Show simple item record

Bridging Restoration Science and Practice: Results and Analysis of a Survey from the 2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International Meeting

dc.contributor.authorCabin, Robert J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorClewell, Andreen_US
dc.contributor.authorIngram, Mrillen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcdonald, Teinen_US
dc.contributor.authorTemperton, Vickyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-31T17:33:04Z
dc.date.available2012-01-03T20:18:47Zen_US
dc.date.issued2010-11en_US
dc.identifier.citationCabin, Robert J.; Clewell, Andre; Ingram, Mrill; Mcdonald, Tein; Temperton, Vicky; (2010). "Bridging Restoration Science and Practice: Results and Analysis of a Survey from the 2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International Meeting." Restoration Ecology 18(6): 783-788. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79142>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1061-2971en_US
dc.identifier.issn1526-100Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79142
dc.description.abstractDeveloping and strengthening a more mutualistic relationship between the science of restoration ecology and the practice of ecological restoration has been a central but elusive goal of SERI since its inaugural meeting in 1989. We surveyed the delegates to the 2009 SERI World Conference to learn more about their perceptions of and ideas for improving restoration science, practice, and scientist/practitioner relationships. The respondents' assessments of restoration practice were less optimistic than their assessments of restoration science. Only 26% believed that scientist/practitioner relationships were “generally mutually beneficial and supportive of each other,” and the “science–practice gap” was the second and third most frequently cited category of factors limiting the science and practice of restoration, respectively (“insufficient funding” was first in both cases). Although few faulted practitioners for ignoring available science, many criticized scientists for ignoring the pressing needs of practitioners and/or failing to effectively communicate their work to nonscientists. Most of the suggestions for bridging the gap between restoration science and practice focused on (1) developing the necessary political support for more funding of restoration science, practice, and outreach; and (2) creating alternative research paradigms to both facilitate on-the-ground projects and promote more mutualistic exchanges between scientists and practitioners. We suggest that one way to implement these recommendations is to create a “Restoration Extension Service” modeled after the United States Department of Agriculture's Cooperative Extension Service. We also recommend more events that bring together a fuller spectrum of restoration scientists, practitioners, and relevant stakeholders.en_US
dc.format.extent553241 bytes
dc.format.extent3106 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.subject.otherAlternative Research Paradigmsen_US
dc.subject.otherPractical Relevanceen_US
dc.subject.otherRestoration Extension Serviceen_US
dc.subject.otherScience–Practice Gapen_US
dc.subject.otherSERI Surveyen_US
dc.titleBridging Restoration Science and Practice: Results and Analysis of a Survey from the 2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International Meetingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDivision of Science and Math, Brevard College, Brevard, NC 28712, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationother5974 Willows Bridge Loop, Ellenton, FL 34222, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison Arboretum, 1207 Seminole Hwy, Madison, WI 53711, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherTein McDonald & Associates, Wooburn, NSW 2472, Australiaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitute of Chemistry and Dynamics of the Geosphere (ICG-3; Phytosphere), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH (Research Centre Jülich), Germanyen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/79142/1/j.1526-100X.2010.00743.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1526-100X.2010.00743.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceRestoration Ecologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.