Ecosystem restoration as a boundary object, demonstrated in a large-scale landscape restoration project in the Dovre Mountains, Norway

Jørund Aasetre,Dagmar Hagen,Kristine Bye

doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01582-2

Abstract

Coordinating and implementing ecosystem restoration projects can be challenging when the professions involved have differing perceptions of ecological restoration and implementation in practice. To overcome these barriers in complex restoration projects, we suggest analysing ecosystem restoration as a boundary object, a concept drawn from the field of science and technology studies. We use a large scale restoration project in the Dovre Mountains of Norway to demonstrate the validity of using the boundary object concept in this context. The restoration involves a former military training area where the goal of the project was to protect and restore the environment and allow for civilian use. We examine how the different professions developed sufficient mutual understanding to make the project work. In particular, we explore the extent to which the perceptions of different professions overlap, the diversity of the perceptions in the project and how this might influence the outcome of the restoration. The boundary object concept offers potential to help improve restoration quality and reduce conflicts.

Highlights

Over the last decade, ecosystem restoration has been acknowledged in global and regional policy, and in science as a crucial activity to reverse the amount of degraded land and to ensure the continued provision of ecosystem services (e.g., Benayas et al 2009; CBD 2010; Comın 2010; Bullock et al 2011)
This combination of features makes the Hjerkinn project an interesting case to explore the idea of boundary objects in restoration ecology
If we look at the restoration project as a boundary object, we can conclude that it was perceived from different angles, which might partly explain the divergent attitudes

Summary

Introduction

Ecosystem restoration has been acknowledged in global and regional policy, and in science as a crucial activity to reverse the amount of degraded land and to ensure the continued provision of ecosystem services (e.g., Benayas et al 2009; CBD 2010; Comın 2010; Bullock et al 2011). The UN Assembly has declared 2021–2030 as the decade of restoration, aiming for a ‘‘massive upscaling of restoration’’ (UNEP 2020). This increased attention has contributed to a large increase in active restoration projects, and to a shift in restoration goals from focusing solely on biodiversity, to a broader approach of securing the supply of ecosystem services (e.g., Lindenmayer et al 2012). In consideration of the UN goal of a ‘‘massive upscaling of restoration’’ (UNEP 2020) these activities need to be approached with new concepts and theories to understand conflicts and find multi-use solutions

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion