4.4 Review

Gender and ecological restoration: time to connect the dots

Journal

RESTORATION ECOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages 729-736

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/rec.12270

Keywords

gender issues; human dimension; international environmental law; restoration practice; SER; women's rights

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although the human dimension of ecological restoration has increasingly been recognized in recent years, the gender dimension thereof remains largely unexplored. This article aims to fill this gap in the literature by providing an overview of the current knowledge on gender and ecological restoration. Our analysis of selected academic literature on ecological restoration revealed that scholars have only marginally addressed gender issues in their publications. However, in restoration practice, various initiatives that highlight the importance of including a women's rights and gender perspective can be found. These initiatives seem to indicate that applying a gender approach to restoration practice creates a double benefit. First, integrating gender considerations into restoration efforts is desirable from a human rights and gender equality perspective. Second, different case studies suggest that integrating gender considerations can promote the efficiency and effectiveness of restoration work. Integrating a social and gender dimension into restoration policy and practice should therefore be recommended. This integration process can learn from a wide range of literature on gender and the environment, and from existing practices of gender mainstreaming in this field. Furthermore, international law provides useful policy intentions on gender and restoration that could be used as entry points. To conclude, this article summarizes the main challenges for connecting the dots between gender and ecological restoration and formulates some recommendations for the Society for Ecological Restoration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available