Off-campus UMass Amherst users: To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your UMass Amherst user name and password.

Non-UMass Amherst users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this dissertation through interlibrary loan.

Dissertations that have an embargo placed on them will not be available to anyone until the embargo expires.



Access Type

Open Access Thesis

Document Type


Degree Program

Landscape Architecture

Degree Type

Master of Landscape Architecture (M.L.A.)

Year Degree Awarded


Month Degree Awarded



The terms restoration ecology and ecological restoration are used interchangeably confusing the definition and work of ecological restoration and its many components. Restoration ecology is a type of scientific practice whose work will be a component of a restoration project while ecological restoration is the sum of practices, social, historical and ecological that constitute the field of restoration (Higgs, 2005). Within our rapidly urbanizing society the role of ecological restoration and restoring ecosystem services is increasingly important, especially within our coastal cities. The goals of restoration differ when the classification of restoration techniques is by ecosystem service, not ecological function, framing restoration around people’s use of the ecosystem, not the ecosystems needs. The problems faced in restoration work affect social, historical and ecological aspects that reach beyond the physical and political boundaries of the restoration site. Ecological restorationists need to understand the differences in framing that a non-universal definition for ecological restoration creates, while also understanding how to bridge these differences. One solution is graphic communication and representation of the different components that scientists and non-scientists alike can understand. This study uses restoration project plans to illustrate the goals within projects, and shows where the goals of scientists and designers conflict and harmonize. Shown through map overlays and graphics, this comparison provides professionals within the field, with resources and illustrations to better communicate. In addition, graphics and matrices will illustrate key terms, concepts and the intersection of restoration types with habitat types, ecosystem services and social components. In conclusion, this study addresses differences in ways of learning, and kinds of knowledge other than science needed in ecological restoration projects, and uses graphics to bridge these gaps.


First Advisor

Robert L Ryan

Second Advisor

Patricia McGirr

Third Advisor

Timothy D Zimmerman