiversity Observation Network. Available online: https://www.geobon.org/bons/thematic-bon/soil-bon/ (accessed on 30 July 2021). 133. Seymour, C.L.; Gillson, L.; Child, M.F.; Tolley, K.A.; Curie, J.C.; da Silva, J.M.; Alexander, G.J.; Anderson, P.; Downs, C.T.; Egoh, B.N.; et al. Horizon scanning for South African biodiversity: A need for social engagement as well as science. Ambio 2019, 49, 1211–1221. [CrossRef] 134. Grumbine, R.E.; Xu, J. Mountain futures: Pursuing innovative adaptations in coupled social-ecological systems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2021. [CrossRef] 135. Martín-López, B.; Leister, I.; Cruz, P.L.; Palomo, I.; Grêt-Regamey, A.; Harrison, P.A.; Lavorel, S.; Locatelli, B.; Luque, S.; Walz, A. Nature’s contributions to people in mountains: A review. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0217847. [CrossRef] 136. Schirpke, U.; Wang, G.; Padoa-Schioppa, E. Editorial: Mountain landscapes: Protected areas, ecosystem services, and future challenges. Ecosyst. Serv. 2021, 49, 101302. [CrossRef] 137. Flint, C.G. Framing the human dimensions of mountain systems: Integrating social science paradigms for a global network of mountain observatories. Mt. Res. Dev. 2016, 36, 528–536. [CrossRef] 138. Makino, Y.; Manuelli, S.; Hook, L. Accelerating the movement for mountain peoples and policies. Science 2019, 365, 1084–1086. [CrossRef] 139. Everson, T.M.; Everson, C.S.; Zuma, K.D. Community Based Research on the Inﬂuence of Rehabilitation Techniques on the Management of Degraded Catchments, Water Research Commission Report 1316/1/0797; Water Research Commission: Pretoria, South Africa, 2007; pp. 1–97. 140. Mthembu, B.E.; Everson, T.M.; Everson, C.S. Intercropping for enhancement and provisioning of ecosystem services in smallholder, rural farming systems in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa: A review. J. Crop Improv. 2019, 33, 145–176. [CrossRef] 141. Feig, G. The Expanded Freshwater and Terrestrial Environmental Observation Network (EFTEON). Clean Air J. 2018, 28, 27. [CrossRef] Land 2021, 10, 1024 27 of 27 142. Asmal, O.E. Land Degradation in the Cathedral Peak Area of the Natal Drakensberg: 1945–1992. Master ’sThesis, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, 1995. 143. Peden, M.I. The Impact of Communal Land-use on the Biodiversity of a Conserved Grassland at Cathedral Peak, uKhahlamba- Drakensberg Park, South Africa. Master of Science Thesis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 2004. 144. De Villiers, A.M. The early history of Cathedral Peak Research Station. S. Afr. For. J. 1969, 72, 12–16. [CrossRef] 145. South African Environmental Observation Network–Crucial Milestone for Ecosystems Research in South Africa. Available online: http://www.saeon.ac.za/ (accessed on 1 June 2021). 146. Unganai, L.S. Historic and future climatic change in Zimbabwe. Clim. Res. 1996, 6, 137–145. [CrossRef] 147. Mason, S.J.; Jury, M.R. Climatic change and variability over Southern Africa: A reﬂection on underlying processes. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 1997, 21, 23–50. [CrossRef] 148. Fanta, B.; Zaake, B.T.; Kachroo, R.K. A study of variability of annual river ﬂow of the southern Africa region. Hydrolog. Sci. J. 2001, 46, 513–524. [CrossRef] 149. New, M.; Hewitson, B.; Stephenson, D.B.; Tsiga, A.; Kruger, A.; Manhique, A.; Gomez, B.; Coelho, C.A.S.; Masisi, D.N.; Kululanga, E.; et al. Evidence of trends in daily climate extremes over southern and west Africa. J. Geophys. Res. 2006, 111, 1–11. [CrossRef] 150. Mazvimavi, D. Investigating changes over time of annual rainfall in Zimbabwe. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2010, 14, 2671–2679. [CrossRef] 151. Nel, W.; Sumner, P.D. Rainfall and temperature attributes on the Lesotho-Drakensberg escarpment edge, southern Africa. Geogr. Ann. A 2008, 90, 97–108. [CrossRef] 152. Barry, R.G. Mountain climatology and past and potential future climatic changes in mountain regions: A review. Mt. Res. Dev. 1992, 12, 71–86. [CrossRef] 153. African Mountain Research Foundation. Available online: https://www.africanmountainresearch.com/ (accessed on 22 June 2021). 154. Linder, H.P.; Vlok, J.H.; McDonald, D.J.; Oliver, E.G.H.; Boucher, C.; Van Wyk, B.-E.; Schutte, A. The high altitude ﬂora and vegetation of the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Opera Bot. 1993, 121, 247–261. 155. Carbutt, C.; Edwards, T.J. The endemic and near-endemic angiosperms of the Drakensberg Alpine Centre. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2006, 72, 105–132. [CrossRef] 156. Clark, V.R.; Barker, N.P.; Mucina, L. The Sneeuberg: A new centre of ﬂoristic endemism on the Great Escarpment, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2009, 75, 196–238. [CrossRef] 157. Adie, H.; Kotze, D.J.; Lawes, M.J. Small ﬁre refugia in the grassy matrix and the persistence of Afrotemperate forest in the Drakensberg mountains. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 6549. [CrossRef] 158. Körner, C.; Hiltbrunner, E. Why is the alpine ﬂora comparatively robust against climate warming? Diversity 2021, 13, 383. [CrossRef] 159. Hall, K. Glaciation in southern Africa. In Quaternary Glaciations–Extent and Chronology, Part III; Ehlers, J., Gibbard, P.L., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 337–338. 160. Smith, J.M.; Lee-Thorp, J.A.; Sealy, J.C. Stable carbon and oxygen isotopic evidence for late Pleistocene to middle Holocene climatic ﬂuctuations in the interior of southern Africa. J. Quat. Sci. 2002, 17, 683–695. [CrossRef] 161. Lesotho. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesotho (accessed on 26 July 2021). 162. Shahgedanova, M.; Adler, C.; Gebrekirstos, A.; Grau, H.R.; Huggel, C.; Marchant, R.; Pepin, N.; Vanacker, V.; Viviroli, D.; Vuille, M. Mountain observatories: Status and prospects for enhancing and connecting a global community. Mt. Res. Dev. 2021, 41, A1–A15. [CrossRef] 163. Tucker, C.M.; Alcántara-Ayala, I.; Gunya, A.; Jimenez, E.; Klein, J.A.; Xu, J.; Bigler, S.L. Challenges for governing mountains sustainably: Insights from a global survey. Mt. Res. Dev. 2021, 41, 10–20. [CrossRef] 164. O’Connor, T.G. Understanding Environmental Change in Complex Systems: SAEON Core Science Framework, 1st ed.; SAEON: Pretoria, South Africa, 2010; pp. 1–47.
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
Mountain Watch: How LT(S)ER Is Safeguarding Southern Africa’s People and Biodiversity for a Sustainable Mountain Future
Thompson, Dave I.
, Volume 10 (10) –
Sep 30, 2021
Share Full Text for Free
Add to Folder
Web of Science