Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Participation of this type suggests public participation (i.e., the participation of
stakeholders) in the participatory design, implementation, and management of resto-
ration projects, in particular, and community resources, in general. Participation
might also include the interdisciplinary restoration work of individuals or groups
trained in a certain practice or discipline. Lastly, it may be viewed from the perspec-
tive of the individual participation of a restoration practitioner as she hones her skills
and builds her consciousness of the restoration experience on a daily basis. As there
are many ways of participation in ecological restoration, so are there many levels of
participation in a restoration context. The chapters in this topic provide insights into
many of the ways and levels of our participatory practice.
However, while no practice can exist without participation, being open to and en-
couraging public participation forces restoration practitioners and others to confront
some serious issues. There are, for instance, the fundamental questions about partici-
pation: Who participates? Which perspectives are welcomed? Who decides? In many
cases, these are tied to questions of equity, influence, and justice: Where does restora-
tion funding originate and who controls it? Who controls access to land and water?
Whose interests are represented by existing or proposed policies? What incentives
exist for bureaucratic or otherwise rigid decision-making processes to open to a
broader set of interests? Beyond this, more difficult questions arise from participatory
processes: How can multiple, and sometimes contradictory, perspectives about resto-
ration be accommodated and resolved in practice? How can ecological restoration
work resist—rather than reproduce—existing power inequalities (Wilmsen 2001)?
What will it take for restoration to be a transformative process for both the land and
the people?
Participation can be powerful, as many authors in this topic point out. It can also
be problematic when people are forced to participate, as is the case for some land
managers from agencies who have mandated collaboration with the public for resto-
ration projects. Similarly, people who have strong beliefs or thoughts about how a res-
toration project should be structured or proceed sometimes have trouble working in
group settings with a slow-moving, consensus-based structure. Likewise, scientists of-
ten find that appeals to scientific objectivity tend to gain little traction, and those
expecting public deference to “expert opinion” are typically disappointed. Moving be-
yond such expectations requires, at the very least, an open, transparent, and account-
able process in which nonscientists, land managers, and scientists are able to share
their perspectives, influence restoration management, and engage in restoration ac-
tivities (Andre, Ewing and Gold, Westervelt). Such participatory models provide op-
portunities for learning about ecosystems, cultures, and economies among “experts”
and “nonexperts” alike (Gross and Hoffmann-Riem 2005).
Power
People have fundamental relationships to other people (i.e., culture) and to the envi-
ronment they live in (i.e., nature). By their very essence, these relationships in-
clude/embody power relationships (Bliss and Fischer, Buckley and Holl, Brunck-
