Copyright © 2019 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Seele, B. C., K. J. Esler, and A. B. Cunningham. 2019. Biocultural diversity: a Mongolian case study. Ecology and Society 24(4):27. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11207-240427 Research Biocultural diversity: a Mongolian case study Barbara C. Seele 1, Karen J. Esler 1 and Anthony B. Cunningham 2,3 ABSTRACT. Although conceptual frameworks describing biodiversity and cultural keystone species have been widely accepted over the past 15 years, there remains a need for an overarching framework that covers the various components of biocultural diversity. We present a conceptual framework to enable the better understanding, monitoring, and maintenance of biocultural diversity across a range of spatial scales, from the landscape and ecosystem level to the species and gene/meme level. This is done by combining the concepts of biological diversity and cultural diversity, including cultural values and symbols, ethnoscientific approaches, as well as power relations and institutions, to form a biocultural diversity framework. To illustrate the framework, we use a systems diagram and practical examples from a case study on the ethnoveterinary knowledge and practices of Mongolian pastoralists. Ethnoveterinary knowledge is an example of traditional ecological knowledge and therefore offers valuable insight into biocultural diversity. Using the conceptual framework as a tool, our investigation of biocultural diversity in the Mongolian pastoralist context strongly suggests that an understanding of the historical, political, and cultural contexts, as well as the interrelatedness of cultural processes and ecological systems, is essential for maintaining biocultural diversity. More specifically, our results indicate that retaining a mobile herding way of life as well as the associated balance and communication with nature, is vital for both the continued transmission of ethnoveterinary knowledge and the sustainable use of ecological resources that Mongolian pastoralists rely on. There is a need for national policies that acknowledge, support, and maintain the important and complex processes underlying the Mongolian landscape and the associated worldviews, knowledge, and practices. The development of a coherent framework for biocultural diversity therefore allows for a clearer understanding of the various components and the selection of appropriate indicators for monitoring biocultural diversity. Key Words: biocultural diversity; cultural keystone species; ethnoveterinary knowledge; Mongolia; pastoralists INTRODUCTION addressed in the “Florence Declaration” (UNESCO and SCBD The relationship between human culture and nature, and the 2014) and include, among others, indications that landscapes connections between cultural and biological diversity, are (including seascapes) rich in biocultural diversity are often those encapsulated in the term “biocultural diversity” (Maffi and managed by traditional pastoralists, peasant farmers, and small- Woodley 2010). This is defined by Loh and Harmon scale fishermen. (2005:231-232) as “the sum total of the world’s differences, no As traditional pastoralists, Mongolian herders actualize a social- matter what their origin. It includes biological diversity at all its ecological system that represents a working example of levels, from genes to populations to species to ecosystems; cultural biocultural diversity. For centuries they have lived in close diversity in all its manifestations ..., ranging from individual ideas connection with their livestock and the steppe ecosystem they to entire cultures; and, importantly, the interactions among all of inhabit, with a worldview that includes themselves, their livestock, these.” Notably, the consolidation of biological diversity and and the landscape they live in as a strongly interrelated unit cultural diversity into a single concept reflects the development (Humphrey et al. 1993). Because landscapes are products of both of social-ecological science, and echoes the worldview of many biological and cultural processes (Taylor 2009), understanding cultures, where people and nature are viewed not as separate cultural knowledge and practices associated with a particular entities, but as an interconnected whole (Berkes 1999). This place is crucial for the conservation of both cultural and biological interconnected “whole” can be viewed as a system with emergent diversity associated with that specific landscape, eloquently properties that are not necessarily evident when parts are viewed encapsulated by Cuerrier et al. (2015) in the term “cultural in isolation. keystone places.” For example, in a case study of the Dongba The links between biological and cultural diversity are culture among the Naxi in Yunnan Province, China, Geng et al. increasingly recognized as important constituents of social- (2017) found that understanding symbolic plant use and places ecological systems (Sutherland 2003, Loh and Harmon 2005, of ritual potency can help to better understand both communities Maffi and Woodley 2010, Agnoletti and Rotherham 2015). and the conservation of natural resources. Interactive, cross- Consequently, in 2010, the Convention on Biological Diversity cultural approaches to conservation that include a focus on (CBD) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and indigenous knowledge and cultural values thus contribute to Cultural Organization (UNESCO), launched a “Joint conserving both biodiversity and traditional knowledge Programme on the Links between Biological and Cultural associated with biodiversity (Xu et al. 2005). Diversity” (Agnoletti and Rotherham 2015). The interconnectedness Ethnoveterinary knowledge and practices can be described as a between biological and cultural diversity also forms a form of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and in this study, fundamental ethos of the IPBES (Intergovernmental Platform on as in Berkes (1999:6), TEK is used in the same way that aboriginal Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) framing (Díaz et al. 2015). people from the Canadian North refer to their “knowledge of the Important issues concerning biocultural research activities were 1Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, South Africa, 2School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 3School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch WA, Australia Ecology and Society 24(4): 27 https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol24/iss4/art27/ land.” This dynamic body of knowledge, practices, and beliefs dried in their felt homes (gers), and stored for use during the harsh about the relationships between living beings and their winter and spring months. environment is a characteristic of societies that have for Mongolian pastoralists have a wealth of traditional ecological generations been dependent on resource use of specific lands knowledge on rangeland management (Fernández-Giménez (Berkes 1999), such as the Mongolian pastoralists. In addition, 2000) as well as ethnoveterinary practices and beliefs (Seele 2017). ethnoveterinary knowledge is embedded in a complex social- As Berkes (1999) points out, damage is done when traditional ecological system and is built upon specific cultural beliefs, ecological knowledge is separated from its cultural and historical customs, traditions, as well as the relationship of herders to the context. Baigal, the Mongolian term for nature, is closely related land and to their animals, and therefore, contains both cultural to baidal, “the way things are” or a “state of being” and includes and biological elements (Wanzala et al. 2005). animals, plants, the landscape, weather, human existence, and the Within the Mongolian pastoralist context, we use a study on the ways in which they affect each other (Humphrey et al. 1993, ethnoveterinary knowledge of Mongolian herders (Seele 2017) as Humphrey and Sneath 1999:2). Reciprocity applies to human- a case study to identify and better understand the components of animal and human-landscape relationships (Humphrey et al. biocultural diversity, and to illustrate how this information 1993). For example, herders believe that if they treat other beings contributed to the development of a two-part conceptual and the landscape around them with respect, their extended family framework for biocultural diversity. We refer to ethnoveterinary will remain strong and healthy (Fijn 2011), however, if harmed, knowledge and practice as a living example of TEK that connects nature could retaliate (Humphrey et al. 1993, Charlier 2015). biological and cultural diversity, and includes the use of medicinal During the Soviet era in Mongolia (1920s–1980s), traditions and plants, fungi, and remedies of mineral and animal origin (Seele spiritual norms regarding interactions with nature were 2017), as well as specific herding techniques that are closely linked suppressed (Bawden 1986, as cited in Upton 2010), and a more to ecological markers (Fernández-Giménez 2000). The TEK of scientific, state-led nature conservation approach was Mongolian herders has been the focal point of various studies, implemented based on species identification and enumeration including herders’ observations of rangeland change (Bruegger (Reading et al. 2006). Since the end of the Soviet era, conservation et al. 2014), herders’ perceptions of climate change (Marin 2010), programs and practices were largely influenced by donor agencies, perceptions of vegetation threshold