Premium
Ideals and pragmatism in the justification of ecological restoration
Author(s) -
Hertog Iris M.,
Turnhout Esther
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
restoration ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.214
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1526-100X
pISSN - 1061-2971
DOI - 10.1111/rec.12680
Subject(s) - conceptualization , narrative , stewardship (theology) , pragmatism , restoration ecology , sociology , variety (cybernetics) , epistemology , value (mathematics) , environmental ethics , ecology , computer science , political science , law , philosophy , linguistics , artificial intelligence , machine learning , politics , biology
Ecological restoration requires value‐laden choices about what goals, references, and methods to use in a particular area. The restoration ecology literature has identified a number of interrelated dilemmas pertaining among others to the use of historical references or the creation of novel ecosystems and to the selection of appropriate measures of intervention. In this study, we investigate the narratives that Dutch professionals in ecological restoration use to justify these choices and we analyze the values, beliefs, and human‐nature relationships they reflect. Based on our analysis, we identify three interrelated sets of values, beliefs, and human‐nature relationships, which we call here narrative clusters. These are: (1) virtuous stewardship, which foregrounds human responsibility to care for nature; (2) autonomous nature, which foregrounds the self‐regulating capacities of nature; and (3) pragmatic wise use, which foregrounds the use of nature by humans and the importance of practical considerations. These narrative clusters connect well with established sociological and philosophical classifications of nature and human‐nature relationships. However, our analysis also shows that in the navigation of the different dilemmas of conservation, practitioners draw on a wide variety of arguments to justify their practices. In doing so, they blur the boundaries between different views of nature, between ethical and pragmatic arguments, and between nature and culture. We conclude the article by reflecting on the implications of these findings for the conceptualization and practice of restoration.