Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Challenging Assumptions in Urban Restoration Ecology

Challenging Assumptions in Urban Restoration Ecology Abstract: This paper presents a critical examination of core assumptions of Restoration Ecology (RE) and Urban Restoration Ecology (URE) with a focus on reinstatement of native/indigenous vegetation in urban areas. RE’s widely utilized and imposed land use approach reconstructs questionable historic interpretations of natural landscapes. RE misappropriates various terms and ideologies central to its paradigm, thereby excluding non-native biodiversity. Despite decades of theory, research, and practice, RE suffers a noteworthy risk of failure. RE applies rural conservation practices to urban environments, which often presents difficulties in terms of scale and suitability for fauna. RE is optimistic or misrepresentative regarding economics, maintenance, and risk in urban environments. This paper briefly discusses an alternative focus, which includes a broader concept of restoration. More substantially, this paper explores multi-functional landscape techniques that: respond to novel states in urban environments; that address present and future needs and scenarios; deliver tailored ecosystem services; and provide resources and productivity specifically relevant to urban contexts. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Landscape Journal: design, planning, and management of the land University of Wisconsin Press

Challenging Assumptions in Urban Restoration Ecology

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-wisconsin-press/challenging-assumptions-in-urban-restoration-ecology-QNTiAYGTk4

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Wisconsin Press
Copyright
Copyright © University of Wisconsin Press
ISSN
1553-2704
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: This paper presents a critical examination of core assumptions of Restoration Ecology (RE) and Urban Restoration Ecology (URE) with a focus on reinstatement of native/indigenous vegetation in urban areas. RE’s widely utilized and imposed land use approach reconstructs questionable historic interpretations of natural landscapes. RE misappropriates various terms and ideologies central to its paradigm, thereby excluding non-native biodiversity. Despite decades of theory, research, and practice, RE suffers a noteworthy risk of failure. RE applies rural conservation practices to urban environments, which often presents difficulties in terms of scale and suitability for fauna. RE is optimistic or misrepresentative regarding economics, maintenance, and risk in urban environments. This paper briefly discusses an alternative focus, which includes a broader concept of restoration. More substantially, this paper explores multi-functional landscape techniques that: respond to novel states in urban environments; that address present and future needs and scenarios; deliver tailored ecosystem services; and provide resources and productivity specifically relevant to urban contexts.

Journal

Landscape Journal: design, planning, and management of the landUniversity of Wisconsin Press

Published: Mar 4, 2013

There are no references for this article.