TREE-1895; No. of Pages 6 Opinion Defining biocultural approaches to conservation 1,2 1 3 4 Michael C. Gavin , Joe McCarter , Aroha Mead , Fikret Berkes , 5 4 2 John Richard Stepp , Debora Peterson , and Ruifei Tang 1 Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1480, USA 2 School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand 3 Maori Business, School of Management, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand 4 Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada 5 Ethnobiology Lab, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA We contend that biocultural approaches to conservation Here, we argue that a set of conservation practices, can achieve effective and just conservation outcomes which we term ‘biocultural approaches to conservation’, while addressing erosion of both cultural and biological provide a path forward by addressing a central theme from diversity. Here, we propose a set of guidelines for the these debates: how conservation can lead to effective and adoption of biocultural approaches to conservation. just outcomes within different social–ecological contexts. First, we draw lessons from work on biocultural diversity In turn, we contend that biocultural approaches to conser- and heritage, social–ecological systems theory, integrat- vation can serve as a powerful tool for confronting the rapid ed conservation and development, co-management, and global loss of both biological and cultural diversity. We community-based conservation to define biocultural propose a set of guidelines for adopting biocultural app- approaches to conservation. Second, we describe eight roaches to conservation. We first define these conservation principles that characterize such approaches. Third, we approaches and establish a set of key principles, before discuss reasons for adopting biocultural approaches and arguing their merits and discussing the main challenges challenges. If used well, biocultural approaches to con- that these approaches might face. servation can be a powerful tool for reducing the global loss of both biological and cultural diversity. What are biocultural approaches to conservation? Biocultural approaches to conservation provide a unique Transcending conservation debates way forward for conservation by drawing lessons from pre- The methods and scope of biodiversity conservation have vious work on biocultural diversity and heritage, social– been a source of constant debate. Arguments have centered ecological systems theory, and different models of people- on the role of human communities, particularly ones in centered conservation[6,11–13] (see Glossary; Figure 1). The close proximity to areas of conservation interest, and the degree to which interests of these people should define conservation [1–4]. These debates have focused on the real Glossary or potential impacts that people have on biodiversity, the Adaptive governance: : formal and informal institutions designed to evolve in degree to which benefits and costs of conservation should response to changes within the social–ecological context [60]. Biocultural approaches to conservation: : conservation actions made in the be shared, across what groups should this sharing occur, service of sustaining the biophysical and sociocultural components of and who should control the conservation process [5,6]. dynamic, interacting, and interdependent social–ecological systems. Biocultural heritage: The discussion, in its starkest form, has pitted advocates : knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous and local communities that are collectively held and inextricably linked to, and of people-free or ‘fortress conservation’ against those in favor shaped by, the socioecological context of communities [19]. of people-centered conservation [3]. In reality, the practice of Co-management: : ‘a situation in which two or more social actors negotiate, define and guarantee amongst themselves a fair sharing of the management conservation today encompasses a spectrum of approaches, functions, entitlements and responsibilities for a given territory, area or set of which vary in the degree to which they balance objectives of natural resources’ [61] (p. 1). Co-management tends not to be a fixed state, but biodiversity conservation with those emphasizing human an iterative, deliberate, problem-solving process [62]. Community-based conservation: : a range of activities that includes natural livelihoods [7,8]. However, heated debates continue to resource management or biodiversity protection done by, for, and with, the surface in the conservation literature and popular press. local community, and recognizes ‘the coexistence of people and nature, as Most recently, arguments have erupted over the potential distinct from protectionism and the segregation of people and nature’ [63]. Integrated conservation and development programs: : seek to link conserva- for a ‘new conservation science’, the degree to which past tion and human community livelihood objectives [64]. approaches have been successful, and the extent to which Multilevel institutions: : formal and informal rules, norms, and/or strategies at conservation should serve human welfare [9,10]. multiple levels (i.e., local, national regional, and international) that structure social, political, and economic interactions [26,54]. Corresponding author: Gavin, M.C. ([email protected]). Social–ecological systems: : coupled human and natural systems that are Keywords: biocultural conservation; biodiversity; culture; social–ecological systems. complex, dynamic, unpredictable, and heterogeneous at multiple spatial and temporal scales, shaped by reciprocal feedback loops, and characterized by 0169-5347/ nonlinear dynamics, time lags, thresholds, and linked social and ecological ß 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.12.005 processes [24]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution xx (2015) 1–6 1 TREE-1895; No. of Pages 6 Opinion Trends in Ecology & Evolution xxx xxxx, Vol. xxx, No. x unpredictable, shaped by feedback loops across multiple Social–ecological systems scales and levels, and characterized by linked social and ecological processes [24]. No one institutional arrangement or knowledge system has the capacity to manage these systems in all locations [25]. Instead, successful conserva- Biocultural conservaon tion requires approaches to governance and management that are context specific, nested, multilevel, and adaptive in nature [13,26]. Community- We assert that the lessons from previous conservation based ICDPs work that we have outlined above can be combined to create conservaon more synthetic and holistic approaches to conservation. We define these biocultural approaches to conservation as ‘con- servation actions made in the service of sustaining the Co- biophysical and sociocultural components of dynamic, inter- management acting and interdependent social–ecological systems’. This definition emphasizes that the biophysical and sociocultural components of social–ecological systems are linked, and can be sustained through the process of biocultural conserva- tion. We also recognize the need for different actions in TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution different contexts and, therefore, we use the plural: biocul- tural approaches to conservation. These actions encompass Figure 1. Conceptual model of foundations for biocultural approaches to all phases of the conservation process, including manage- conservation. Biocultural approaches to conservation draw lessons from previous work on different models of conservation (co-management, integrated ment, and also governance more broadly. conservation and development, and community-based conservation) and are embedded within social–ecological systems. Abbreviation: ICDP, integrated Principles of biocultural approaches to conservation conservation and development project. We define eight principles of successful biocultural conser- vation initiatives (Box 1), and discuss each of them in turn below. study of biocultural diversity has emphasized the interde- pendence of biological and cultural diversity via coevolution Acknowledge that conservation can have multiple processes, common threats, and geographic overlap [14– objectives and stakeholders 18]. Biocultural heritage encompasses indigenous and local Conservation almost always involves multiple stake- community knowledge, innovations, and practices, which holders who promote a range of objectives. For example, are developed within, and linked to, the social–ecological in a sample of ten conservation-development projects from context [19]. A focus on biocultural heritage also stresses the the Equator Initiative of the United Nations Development recognition of multiple worldviews that serve as the founda- Program (www.equatorinitiative.org), local people and tion for different sets of knowledge about the natural world groups had a range, and different mixes, of economic, and our species’ place in it [19,20]. Conserving diverse sets of political, social, and cultural objectives, in addition to knowledge can provide human and biological communities conservation objectives [27]. These objectives can pull in with greater adaptive capacity to cope with current and different directions, leading to the need to make trade-offs future disturbances [16,19]. Several authors have also noted in the design of conservation approaches [7]. Biocultural the importance of securing