ABSTRACT. Diverse and productive ecosystems and human well-being are too often considered opposing targets. This stems mainly from nature being perceived as separate from culture, which results in resilience indicators that focus predominantly on either ecosystems or humans, and that overlook the interplay between the two. Meanwhile, global targets for biodiversity conservation and human wellbeing have yet to be satisfactorily achieved. We believe that in order to develop effective, culturally appropriate, and equitable conservation strategies that ensure social-ecological resilience, conservation planners and practitioners must conceive of human and ecological wellbeings as an interrelated system. By giving nature a voice, and by viewing nature and people as an undifferentiated whole, some indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) have philosophical bases for achieving well-being for both humans and nature. Biocultural approaches to conservation ground management in local knowledges, practices, and ontologies. These approaches encompass both the biological and cultural aspects of a system, address complex relationships and feedbacks within human and ecological well-being, and offer flexible frameworks that facilitate synthesis across different metrics, knowledge systems, and ontologies. The process of developing indicators of resilience with a biocultural approach could help (1) overcome the human-nature dichotomy that often makes global approaches incompatible with local approaches by integrating local peoples' diverse forms of relating to nature, (2) reflect two-way feedbacks between people and their environment by focusing on processes, not just final states, and (3) define, measure, and monitor ecological and human well-being as a whole. It can also facilitate dialog between IPLCs and global decisionmakers who are disconnected from local realities, and between people from a diversity of disciplinary, ontological, and professional backgrounds.

The cultural and spiritual significance of nature has been defined as the spiritual, cultural, inspirational, aesthetic, historic and social meanings, values, feelings, ideas and associations that natural features and nature in general have for past, present and future generations of people – both individuals and groups. These guidelines respond to a growing need to make conservation more inclusive, effective and socially just by accommodating multiple worldviews; by treating natural and cultural heritage as interlinked; and by suggesting ways for engaging and empowering all relevant groups and stakeholders in protected area design, governance and management. The guidelines also assist with creating common ground, resolving conflicts and implementing rights-based approaches that recognise human rights and legal pluralism.

A hundred research priorities of critical importance to protected area management were identified by a targeted survey of conservation professionals; half researchers and half practitioners. Respondents were selected to represent a range of disciplines, every continent except Antarctica and roughly equal numbers of men and women. The results analysed thematically and grouped as potential research topics as by both practitioners and researchers. Priority research gaps reveal a high interest to demonstrate the role of protected areas within a broader discussion about sustainable futures and if and how protected areas can address a range of conservation and socio-economic challenges effectively. The paper lists the hundred priorities structured under broad headings of management, ecology, governance and social (including political and economic issues) and helps contribute to setting future research agendas.

No abstract

Historically, contemporary conservation approaches were less concerned with and informed about indigenous management and governance practices. In particular, the intangible cultural, spiritual and sacred values that are an integral part of indigenous ontologies were poorly www.iucn.org/parks www.iucn.org/parks ABSTRACT This article demonstrates the importance of indigenous ontologies in cross-cultural or 'both ways' coastal conservation management of the Dhimurru Indigenous Protected Area in north east Arnhem Land, Australia. In this action research, selected Yolŋu individuals identified concerns regarding recreational fishing and boating practices of non-Yolŋu. Yolŋu engaged in a discussion of the issues and the subsequent formulation of indigenous management responses. This led to the development of locally relevant guidelines for fishers and boaters with potentially broader applications in other Indigenous Protected Areas and beyond. We explore the 'both ways' approach adopted by the Dhimurru Aboriginal Corporation that guides collaboration between Yolŋu and non-Yolŋu. We illustrate how the approach facilitates indigenous ontologies to co-create conservation approaches together with contemporary conservation efforts informed by Western science. We further explore the disjunctures and synergies between the two and argue that these mix and can be compatible as part of the 'both ways' approach. In learning from this action research, we reflect on the process of cross-cultural learning and the role of researchers in the cross-cultural coproduction of knowledge and the formulation of guidelines for fishers and boaters.