Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Call for Papers
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal
    • Native Plants Journal

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Ecological Restoration
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal
    • Native Plants Journal
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Ecological Restoration

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Call for Papers
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Visit uwp on Facebook
Research ArticlePerspectives
Open Access

Three Approaches to Restoration and Their Implications for Social Inclusion

Emily Sigman and Marlène Elias
Ecological Restoration, March 2021, 39 (1-2) 27-35; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/er.39.1-2.27
Emily Sigman
Emily Sigman (corresponding author), 459 Dixwell Avenue, New Haven, CT 06511 USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Marlène Elias
Marlène Elias, Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a, 00054 Maccarese (Fiumicino), Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

References

    1. Alexander, S.,
    2. C.R. Nelson,
    3. J. Aronson,
    4. D. Lamb,
    5. A. Cliquet,
    6. K.L. Erwin
    et al. 2011. Opportunities and challenges for ecological restoration within REDD+. Restoration Ecology 19:683–689.
    OpenUrl
    1. Appiah, M.
    2001. Co-partnership in forest management: The Gwira-Banso joint forest management project in Ghana. Development and Sustainability 3:343–360.
    OpenUrl
    1. Aronson, J.,
    2. J.N. Blignaut,
    3. S.J. Milton,
    4. D. Le Maitre,
    5. K.J. Esler,
    6. A. Limouzin
    et al. 2010. Are socioeconomic benefits of restoration adequately quantified? A meta‐analysis of recent papers (2000–2008) in Restoration Ecology and 12 other scientific journals. Restoration Ecology 18:143–154.
    OpenUrl
    1. Aronson, J. and
    2. S. Alexander
    . 2013. Ecosystem restoration is now a global priority: Time to roll up our sleeves. Restoration Ecology 21:293–296.
    OpenUrl
    1. Aslan, C.E.,
    2. B. Petersen,
    3. A.B Shiels,
    4. W. Haines, and
    5. C.T. Liang
    . 2018. Operationalizing resilience for conservation objectives: The 4S’s. Restoration Ecology 26:1032–1038.
    OpenUrl
    1. Baker, S.,
    2. K. Eckerberg and
    3. A. Zachrisson
    . 2014. Political science and ecological restoration. Environmental Politics 23:509–524.
    OpenUrl
    1. Bennett, E.M.,
    2. W. Cramer,
    3. A. Begossi,
    4. G. Cundill,
    5. S. Díaz,
    6. B.N. Egoh
    et al. 2015. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14:76–85.
    OpenUrl
    1. Bonn Challenge
    . 2021. The Bonn Challenge. IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature. www.bonnchallenge.org.
    1. Bradley, B.A.,
    2. M. Oppenheimer and
    3. D.S. Wilcove
    . 2009. Climate change and plant invasions: restoration opportunities ahead? Global Change Biology 15:1511–1521.
    OpenUrl
    1. Bradshaw, A.D.
    1992. The biology of land restoration. Applied Population Biology 25–44.
    1. Brick, C.
    2019. A modest proposal for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 27:485–487.
    OpenUrl
    1. Brudvig, L.
    2011. The restoration of biodiversity: Where has research been and where does it need to go? American Journal of Botany 98:549–558.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Budiharta, S.,
    2. E. Meijaard,
    3. D.L. Gaveau,
    4. M.J. Struebig,
    5. A. Wilting,
    6. S. Kramer-Schadt
    et al. 2018. Restoration to offset the impacts of developments at a landscape scale reveals opportunities, challenges and tough choices. Global Environmental Change 52:152–161.
    OpenUrl
    1. Ceccon E,
    2. J.I Barrera-Cataño,
    3. J. Aronson and
    4. C. Martínez-Garza
    . 2015. The socioecological complexity of ecological restoration in Mexico. Restoration Ecology 23:331–36.
    OpenUrl
    1. Cernea, M.M.
    2000. Risks, safeguards and reconstruction: A model for population displacement and resettlement. Economic and Political Weekly 3659–3678.
    1. Choi, Y.D.
    2007. Restoration ecology to the future: A call for new paradigm. Restoration Ecology 15:351–353.
    OpenUrl
    1. Chancel, L. and
    2. T. Piketty
    . 2015. Carbon and inequality: From Kyoto to Paris. Trends in the global inequality of carbon emissions (1998–2013) & Prospects for an equitable adaptation fund. Paris School of Economics.
    1. Christin, Z.L.,
    2. K.J. Bagstad and
    3. M.A. Verdone
    2016. A decision framework for identifying models to estimate forest ecosystem services gains from restoration. Forest Ecosystems 3:1–12.
    OpenUrl
    1. Davenport, M.A.,
    2. J.E. Leahy,
    3. D.H. Anderson and
    4. P.J Jakes
    . 2007. Building trust in natural resource management within local communities: A case study of the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie. Environmental Management 39:353–368.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Denevan, W.M.
    1992. The pristine myth: The landscape of the Americas in 1492. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 82:369–385.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Diamond, J.
    1985. How and why eroded ecosystems should be restored. Nature 313(6004):629–630.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Elias, M.,
    2. D. Joshi,
    3. R.S. Meinzen-Dick
    . 2021. Restoration for Whom, by Whom? A Feminist Political Ecology of Restoration. Ecological Restoration 39:3–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Evans, N.M. and
    2. M.A. Davis
    . 2019. Theorizing human impacts into ecological restoration is not a slippery slope, but a toehold for reaching social‐ecological resilience: A counter‐response to McDonald et al. Restoration Ecology 27:726–729.
    OpenUrl
    1. Failing, L.,
    2. R. Gregory,
    3. P. Higgins
    . 2012. Science, uncertainty, and values in ecological restoration: a case study in structured decision‐making and adaptive management. Restoration Ecology 21:422–430.
    OpenUrl
    1. Fairhead, J.M. Leach and
    2. I. Scoones
    . 2012. Green grabbing: A new appropriation of nature?. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39:237–261.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Fernández-Manjarrés, J.F.,
    2. S. Roturier and
    3. A.G. Bilhaut
    . 2018. The emergence of the social‐ecological restoration concept. Restoration Ecology 26:404–410.
    OpenUrl
    1. Fleischman, F.D.
    2014. Why do foresters plant trees? Testing theories of bureaucratic decision-making in central India. World Development 62:62–74.
    OpenUrl
    1. Fox, H. and
    2. G. Cundill
    . 2018. Towards increased communityengaged ecological restoration: A review of current practice and future directions. Ecological Restoration 36:208–218.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Gann, G.D.,
    2. T. McDonald,
    3. B. Walder,
    4. J. Aronson,
    5. C.R. Nelson,
    6. J. Jonson
    et al. 2019. International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restoration Ecology 27:S1–S46.
    OpenUrl
    1. Habtezion, S.,
    2. I. Adelekan,
    3. E. Aiyede,
    4. F. Biermann,
    5. M. Fubara,
    6. C. Gordon
    et al. 2015. Earth System Governance in Africa: Knowledge and capacity needs. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14:198–205.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hallett, L.M.,
    2. S. Diver,
    3. M.V. Eitzel,
    4. J.J Olson,
    5. B.S. Ramage,
    6. H. Sardinas
    et al. 2013. Do we practice what we preach? Goal setting for ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology 21:312–319.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hejnowicz, A.P.,
    2. D.G. Raffaelli,
    3. M.A. Rudd and
    4. P.C. White
    . 2014. Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework. Ecosystem Services 9:83–97.
    OpenUrl
    1. Healy, S.
    2003. Epistemological pluralism and the ‘politics of choice’. Futures 35:689–701.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Healy, S.
    2009. Toward an Epistemology of Public Participation. Journal of Environmental Management 90.4: 1644–1654.
    OpenUrl
    1. Higgs, E.
    2005. The two‐culture problem: ecological restoration and the integration of knowledge. Restoration Ecology 13:159–164.
    OpenUrl
    1. Higgs, E.,
    2. D.A. Falk,
    3. A. Guerrini,
    4. M. Hall,
    5. J. Harris,
    6. R.J. Hobbs
    et al. 2014. The changing role of history in restoration ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12:499–506.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hilderbrand, R.H.,
    2. A.C. Watts and
    3. A.M. Randle AM
    . 2005. The myths of restoration ecology. Ecology and Society 10:19.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hobbs, R.J. and
    2. J.A. Harris
    . 2001. Restoration ecology: Repairing the earth’s ecosystems in the new millennium. Restoration Ecology 9:239–246.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hobbs, R.J.
    2004. Restoration ecology: The challenge of social values and expectations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:43–44.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Hobbs, R.J.,
    2. E. Higgs and
    3. J.A. Harris
    . 2009. Novel ecosystems: Implications for conservation and restoration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24:599–605.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hobbs, R.J.,
    2. L.M. Hallett,
    3. P.R. Ehrlich and
    4. H.A. Mooney
    . 2011. Intervention ecology: Applying ecological science in the twenty-first century. BioScience 61:442–450.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Holling, C.S.
    1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4:1–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Ives, A.R. and
    2. S.R. Carpenter
    . 2007. Stability and diversity of ecosystems. Science 317.5834:58–62.
    OpenUrl
    1. Lawrence, R.L.,
    2. S.E. Daniels and
    3. G.H. Stankey
    . 1997. Procedural justice and public involvement in natural resource decision making. Society & Natural Resources 10:577–589.
    OpenUrl
    1. Liu, J.,
    2. M. Calmon,
    3. A. Clewell,
    4. J. Liu,
    5. B. Denjean,
    6. V.L. Engel
    et al. 2017. South-South cooperation for large-scale ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology 25:27–32.
    OpenUrl
    1. Lowenthal, D.
    2013. Eden, Earth Day, and ecology: Landscape restoration as metaphor and mission. Landscape Research 38:5–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Ludwig, D. and
    2. P. Macnaghten
    . 2020. Traditional ecological knowledge in innovation governance: A framework for responsible and just innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation 7:26–44.
    OpenUrl
    1. Maynard, C.M.
    2013. How public participation in river management improvements is affected by scale. Area 45:230–238.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. McDermott, M.H.
    2009. Locating benefits: Decision-spaces, resource access and equity in US community-based forestry. Geoforum 40:249–259.
    OpenUrl
    1. Metcalf, E.C.,
    2. J.J. Mohr,
    3. L. Yung,
    4. P. Metcalf and
    5. D. Craig
    . 2015. The role of trust in restoration success: Public engagement and temporal and spatial scale in a complex social‐ecological system. Restoration Ecology 23:315–324.
    OpenUrl
    1. Milgroom, J. and
    2. J. Ribot
    . 2020. Children of another land: Social disarticulation, access to natural resources and the reconfiguration of authority in post resettlement. Society & Natural Resources 33:184–204.
    OpenUrl
    1. Miller, J.R. and
    2. R.J. Hobbs
    . 2007. Habitat restoration: Do we know what we’re doing?. Restoration Ecology 15:382–390.
    OpenUrl
    1. Moilanen, A.,
    2. A.J. van Teeffelen,
    3. Y. Ben-Haim and
    4. S. Ferrier
    . 2009. How much compensation is enough? A framework for incorporating uncertainty and time discounting when calculating offset ratios for impacted habitat. Restoration Ecology 17:470–478.
    OpenUrl
    1. Moreno-Mateos, D.,
    2. M.E. Power,
    3. F.A. Comínand
    4. R. Yockteng
    . 2012. Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLOS Biology 10:e1001247.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Naveh, Z.
    1998. Ecological and cultural landscape restoration and the cultural evolution towards a post-industrial symbiosis betwee human society and nature. Restoration Ecology 6:135–143.
    OpenUrl
    1. O’Hara, K.L., and
    2. B.S. Ramage
    . 2013. Silviculture in an uncertain world: Utilizing multi-aged management systems to integrate disturbance. Forestry 86:401–410.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Paul, S. and
    2. S. Chakrabarti
    . 2011. Socio-economic issues in forest management in India. Forest Policy and Economics 13:55–60.
    OpenUrl
    1. Perring, M.P.,
    2. T.E. Erickson and
    3. P.H. Brancalion
    . 2018. Rocketing restoration: Enabling the upscaling of ecological restoration in the Anthropocene. Restoration Ecology 26:1017–1023.
    OpenUrl
    1. Pfadenhauer, J.
    2001. Some remarks on the socio‐cultural background of restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 9:220–229.
    OpenUrl
    1. Qun, G. and
    2. M. Hanying
    . 2007. Ecological restoration, socialeconomic changes and sustainable development in the Three Gorges Reservoir area: A case study in Yunyang, Chongqing Municipality. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 14:174–181.
    OpenUrl
    1. Reed, M.S.,
    2. S. Vella,
    3. E. Challies,
    4. J. de Vente,
    5. L. Frewer,
    6. D. Hohenwallner‐Ries
    et al. 2018. A theory of participation: What makes stakeholder and public engagement in environmental management work?. Restoration Ecology 26:S7–S17.
    OpenUrl
    1. Rice, K.J. and
    2. N.C. Emery
    . 2003. Managing microevolution: Restoration in the face of global change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1:469–478.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Shackelford, N.,
    2. R.J. Hobbs,
    3. J.M. Burgar,
    4. T.E. Erickson,
    5. J.B. Fontaine,
    6. E. Laliberté
    , et al. 2013. Primed for change: Developing ecological restoration for the 21st century. Restoration Ecology 21:297–304.
    OpenUrl
    1. Shebitz, D.J. and
    2. R.W. Kimmerer
    . 2005. Reestablishing roots of a Mohawk community and a culturally significant plant: Sweetgrass. Restoration Ecology 13:257–264.
    OpenUrl
    1. Spink, A.,
    2. K. Fryirs, and
    3. G. Brierley
    . 2009. The relationship between geomorphic river adjustment and management actions over the last 50 years in the Upper Hunter catchment, NSW, Australia. River Research and Applications 25:904–928.
    OpenUrl
    1. Suding, K.N.
    2011. Toward an era of restoration in ecology: Successes, failures, and opportunities ahead. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 42:465–487.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Swyngedouw, E.
    2010. Impossible sustainability and the post-political condition. Pages 185–205 in (eds), M. Cerreta, G. Concilio and V. Monno Making Strategies in Spatial Planning. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
    1. Temperton, V.M.,
    2. N. Buchmann,
    3. E. Buisson,
    4. G. Durigan,
    5. Ł. Kazmierczak,
    6. M.P. Perring
    et al. 2019. Step back from the forest and step up to the Bonn Challenge: How a broad ecological perspective can promote successful landscape restoration. Restoration Ecology 27:705–719.
    OpenUrl
    1. Toledo, D.,
    2. M.S. Agudelo and
    3. A.L. Bentley
    . 2011. The shifting of ecological restoration benchmarks and their social impacts: Digging deeper into pleistocene re‐wilding. Restoration Ecology 19:564–568.
    OpenUrl
    1. Trigger, D.,
    2. J. Mulcock,
    3. A. Gaynor and
    4. Y. Toussaint
    . 2008. Ecological restoration, cultural preferences and the negotiation of ‘nativeness’ in Australia. Geoforum 39:1273–1283.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Turner, R.
    2001. Estimating the indirect effects of hydrologic change on wetland loss: If the earth is curved, then how would we know it?. Estuaries 24:639–646.
    OpenUrl
    1. United Nations (UN)
    . 2020. World Environment Day 5 June. www.un.org/en/observances/environment-day.
    1. United Nations (UN)
    . 2021. Decade on restoration. www.decade on restoration.org.
    1. Wei, J.B.,
    2. D.N. Xiao and
    3. H. Zeng
    . 2008. Sustainable development of an agricultural system under ecological restoration based on Emergy analysis: A case study in northeastern China. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 15:103–112
    OpenUrl
    1. Wells, H.B.,
    2. A.J. Dougill and
    3. L.C. Stringer
    . 2019. The importance of long-term social-ecological research for the future of restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 27:929–933.
    OpenUrl
    1. Winter, K.,
    2. T. Ticktin, and
    3. S. Quazi
    . 2020. Biocultural restoration in Hawai‘i also achieves core conservation goals. Ecology and Society 25:26.
    OpenUrl
    1. Xiao, W.,
    2. Z. Hu,
    3. J. Li,
    4. H. Zhang and
    5. J. Hu J
    . 2011. A study of land reclamation and ecological restoration in a resource-exhausted city—a case study of Huaibei in China. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment 25:332–341.
    OpenUrl
    1. Zedler, J.B. and
    2. J.C. Callaway
    . 1999. Tracking wetland restoration: Do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories?. Restoration Ecology 7:69–73
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ecological Restoration: 39 (1-2)
Ecological Restoration
Vol. 39, Issue 1-2
March and June, 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ecological Restoration.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Three Approaches to Restoration and Their Implications for Social Inclusion
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ecological Restoration
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ecological Restoration web site.
Citation Tools
Three Approaches to Restoration and Their Implications for Social Inclusion
Emily Sigman, Marlène Elias
Ecological Restoration Mar 2021, 39 (1-2) 27-35; DOI: 10.3368/er.39.1-2.27

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Three Approaches to Restoration and Their Implications for Social Inclusion
Emily Sigman, Marlène Elias
Ecological Restoration Mar 2021, 39 (1-2) 27-35; DOI: 10.3368/er.39.1-2.27
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Restoration for Whom, by Whom? A Feminist Political Ecology of Restoration
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Ramsar Convention and the Wise Use of Wetlands: Rethinking Inclusion
  • Disciplines, Sectors, Motivations and Power Relations in Forest Landscape Restoration
  • Restoration for Whom, by Whom? A Feminist Political Ecology of Restoration
Show more Perspectives

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Bonn Challenge
  • political ecology
  • resilience
  • social-ecological restoration
  • UN decade on Ecosystem Restoration
UWP

© 2023 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Powered by HighWire