Abstract
The degradation of urban natural spaces reduces their ability to benefit human populations. Restoration can support urban sustainability by improving both the ecological health of these spaces and the public benefits they provide, but studies rarely combine both perspectives. We assessed the ecological and social benefits of an urban river restoration project relative to an unrestored river on the basis of the following four principles: Increasing ecological integrity; benefitting and engaging society; taking account of the past and future; and sustainability. Ecological health at each site was assessed by analyzing macroinvertebrate samples. The social benefits were measured by conducting focus groups with local users of green spaces surrounding the two rivers and comparing their responses. Restoration increased the ecological health of the river and was viewed positively by users, enhancing the river as a space to visit for psychological benefits. However, there were concerns over the erasure of the cultural heritage of the area. Our findings indicate that the long-term sustainability of restoration projects, particularly in urban areas, can be enhanced by integrating ecological and social dimensions. Although short-term ecological improvements may be small, they have the potential to provide a range of benefits for human populations.
Highlights
The majority of the world’s population live in urban areas, a proportion which is only predicted to increase [1]
The ecological health of the restored site (M-Dr) was lower than that of the upstream site (M-U), with richness (Mann-Whitney U = 1242.00, p < 0.001), abundance (Mann-Whitney U = 324.00, p < 0.001), EPT richness (Mann-Whitney U = 954.00, p < 0.001), average score per taxon (ASPT) (Mann-Whitney U = 1080.00, p < 0.001), and Shannon diversity (Mann-Whitney U = 1260.00, p < 0.001) differing significantly from zero; all measures apart from abundance were lower at the restored site (Figure 4; Table 2)
On the unrestored Irk, there was some difference in ecological health between the two unrestored downstream sites (I-Du1 and I-Du2)
Summary
The majority of the world’s population live in urban areas, a proportion which is only predicted to increase [1]. Whilst the primary aim of restoration is environmental, it is guided by cultural expectations and values which determine both the goals set for restoration and whether projects are judged to be successful [6] Considering this wider context makes it clear that ecological restoration projects can offer benefits that extend beyond the environmental, to the social and economic [7,8]. Whilst there are frameworks—such as the ecosystem service approach—used to integrate environmental and social perspectives regarding the provision of benefits by the natural environment, these have been found to be lacking, in regard to health benefits [10] Neither do they acknowledge debates within the field of restoration ecology such as that regarding the aims of restoration [6,8]. Suding et al.’s [9] principles are used as a framework for assessing and integrating the ecological and social success of ecological restoration in this paper
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
