Solutions

Restoring Rivers, Restoring Community

Healthy ecosystems are good for everyone in California—they provide us with abundant wildlife and fisheries, clean drinking water, and needed space in nature for recreation, among other benefits. Here at the PPIC Water Policy Center, we’ve studied restoration issues in the past—including the importance of restoring more natural flow patterns,  improving permitting, and storing water for the environment. This year we brought in three CalTrout Ecosystem Fellows to look at another major challenge in river restoration: community engagement.

There is a lot of literature on the importance of stakeholder engagement in restoration work. Studies in the US and internationally have shown that robust engagement can improve restoration outcomes. Yet project proponents frequently make erroneous assumptions when trying to engage community stakeholders, as a recent study of urban stream restoration illuminated. This includes assuming that community members and those proposing restoration actions have the same goals; that education and outreach alone will create community support; and that the community will benefit from restoration, and thus support it.

“robust engagement can improve restoration outcomes”

In addition to illuminating—and not falling prey to—these assumptions, proponents of restoration work must clear other major hurdles. These include:

  • Lack of trust. Transparency and accountability are key to building trust and maintaining healthy channels of communication. But community members may feel that their input, even if solicited, won’t matter. This perception may be reinforced by historical events and perceptions of where political and economic power lie in their community, making it hard to solicit their engagement.
  • Lack of capacity. Capacity issues cut both ways in restoration. On the one hand, project proponents may not have sufficient funding—or training—to support sustained community engagement. And many communities, for their part, may simply lack the monetary resources, time, or flexibility to engage. Barriers to engagement can include time of the day of meetings, transportation, language, technology access, and discomfort with expressing opinions. A 2017 guide by The Nature Conservancy suggested that enabling grassroots organizing, civic dialogue, and community events; creating opportunities to practice civic skills; and training community leaders could help make stakeholder engagement processes more effective.
  • Need for […]

Full article: www.ppic.org

Summary
Article Name
Restoring Rivers, Restoring Community
Description
Community engagement improves restoration outcomes, but proponents frequently make erroneous assumptions when trying to engage stakeholders.
Author
Publisher Name
Public Policy Institute of California
Publisher Logo

Recent Posts

Advocates work to safeguard critical lake, extend the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act

Photo Credit: iStock The lake supports nearly 300 species of birds, mammals, and fish, as…

19 hours ago

Well Data Explorer: Visualizing Contaminated Groundwater in 3D

Map: A 3D view with basemap transparency adjusted to show underground wells, with filtering by…

4 days ago

California’s Plans for Slowing Climate Change Through Nature-Based Solutions

As part of SF Climate Week, KQED’s Danielle Venton sat down with the California Secretary…

5 days ago

‘More litter in Tahoe than meets the eye’

JT Chevallier and JB Harris operate BEBOT during a demo on Tallac Beach, June 15,…

5 days ago

Biden administration announces new wetlands protections after Supreme Court decision

The Biden administration announced new protections for millions of acres of wetlands, which are essential…

6 days ago

It’s Raining Stormwater NOVs in California

Photo: Adobe Stock / Romolo Tavani For many California industrial facilities, above average rainfall brought 60-day…

7 days ago