An Evaluation of the Influence of Natural Science in Regional-Scale Restoration Projects

Regional-scale restoration is a tool of growing importance in environmental management, and the number, scope, and complexity of restoration programs is increasing. Although the importance of natural science to the success of such projects generally is recognized, the actual use of natural science in these programs rarely has been evaluated. We used techniques of program evaluation to examine the use of natural science in six American and three Western European regional-scale restoration programs. Our results suggest that ensuring the technical rigor and directed application of the science is important to program development and delivery. However, the influence of science may be constrained if strategies for its integration into the broader program are lacking. Consequently, the influence of natural science in restoration programs is greatest when formal mechanisms exist for incorporating science into programs, for example, via a framework for integration of science and policy. Our evaluation proposes a model that can be used to enhance the influence of natural science in regional-scale restoration programs in the United States and elsewhere.

[1]  Robert T. Lackey,et al.  Seven pillars of ecosystem management , 1998 .

[2]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Chapter 9. Watershed Restoration— Adaptive Decision Making in the Face of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[3]  C. Simenstad,et al.  Application of the Best Available Science in Ecosystem Restoration: Lessons Learned From Large-Scale Restoration Project Efforts in the USA , 2004 .

[4]  E. Higgs,et al.  Nature by Design: People, Natural Process, and Ecological Restoration , 2003 .

[5]  E. Higgs.  Expanding the Scope of Restoration Ecology , 1994 .

[6]  M. Patton.  Politics and Evaluation , 1988 .

[7]  C. Gaudet,et al.  HOW ARE WE MANAGING , 1997 .

[8]  E. S. Quade,et al.  Analysis for public decisions , 1975 .

[9]  J. March,et al.  Handbook of organizations , 1966 .

[10]  A. D. Bradshaw,et al.  Underlying principles of restoration , 1996 .

[11]  Timothy M. Hennessey,et al.  The utilization of scientific information in the management of estuarine ecosystems , 1994 .

[12]  William J. Mitsch,et al.  Lessons learned by the National Technical Review Committee for the Louisiana Coastal Area Study , 2004 .

[13]  P. Sabatier,et al.  Policy Change And Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach , 1993 .

[14]  Gary K. Meffe,et al.  Principles of Conservation Biology , 1995 .

[15]  Mark T. Imperial.  Analyzing Institutional Arrangements for Ecosystem-Based Management: Lessons from the Rhode Island Salt Ponds SAM Plan , 1999 .

[16]  D. Palumbo,et al.  The Politics of Program Evaluation , 1988 .

[17]  W. Edwards,et al.  Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research , 1986 .

[18]  Andrew P. Dobson,et al.  Hopes for the Future: Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology , 1997 .

[19]  Donald A. Falk,et al.  Developing the Conceptual Basis for Restoration Ecology , 1997 .

[20]  Kai N. Lee.  Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, Kai N. Lee. 1993. Island Press, Washington, DC. 290 pages. ISBN: 1-59963-197-X. $25.00 , 1993 .

[21]  R. Lackey.  Values, Policy, and Ecosystem Health , 2001 .

[22]  Mark T. Imperial.  Institutional Analysis and Ecosystem-Based Management: The Institutional Analysis and Development Framework , 1999, Environmental management.

[23]  O. Houck.  Tales from a Troubled Marriage: Science and Law in Environmental Policy , 2003, Science.

[24]  George Perkins Marsh,et al.  Man and Nature , 2002 .

[25]  Garry D. Brewer,et al.  The foundations of policy analysis , 1983 .

[26]  J. Aronson,et al.  Values and Science in Ecological Restoration—A Response to Davis and Slobodkin , 2004 .

[27]  National Research Council,et al.  Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems. , 1993 .

[28]  J. Springer,et al.  Policy research : concepts, methods, and applications , 1989 .

[29]  Holly Doremus,et al.  Listing Decisions Under the Endangered Species Act: Why Better Science Isn't Always Better Policy , 1997 .

[30]  D. Boesch.  Science and management in four U.S. coastal ecosystems dominated by land-ocean interactions , 1996 .

[31]  Eric Higgs,et al.  What is Good Ecological Restoration? , 1997 .

[32]  James A. MacMahon,et al.  Empirical and Theoretical Ecology as a Basis for Restoration: An Ecological Success Story , 1998 .

[33]  D. Lonzarich.  Strategies for Restoring River Ecosystems: Sources of Variability and Uncertainty in Natural and Managed Systems , 2004 .

[34]  L. Dexter.  Elite and specialized interviewing , 1971 .

[35]  S. Kvale.  Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing , 1996 .

[36]  Michael L. Pace,et al.  Successes, Limitations, and Frontiers in Ecosystem Science , 1998, Springer New York.

[37]  H. J. Schellnhuber,et al.  ‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican revolution , 1999, Nature.

[38]  David W. Cash,et al.  Information as Influence: How Institutions Mediate the Impact of Scientific Assessments on Global Environmental Affairs , 2002 .