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

Scathing report released detailing Navy’s handling of Red Hill fuel spill

The Inspector General of the Department of Defense released some scathing reports Thursday over the…

5 days ago

Growing Food Instead of Grass Lawns in California Front Yards

Photo: Morgan Boone, a volunteer with Crop Swap LA, harvested lettuce at the La Salle…

2 weeks ago

LA River restoration connects us back to ‘the life force of our city’

Los Angeles residents at a section of the Los Angeles River cleanup in Los Angeles,…

3 weeks ago

LAist: New study raises questions about heavy metals in fire retardants

Over the past decade, about 67 million gallons of fire retardant have been dropped on…

3 weeks ago

Meadow and watershed restoration in the Golden Trout Wilderness

Photo: Golden Trout Wilderness Seeking blue, seeing gold The Kern Plateau features a chain of…

3 weeks ago

First sighting of salmon in 100 years marks key milestone for California dam removal

For the first time in more than a century, a salmon was observed swimming through Klamath…

4 weeks ago