Passage
The recent emergence of "urban restoration ecology"—a field that seeks to reestablish functioning ecosystems within densely populated metropolitan areas—has prompted both enthusiasm and skepticism among environmental scientists. Advocates argue that the same ecological principles that underlie restoration projects in rural or wilderness contexts apply in cities, and they cite cases where native plants and pollinators have reappeared in revitalized green spaces previously covered by asphalt. These proponents contend that such projects not only enhance biodiversity, but also improve public well-being by fostering residents’ sense of connection to nature.
Critics, however, contend that urban environments are so radically transformed—both physically and socially—that they defy the baseline assumptions underpinning traditional ecological restoration. Unlike remote wilderness sites, cities are characterized by intense fragmentation, persistent pollution, and continuous human interference. Accordingly, these critics argue, attempts to "restore" pre-urban ecosystems within cities are misguided, romanticized efforts that fail to acknowledge the fundamentally novel character of urban ecological conditions. Some go so far as to propose that urban ecology should eschew restoration entirely and focus instead on managing hybrid ecosystems without reference to historical baselines.
In response to this critique, some urban ecologists have proposed a redefinition of "restoration" that accommodates the altered realities of city life. Rather than attempting to recreate a pristine preindustrial state—an endeavor many concede is infeasible—this reframed approach focuses on increasing ecological function, such as stormwater filtration or pollinator activity, within the constraints of contemporary urban landscapes. From this perspective, success is measured not by fidelity to a historical snapshot, but by the degree to which ecosystems can be reintegrated into the urban fabric in a way that is both resilient and meaningful to human communities.
Still, tensions persist regarding the ultimate goals and guiding assumptions of urban restoration efforts. Some ecologists warn that relaxing the definition of "restoration" risks diluting the term to the point of meaninglessness, allowing almost any greening initiative to be framed as ecological improvement. Others counter that clinging to outdated definitions will only alienate the public and hinder the adoption of environmentally-beneficial urban design practices. At stake is not merely a technical question of terminology, but a deeper philosophical debate about what it means to live in ecological harmony within cities.
