Identifying Challenges to Building an Evidence Base for Restoration Practice

Phumza Ntshotsho, Karen J. Esler and Belinda Reyers
Additional contact information
Phumza Ntshotsho: Natural Resources and the Environment, CSIR, P.O. Box 320, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa
Karen J. Esler: Department of Conservation Ecology & Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag x1, Matieland 7602, South Africa
Belinda Reyers: Natural Resources and the Environment, CSIR, P.O. Box 320, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa

Sustainability, 2015, vol. 7, issue 12, 1-11

Abstract: Global acknowledgement of ecological restoration, as an important tool to complement conservation efforts, requires an effort to increase the effectiveness of restoration interventions. Evidence-based practice is purported to promote effectiveness. A central tenet of this approach is decision making that is based on evidence, not intuition. Evidence can be generated experimentally and in practice but needs to be linked to baseline information collection, clear goals and monitoring of impact. In this paper, we report on a survey conducted to assess practitioners’ perceptions of the evidence generated in restoration practice in South Africa, as well as challenges encountered in building this evidence base. Contrary to a recent assessment of this evidence base which found weaknesses, respondents viewed it as adequate and cited few obstacles to its development. Obstacles cited were mostly associated with planning and resource availability. We suggest that the disparity between practitioners’ perceptions and observed weaknesses in the evidence base could be a challenge in advancing evidence-based restoration. We explore opportunities to overcome this disparity as well as the obstacles listed by practitioners. These opportunities involve a shift from practitioners as users of scientific knowledge and evidence, to practitioners involved in the co-production of evidence needed to increase the effectiveness of restoration interventions.

Keywords: baseline information; evidence-based practice; impact monitoring; practitioner perceptions; resource limitations (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/12/15788/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/12/15788/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:12:p:15788-15881:d:59652

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().