首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      


Bridging Restoration Science and Practice: Results and Analysis of a Survey from the 2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International Meeting
Authors:Robert J Cabin  Andre Clewell  Mrill Ingram  Tein McDonald  Vicky Temperton
Institution:1. Division of Science and Math, Brevard College, Brevard, NC 28712, U.S.A.;2. 5974 Willows Bridge Loop, Ellenton, FL 34222, U.S.A.;3. University of Wisconsin‐Madison Arboretum, 1207 Seminole Hwy, Madison, WI 53711, U.S.A.;4. Tein McDonald & Associates, Wooburn, NSW 2472, Australia;5. Institute of Chemistry and Dynamics of the Geosphere (ICG‐3;6. Phytosphere), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH (Research Centre Jülich), Germany
Abstract:Developing 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.
Keywords:alternative research paradigms  practical relevance  restoration extension service  science–  practice gap  SERI survey
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号