Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Higgs (1997), in an article where he asks, “What is good restoration?” discusses how
participation in restoration projects can foster a sense of community, create a connec-
tion with the natural environment, and help people form a sense of identity around
the place where they live. Participants meeting regularly create linkages and relation-
ships not only with the land but also with their neighbors and neighborhood, accord-
ing to Higgs (1997). More recently, Forest Service social scientist Lynne Westphal
(2003) found that community empowerment is not always an automatic result of a
successful urban ecological restoration project, which suggests that a more inclusive
ecological restoration approach can contribute to increased community activism and
involvement.
Involving racialized communities in the planning, implementation, and monitor-
ing of ecological restoration projects can also bring new perspectives and strategies to
these projects. Diverse experiences and different ways of knowing nature as well as
culturally specific values about living within a balanced system can be valuable con-
tributions to urban ecological restoration. However, ecological restoration has histori-
cally been a practice of the upper-middle-class echelons of society and, in Toronto as
elsewhere in North America, has developed from the policies and assumptions of ear-
lier immigrants of western European heritage. As Roderick Neumann (2002) argues,
nature is socially constructed, and European values of nature are still prevalent in
many places worldwide, including North America. A dominantly held view is that na-
ture is external to society and, therefore, social concerns and issues cannot be related
to environmental or ecological issues. This perspective of nature and the concurrent
nature/social divide is visible within urban ecological restoration in Toronto (Foster
2005). According to Desfor and Keil (2004), restorationists in Toronto strive to re-cre-
ate the “romantic view” of the urban river systems within the city as “wilderness” as
perceived by the first European settlers. Inclusive restoration can bring alternative
ideas about connections between nature and society that are outside the current way
of perceiving urban nature.
Although Toronto is a city of diversity, with almost 49 percent of residents born out-
side of Canada (Statistics Canada 2003), the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and
Recreation Department estimates that less then 10 percent of volunteer participants
working on ecological restoration projects with the City of Toronto are from culturally
diverse populations (Beth Cragg, pers. comm.).
2
Reflecting on a 2007 study by Statis-
tics Canada, more than 40 percent of new or recent immigrants to Canada volunteer
in their community, while only 2 percent volunteer for environmental organizations,
such as those involved in ecological restoration projects.
Hull and Robertson (2000) state that every ecological restoration project is ecolog-
ically unique and “place-based.” Inclusive urban ecological restoration, I suggest, is
even more context and place specific because it emphasizes the relationship people
have to local social and political issues as well as ecological challenges. The Toronto
case study I present provides the background for a critical analysis of inclusive ecolog-
ical restoration practices, and, although as a case study it is uniquely Toronto cen-
tered, the lessons and awareness revealed through this case study are applicable in
other urban environments in North America.
