The emergence of the social‐ecological restoration concept

Abstract

Many ecosystems in the world are the result of a close interaction between local people and their environment, which are currently recognized as social‐ecological systems (SoES). Natural catastrophes or long‐standing social and political turmoil can degrade these SoES to a point where human societies are no longer autonomous and their supporting ecosystems are highly degraded. Here, we focus on the special case of the restoration of SoES that we call social‐ecological restoration (SoER), which is characterized as a restoration process that cannot avoid simultaneously dealing with ecological and social issues. In practice, SoER is analogous in many ways to the general principles of ecological restoration, but it differs in three key aspects: (1) the first actions may be initially intended for human groups that need to recover minimum living standards; (2) the SoER process would often be part of a healing process for local people where cultural values of ecosystems play an essential role; and (3) there is a strong dependency on external economic inputs, as the people belonging to the SoES may be incapable of reorganizing themselves on their own and supporting ecosystems can no longer self‐recover. Although it might not be desirable or necessary to call all restoration projects with a social component an SoER, the use of this concept may help in defining early restoration targets that may prevent conflicts among users in the long term. From the perspective of other disciplines, SoER would be more appropriately perceived as programs of “social‐ecological recovery” in the long term.

What influences European private forest owners' affinity for subsidies?

“…A need for new instruments that consider the diversity of forest owners and their goals is emerging as a key issue for conservation policies, understanding that sometimes forest ownership goals do not respond to economic drivers (Feliciano et al, 2017). Lessons learned about existing subsidies in the EU can be extrapolated to the introduction of new incentives based on the emergent social-ecological restoration concept (Fernández-Majarrés, 2018). Table 3 provides some examples of potential measures to be considered as part of non-market policy mechanisms.…”

“…Rather, considering new approaches such as social-ecological restoration concept (Fernández-Majarrés et al, 2018), identifying the level of ecosystem dependence of local people and the collective cultural value of the supporting ecosystem. Local knowledge is disappearing fast and biodiversity is not coming back without external aid, since restoration require leadership and local community commitment that is currently wanting, making the dependence on policy measures linking people with their surrounding nature, even if they include new ways of human-nature interactions (Fernández-Majarrés et al, 2018).…”

Planning mine restoration through ecosystem services to enhance community engagement and deliver social benefits

“…As a temporary land use, mining has the responsibility of returning rehabilitated land able to provide social benefits in order to ensure a positive postmining legacy. The ecosystem services concept provides a way for explicit analysis of social‐ecological systems, an essential dimension of sustainable land management (Metcalf et al ; Fernández‐Manjarrés et al ; Martin & Lyons ).…”

“…social‐ecological systems) in environmental planning and management has been increasingly recognized in different applications, including ecological restoration, as a way to assess the social benefits that biodiversity affords to communities (i.e. ecosystem services) (Rosa & Sánchez ; Fernández‐Manjarrés et al ; Martin & Lyons ; Swart et al ). In the mining industry, engaging with stakeholders when planning for postmining land use has become standard recommended practice as a key action to mitigate impacts on local communities (ICMM , ) and to ensure the success of restoration itself (Metcalf et al ; Swart et al ).…”

Toward a social–ecological approach to ecological restoration: a look back at three decades of maritime clifftop restoration

“…In other words, it is important to take into account both the social and ecological issues and the interactions between them (Hobbs ; Gunderson et al ) in order to understand all the issues related to a site (Lowe et al ; Wyborn et al ). Many studies incorporating the social aspect have done so from the perspective of ecosystem functions restoration (Rumps et al ; Fernández‐Manjarrés et al ), which does not take into consideration all the social aspects necessary for restoration success. For instance, the requirement for social acceptance might be met through the use of effective communication (Metcalf et al ).…”