Author
Listed:
- Lisa A. Peterson
- Patricia M. Awerbuch
- Sabrina Spatari
Abstract
Floodplain restoration is an approved stormwater management method, but rarely chosen by developers due to the perceived high cost and lengthy approvals required from regulatory agencies. Yet, when chosen, restoring a floodplain yields significant environmental benefits for the community due to improved flood resiliency and wetland habitat and superior reduction of negative externalities. In 2012, a corporation in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, explored the option to restore a historic floodplain on its 40‐hectare property to fulfill the stormwater management requirements for a planned development project. There was a social dynamic at play in this instance that allowed the developer, municipality, and citizens to achieve a win across three dimensions often in conflict: maximizing private economic returns, achieving environmental compliance, and benefiting the community ecologically. Using a social–ecological system (SES) framework, this paper analyzes the course of the development project through the government approvals process and the actual restoration of the floodplain. Two influential actors are identified who do not often appear in the literature on SESs: sports advocacy groups and religious groups. We posit that the developer's industry was uniquely receptive to conservation appeals and that the proximity of an urban metropolis made collective action a relevant strategy for the region. Critical factors in the decision process were the cost–benefit analysis contracted by the developer, local (county) government leadership, and a history of local citizen activism. We conclude that a misalignment of anthropogenic and ecological boundaries can prevent such positive outcomes and that collective action is a viable strategy to overcome that challenge.
Suggested Citation
Lisa A. Peterson & Patricia M. Awerbuch & Sabrina Spatari, 2025.
"When floodplain restoration meets socio‐ecological goals for rural stormwater management,"
Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 29(1), pages 66-80, February.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:inecol:v:29:y:2025:i:1:p:66-80
DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13589
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:29:y:2025:i:1:p:66-80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.