治理和生態系統之間的錯位偏差或不匹配是一項關鍵的永續挑戰，需要協作和協調網絡來設計全面性的解決方案，以解決生態系統退化的嚴重問題。然而，在設計任何全面性的解決方案之前，我們對於修正治理機制與其息息相關的複雜社會生態系統缺乏全面性的理解和知識。本研究認知到上述認識論的挑戰，且認為解決復育生態系統中不匹配問題的先決條件之一可由研究人員作為跨尺度領域中介者來提出干預介入，與多個利害關係人共同生產知識，並與脫節的利害關係人串連，以便為未來籌備生態系統復育聯盟做準備。在這種情況下，研究人員作為中介者的努力不僅連結社會和生態知識，也連結個體環境治理實體中當前持有的知識，為系統思維方法創建資料庫，並為未來的集體行動鋪路。本研究以河川復育治理為示範領域，通過實證研究分別對台灣萬年溪和東港溪的城鄉永續問題進行實證研究，展示研究人員如何在行動中發揮跨尺度領域中介者的作用，以鏈接在五個尺度領域的不連貫知識和利害關係人：（1）人與自然尺度領域，（2）時間尺度領域，（3）空間尺度領域，（4）制度尺度領域和（5）方法尺度領域。除了實證案例演示之外，本研究還嘗試將研究人員的角色與支持生態復育的八項原則相匹配，以探索未來研究人員可作為中間代理人發揮的更多具體任務。

Misalignments or mismatches between governance and ecosystems are a key sustainability challenge that requires a collaboration and coordination network to design integrated solutions for tackling wicked problems of ecosystem degradation. Yet before any integrated solution can be designed, there is a dearth of knowledge on and comprehensive understanding about the complex social-ecological system that the restoration governing mechanism is embedded within and depends on. Recognizing the abovementioned epistemological challenge, this paper argues that one of the prerequisites to tackle mismatches in restoring ecosystem is the intervention of researchers as scale-crossing brokers to co-produce knowledge with multiple stakeholders and link the disconnected stakeholders to prepare a future coalition of ecosystem restorative activities. The endeavor of researchers as brokers in this case is to link not only social and ecological knowledge but also knowledge currently held in individual environment governing entities in order to create the database for a system-thinking approach and pave ways for future collective action. By using urban river restoration governance as an exemplary field, this research showcases with empirical studies of the problem of both urban and rural sustainability, namely, the Wannian River and the Donggang River in Taiwan, respectively, how the role of researchers can actively play as scale-crossing brokers to link disconnected knowledge and stakeholders at the level of five scales: 1) human-nature scale, 2) temporal scale, 3) spatial scale, 4) institutional scale and 5) methodological scale. Moving beyond the empirical case demonstration, this study makes an additional attempt to match the roles of researchers with eight principles underpinning ecological restoration to explore specific tasks researchers can potentially play as intermediate agents in the future.