The meanings that adhere to the term “restore” and
“restoration” can be classified into a) those that relate to the projected
outcomes and purpose of the restorative act for a generic ‘thing” [which may or
may not be a human being]; b) those that specifically address a specified human
element in relation to an outcome or a process.
The latter definitions can further be divided into those that related to
humans conferring or humans receiving a benefit.
Definitions closest to projected outcomes for a “thing”
include: “to build up again; to re-erect or reconstruct.” (Meaning 3 in OED),
“[t]o bring back to the original state; to improve, repair, or retouch (a
thing) so as to bring it back to its original condition.” (Meaning 3b OED). A rarer uses of the word “restore” is “[t]o
set right, repair”. All of these uses
seem to conform pretty readily to the technical definitions developed by
conservation practitioners. Further removed from the senses that the ecological
restorationist ordinarily use is “[t]o reproduce or represent (something
ancient, an extinct animal, etc.) in its original form.” We should note that this last definition
describes the circumstances of several restoration projects where the original
“natural” systems has been replaced by a human dominated one [say an
agricultural system] and is then made available as open land for conservation
purposes. The definition seems also to
describe circumstances criticized by some that restoration claims produces fakes,
forgeries (Katz; Elliott).
Those definition that relate to a specifically human element
in a restorative act include “to give back, to make return or restitution of
(anything previously taken away or lost) (OED Meaning 1) or “to make amends
for; to compensate, to make good (loss or damage) (OED meaning 2), the latter
being a rarer meaning. These definitions
describe a benefit to humans derived from a seemingly altruistic gesture. Related also is “[t]o replace (mankind) in a
state of grace; to free from the effects of sin” where humans both confer and
derives the benefit of restoration.
Relating to health to restore can be [t]o bring (a person or part of the
body) back to a healthy or vigorous state, or “to bring back to mental calm.” (Meaning 4 OED). Also suggesting a human
benefit is when restoring means “to bring back (a person or thing) to a
previous, original, or normal condition. [Meaning 6 OED] and finally “to
recompense or compensate (a person) or to recover, revive. Obs. Hence
restored ppl. a.
Definitions of restoration typically employ other words that
have “re” as a prefix, e.g. return, restitution, recompense, reestablish. “Re” a Latin prefix indicates a general sense
of ‘back’ or ‘again’. All shades of
meaning for the word ‘restore’ signal its relationship with time. The term ecological restoration has the
general sense of returning an ecological system to a former state, one that
represents the conditions that prevails before an anthropogenic. Formally, it has been defined as “an
intentional activity that initiates or accelerates the recovery of an ecosystem
with respect to its health, integrity and sustainability”. This definition
makes the connection with the past clear, but also indicates inevitable
connection with the future. That is,
restoration of ecological systems is to deliberately alter a set of dynamic
processes rather than to retrieve a past condition. A frequently raised question in restoration
debates is one of restoration “of what, to what?” If restoration has a regard to the past, what
it the appropriate moment to select?
Is this the right term?
No comments:
Post a Comment