Loading…

The evolution of Society for Ecological Restoration's principles and standards—counter‐response to Gann et al

In response to our recent article (Higgs et al. 2018) in these pages, George Gann and his coauthors defended the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Standards, clarified several points, and introduced some new perspectives. We offer this counter‐response to address some of these p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Restoration ecology 2018-05, Vol.26 (3), p.431-433
Main Authors: Higgs, Eric, Harris, Jim, Murphy, Stephen, Bowers, Keith, Hobbs, Richard, Jenkins, Willis, Kidwell, Jeremy, Lopoukhine, Nik, Sollereder, Bethany, Suding, Katie, Thompson, Allen, Whisenant, Steve
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In response to our recent article (Higgs et al. 2018) in these pages, George Gann and his coauthors defended the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Standards, clarified several points, and introduced some new perspectives. We offer this counter‐response to address some of these perspectives. More than anything, our aims are in sharpening the field of restoration in a time of rapid scaling‐up of interest and effort, and support further constructive dialogue going forward. Our perspective remains that there is an important distinction needed between “Standards” and “Principles” that is largely unheeded by Gann et al. (2018). We encourage SER to consider in future iterations of its senior policy document to lean on principles first, and then to issue advice on standards that meet the needs of diverse conditions and social, economic, and political realities.
ISSN:1061-2971
1526-100X
DOI:10.1111/rec.12821