The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis
Evans and Davis claim the SER Standards use a “pure naturalness” model for restoration baselines and exclude most cultural ecosystems from the ecological restoration paradigm. The SER Standards do neither. The SER Standards consider both “natural” ecosystems (that are unequivocally not cultural) and...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Blackwell Science Inc.
2019
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/73765 |
| _version_ | 1848763091969376256 |
|---|---|
| author | McDonald, Tein Aronson, J. Eisenberg, C. Gann, G. Dixon, Kingsley Hallett, J. |
| author_facet | McDonald, Tein Aronson, J. Eisenberg, C. Gann, G. Dixon, Kingsley Hallett, J. |
| author_sort | McDonald, Tein |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Evans and Davis claim the SER Standards use a “pure naturalness” model for restoration baselines and exclude most cultural ecosystems from the ecological restoration paradigm. The SER Standards do neither. The SER Standards consider both “natural” ecosystems (that are unequivocally not cultural) and “similar” cultural ecosystems as suitable reference models. Furthermore, Evans and Davis propose assessing whether a cultural ecosystem exhibits “good, bad, or neutral impacts from humans on ecosystems” as the basis for reference models. We argue that such an approach would overlook the indispensability of native ecosystem benchmarks to measure human impacts and provide a springboard for social-ecological restoration. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T10:57:57Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-73765 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T10:57:57Z |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publisher | Blackwell Science Inc. |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-737652019-06-06T07:57:43Z The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis McDonald, Tein Aronson, J. Eisenberg, C. Gann, G. Dixon, Kingsley Hallett, J. Evans and Davis claim the SER Standards use a “pure naturalness” model for restoration baselines and exclude most cultural ecosystems from the ecological restoration paradigm. The SER Standards do neither. The SER Standards consider both “natural” ecosystems (that are unequivocally not cultural) and “similar” cultural ecosystems as suitable reference models. Furthermore, Evans and Davis propose assessing whether a cultural ecosystem exhibits “good, bad, or neutral impacts from humans on ecosystems” as the basis for reference models. We argue that such an approach would overlook the indispensability of native ecosystem benchmarks to measure human impacts and provide a springboard for social-ecological restoration. 2019 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/73765 10.1111/rec.12913 Blackwell Science Inc. restricted |
| spellingShingle | McDonald, Tein Aronson, J. Eisenberg, C. Gann, G. Dixon, Kingsley Hallett, J. The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title_full | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title_fullStr | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title_full_unstemmed | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title_short | The SER Standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to Evans and Davis |
| title_sort | ser standards, cultural ecosystems, and the nature-culture nexus—a reply to evans and davis |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/73765 |