A comparison of social processes at three sites of the<scp>F</scp>rench<scp>R</scp>hône<scp>R</scp>iver subjected to ecological restoration

Barthélémy, Carole; Armani, Gilles

doi:10.1111/fwb.12531

Cited by 24 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As expected, our results showed clear variability between the different locations (Tunstall et al 2000, Seidl and Stauffacher 2013, Barthélémy and Armani 2015. However, the perceptions of restoration outcomes were largely similar between the different user groups, although some differences were seen in general satisfaction.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Radical changes in the river channel and its surroundings can cause longlasting public discontent (Åberg and Tapsell 2013). Sometimes the aesthetics are also associated with the ecomorphological quality of the river, the satisfaction of human needs, and the suitability of the site for recreational purposes Buchecker 2008, Barthélémy andArmani 2015). The residents in our study were possibly following this logic or at least saw similar changes in all these variables because they were included in the first service.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…(Seidl and Stauffacher 2013). Positive or negative perceptions are also rooted in sitespecific physical features, management and landscape context, local history of socionatural interactions, and political and economic issues (Schaich 2009, Barthélémy andArmani 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the socialecological systems approach (e.g., Ostrom 2009), the support of stakeholders and the efficacy of the socioeconomic and political settings are also reflected in the initial success and long-term sustainability of restoration (Naiman 2013, Petursdottir et al 2013, Metcalf et al 2015. To understand the reasons for the (non) acceptance of a restoration project, it is crucial to examine public views (Buijs 2009) and to consider the commonalities and diversity of local experiences (Connelly et al 2002, Schaich 2009, Barthélémy and Armani 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social success of in-stream habitat improvement: from fisheries enhancement to the delivery of multiple ecosystem services

Marttila¹,

Kyllönen²

2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Stream restoration often aims to enhance fisheries by improving stream conditions for target fish species. However, river restoration has a potential impact on a variety of ecosystem services. Among stakeholders, the emerging expectations about restoration attain different priorities. How well these expectations are met influences social perceptions of success or failure. Although public support for restoration is known to have a significant impact on the sustainability and overall success of restoration, social aspects are rarely considered in this context. To address these issues, we conducted a questionnaire study among the residents and fishermen of three recently restored rivers in Finland. Results indicate that both user groups highly supported the restoration goals, but they were not always satisfied with the restoration outcomes. The changes in landscape value and amenity and fish provisioning had the highest influence on the user groups' attitudes. Restoration-induced changes in ecosystem services showed clear variation between the different locations, but the differences in the perceptions of the two user groups were less evident. Comparing perceptions between the user groups and locations and applying the ecosystem services approach are a novel contribution to the debate on restoration success. Our study highlights the importance of perspective, social-ecological context, and adequate communication for success.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social success of in-stream habitat improvement: from fisheries enhancement to the delivery of multiple ecosystem services

Marttila¹,

Kyllönen²

2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To fully evaluate the outcomes, all relevant variables, including the social ones, should be included. Barthélémy and Armani (2015) noted that social processes and local experiences are often ignored in restoration projects and Aronson et al (2010) and Blignaut et al (2013Blignaut et al ( , 2014 found that the benefits of restoration for society were not given due attention. In most of our case studies, however, the social component was fairly well included in the projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

Nilsson¹,

Aradóttir²,

Hagen³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. We developed a conceptual framework for evaluating the process of ecological restoration and applied it to 10 examples of restoration projects in the northern hemisphere. We identified three major phases, planning, implementation, and monitoring, in the restoration process. We found that evaluation occurred both within and between the three phases, that it included both formal and informal components, and that it often had an impact on the performance of the projects. Most evaluations were short-term and only some parts of them were properly documented. Poor or short-term evaluation of the restoration process creates a risk that inefficient methods will continue to be used, which reduces the efficiency and effectiveness of restoration. To improve the restoration process and to transfer the knowledge to future projects, we argue for more formal, sustained evaluation procedures, involving all relevant stakeholders, and increased and improved documentation and dissemination of the results.

show abstract

What are the Political, Social, and Economic Issues in River Restoration? Genealogy and Current Research Issues

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A comparison of social processes at three sites of theFrenchRhôneRiver subjected to ecological restoration

Abstract: International audienceno abstrac

Cited by 24 publications

References 35 publications

Social success of in-stream habitat improvement: from fisheries enhancement to the delivery of multiple ecosystem services

Social success of in-stream habitat improvement: from fisheries enhancement to the delivery of multiple ecosystem services

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

What are the Political, Social, and Economic Issues in River Restoration? Genealogy and Current Research Issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About