Book Review

BOOK REVIEW

Intelligent Tinkering: Bridging theGap between Science and Practice

Robert J. Cabin. 2011. Island Press,Washington, D.C., U.S.A., 240 pages,$70.00 (hardcover) $35.00 (paperback),ISBN 978–1–59726–9643 (paperback).Also available as Ebook

Is a bridge still necessary if thereis no gap? As I read Robert

Cabin’s book, I asked myself whetherwe should even continue to dis-tinguish between restoration scienceand practice. As the subtitle of thebook suggests, Cabin argues thatthe failure of scientists to engagein work that meaningfully informscommunity-driven restoration cre-ates a need for us to better ‘‘bridge thegap.’’ But, the book also highlightsother dichotomies—restoration sci-ence versus art, purists versuspragmatists—that left me wonderingif we can honor the holistic approachof tinkering, without prioritizing orcriticizing the ‘‘cogs and wheels’’ ofthe restoration community.

In the Introduction, Cabin casuallynotes that his work in Hawaiitook place among the ‘‘tightly knit,politically charged, and often volatilenature of Hawaii’s environmentallyrelated . . . communities.’’ This mayexplain why other reviewers (Cordell2012; Giardina 2012) have foundfault with Cabin’s assessment of thetranslation of scientific research torestoration practice. Cabin does takea rather dim view of what experimen-tal work has to offer the restorationpractitioners in Hawaii, and themajority of his work took place overa decade ago. However, I found thisbook an informative, interesting, anduseful introduction to restorationwork in Hawaii and beyond. In fact,it is an excellent and easy read forstudents and served as a valuable

resource in my own graduate coursein Restoration Ecology.

The Introduction provides a suc-cinct overview of the conservationchallenges in Hawaii as well as thegeographic factors that structure pat-terns of diversity and invasion. Forthe non-restoration ecologist, Cabinoutlines the field of restoration andforeshadows his own story by notingthat his career has ‘‘forced me toreevaluate some of my own deeplyheld convictions about science,nature, and applied conservation.’’

The rest of the book is dividedinto two sections. Cabin uses theNorth Kona Dryland Forest Restora-tion Working Group as a case study inPart One (‘‘Restoring Paradise’’). Ina well-written narrative, he outlinesthe challenges of setting up exclo-sure experiments, and I especiallyenjoyed his descriptions of removingtenacious exotic plants. Those of uswho have spent time hacking at rootswith a mattock on a hot summer daywill find kinship here. He also deftlydescribes the opportunity to test eco-logical theories through clear exper-imental design while acknowledg-ing the reality of maintaining theseexperiments over time. My gradu-ate students particularly appreciatedCabin’s description of the data anal-ysis, writing, and reviewing phasesof restoration research in Chapter 4(‘‘Writing it up: The art and impor-tance of science papers’’).

After describing his work with theWorking Group, including hintingat the dysfunction of any group thattries to bring together interestedparties with multiple views, Cabingets to the heart of his argumentin Chapter 6 (‘‘Shall we dance? Thetrade-offs of science-practice col-laborations and community-drivenrestoration’’). In Cabin’s view, thegap between scientists and practi-tioners is widening in Hawaii and hegoes as far as stating ‘‘ . . . scientistsrarely have silver bullets to solvecomplex applied problems. On thecontrary, our research often inhibits

on-the-ground projects withoutproviding any immediate practicalbenefits.’’

The ethical dilemmas that emergein any restoration project seem tohave taken the wind out of Cabin’sscientist sails. In the last paragraphsof Part One, he laments anothergap, this one between appliedenvironmental philosophers andscientists, but I think that this onehas been bridged successfully. Cabinand I share an interest in identifyingand discussing these dilemmas butI find the voices of philosopherswell-represented in the restorationcommunity.

In Part Two (‘‘Toward a More Per-fect Union’’), Cabin further developshis approach for bridging the science-practice gap with an overarchingframework of ‘‘intelligent tinkering.’’He begins by highlighting the need toget scientific research into the handsof practitioners. In my own conver-sations with restoration practitionerson Kaua’i and elsewhere, this needstill exists. Even the ‘‘Implications forPractitioners/Managers’’ sections ofresearch papers that, as Cabin seesit, scientists struggle to write, are notoften put into the hands of those whocould use them the most.

He celebrates the intelligent tinker-ing approach of Leopold (1949), who‘‘rather than designing and imple-menting rigorous experiments andsystematic treatments . . . utilizedthe careful but informal, interdisci-plinary, adaptive methodology typ-ically employed by highly skilledamateurs . . . ’’ He suggests thatattributes of ‘‘good’’ science and‘‘good’’ practice come together inthis new intelligent tinkering modeland provides three case studies fromHawaii to illustrate how this mightlook on the ground. His ‘‘Meta-Intelligent Tinkering Adopt an AcreProgram’’ encourages developingprograms for groups to test restora-tion methods on smaller scales.

Embracing restoration as experi-mentation continues a long lineage

656 Restoration Ecology Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 656–657 SEPTEMBER 2013

Book Review

of using restoration as the ‘‘acid test’’for ecology. As an applied discipline,we are also fortunate to have ahistory of scientists and practitionerscollaborating on small- and large-scale projects. To use an ‘‘intelligenttinkering’’ approach does not andshould not preclude rigorous restora-tion science. While recognizing thepotential benefits of a trial-and-errorapproach to restoration, we alsoneed to ensure that we advance ourown understanding of the processesand dynamics that lead to a well-functioning ecosystem. Intelligenttinkering only works if you keeptrack of the cogs and wheels and theorder in which they fit together.

This book provided good fodderfor discussion in my graduateseminar. Cabin’s statements suchas ‘‘the worlds of conservationand restoration are composed ofindividuals and agencies that form acontinuum running from conserva-tion ‘purists’ to pragmatic thinkers tolaissez-faire, try-anything ‘artists’’’inspired much debate, particularlywhen we considered other promi-nent voices. For example, EmmaMarris’ book Rambunctious Garden(Marris 2011) includes anecdotesfrom Hawaii, including interviewswith the same scientists that Cabinworked alongside, to suggest thatrestoration ecologists’ obsessionwith the past and acceptance of thehuman-nature dichotomy has led to

a narrow, increasingly obsolete focusof restoring small patches of land,while the surrounding landscapecontinues to shift and adapt. In fact,these two books work well alongsideeach other as Cabin fills in some ofthe back-story of Marris’ anecdotes,while Marris addresses some of theethical dilemmas that Cabin hasunearthed from the field.

As I begin building relation-ships with restoration communitiesin Hawaii, I appreciate Cabin’s per-spective on how difficult it is to bean outsider in this vibrant and polit-ically charged conservation commu-nity. His book is a reminder to me tobe open, to come prepared with infor-mation, ideas and energy, and to berespectful of the hard work of thosewho have made Hawaii their homes.

Personally, I do not think that thescience/practice dichotomy is usefulanymore. What we need is a wayforward, a path that allows for goodscience to contribute to the effortsof those engaged ‘‘on the ground’’and for good practice to inform ourresearch questions. While Cabin is, attimes, intensely critical of the impactof academic research science, manyrestoration ecologists have spentconsiderable time and effort collab-orating with practitioners in Hawaiiand elsewhere. Bridge-building doesnot just take engineering. It takescooperation and a willingness totrust your partners. Cabin’s book

highlights the frustration with thisprocess but also provides a real-istic picture of the challenges andopportunities of working on thebridge-building construction crew.

Aldo Leopold encouraged intelli-gent tinkering but also wrote that‘‘we are remodeling the Alhambrawith a steam shovel, and we areproud of our yardage. We shallhardly relinquish the shovel, whichafter all has many good points but weare in need of gentler and more objec-tive criteria for its successful use.’’ Inthe end, Cabin is arguing for gentlerand more objective criteria for suc-cessful restoration efforts that shouldand can be informed by both rigorousscience and rigorous practice.

LITERATURE CITED

Cordell, S. 2012. Former Hawaii restorationecologist now favors ‘tinkering’ over rigor.Environment Hawaii 22:3–4.

Giardina, C. P. 2012. Intelligent tinkering: abreaching of bridges between science andpractice. Ecology 93:1980–1981.

Leopold, A. 1949. A sand county almanac: andsketches here and there. Oxford UniversityPress, New York.

Marris, E. 2011. Rambunctious garden: savingnature in a post-wild world. Bloomsbury,New York.

Rebecca VidraNicholas School of the Environment, DukeUniversity, Durham, NC, USAE-mail: vidra@duke.edu

SEPTEMBER 2013 Restoration Ecology 657