Restoration conundrum: between nostalgia and futuralgia, moving beyond the reference state

3Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Returning to the pristine reference state is a primary goal of ecosystem restoration. However, the concept has faced criticism due to its unrealistic nature and limited ability to address contemporary challenges. This article explores some flaws of the pristine reference state concept and proposes overcoming nostalgia for former ecosystem conditions. Adhering to the pristine reference state can provoke a feeling of futuralgia, sorrow for a lost future, and missed opportunities for ecological integrity. Balancing nostalgia and futuralgia requires fostering inclusive decision-making processes and promoting the long-term success of ecosystem restoration initiatives.

References Powered by Scopus

Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge

6024Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration

1474Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes

1202Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Ecological restoration and biodiversity-friendly management of urban grasslands – A global review on the current state of knowledge

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Challenges in Restoring Mediterranean Seagrass Ecosystems in the Anthropocene

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

“This Whole Town Used to Look Like This”: The Uses of Nostalgia in Establishing Claims to Place and Practice in Northern California’s Forests

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Reyes-Aldana, H. E. (2024). Restoration conundrum: between nostalgia and futuralgia, moving beyond the reference state. Restoration Ecology, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14071

Readers over time

‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 3

38%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

25%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 2

25%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3

38%

Environmental Science 3

38%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 1

13%

Social Sciences 1

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0