Engaging Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in Environmental Management Could Alleviate Scale Mismatches in Social–Ecological Systems

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Scale mismatches in social–ecological systems constrain conservation by obscuring signals of environmental change, which could otherwise feed back to inform adaptive responses and solutions. We argue that engaging indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) in place-based environmental management could generate the fine-resolution information and workforce needed to alleviate scale mismatches. We illustrate our argument using a case study initiated by Māori in Aotearoa/New Zealand and demonstrate that the current broad scales of hunting regulation and assessment in black swan (kakī anau, Cygnus atratus) management could obscure local ecological drivers of populations. Many IPLC can facilitate adaptive place-based management by continually monitoring ecological feedbacks (e.g., population numbers, habitat conditions) at fine resolutions through customary resource use and observations. However, disregard for IPLC rights, scepticism of traditional ecological knowledge, restricted opportunity to connect with resources, compartmentalization of resource management, and insufficient funding limit IPLC engagement and must be overcome to alleviate scale mismatches.</jats:p>

Indigenous Systems of Management for Culturally and Ecologically Resilient Pacific Salmon (Oncorhynchusspp.) Fisheries

“…These mismatches have created adverse downstream consequences for people, ecosystems, and salmon through intensive mixed-stock harvest, resource development, land use, and overproduction of hatchery salmon by industrial nations around the Pacific Rim (e.g., Moore et al 2015 , Sexton et al 2020 , Vierros et al 2020 ). Supporting greater engagement and participation in monitoring and management among Indigenous peoples and local communities is one avenue toward alleviating the negative impacts of these scale mismatches (Herse et al 2020 ).…”

Effects of customary egg harvest regimes on hatching success of a culturally important waterfowl species

“…Engaging more people in place-based resource management, such as customary harvests, also increases the number and detection resolution (both spatially and temporally) of ecological feedbacks (e.g. wildlife population numbers, habitat conditions), which can inform adaptive responses to environmental change (Berkes, 2009;Cumming et al, 2017;Herse et al, 2020;Thompson et al, 2020).…”

“…Modern environmental laws within western and colonial countries that favour Eurocentric, protectionist conservation strategies often allow sport hunting of adults from some bird species (‘game birds’), yet criminalize the customary harvest of eggs, chicks and adults from the same species and/or other non‐threatened species, regardless of their significance for IPLC (Herse et al., 2020; Hunn et al., 2003; Lyver, Ruru, et al., 2019; Merkel & Barry, 2008). Re‐initiating sustainable customary harvests against this legal background is therefore challenging, especially if local knowledge of traditionally harvested populations and management practices have declined, or if IPLC find themselves managing resources in novel social‐ecological contexts (Lyver, Timoti, et al., 2019; Natcher et al., 2012; Tyrrell, 2008).…”

“…Here we present results from a field experiment jointly initiated by Ngāi Tahu, the southern‐most tribe of Māori in NZ, and researchers (both Māori and non‐Māori) to understand how customary egg harvest impacts black swan (kakī anau, Cygnus atratus ) nesting at a 200‐km 2 coastal lagoon and key breeding area, Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere (Figure 1). Current law in NZ declares black swans (hereafter ‘swans’) as non‐threatened game birds (Wildlife Act 1953; Williams, 2013), yet prohibits Ngāi Tahu from harvesting their eggs without special permission (Herse et al., 2020). Swans can replace failed clutches if nutrient reserves are supported by ample food supply (Ankney et al., 1991; Williams, 1979), and the ability or propensity of swans to re‐lay eggs following egg removal influences the population‐level impacts of harvest.…”

“…nesting colony locations and sizes, hatching rates) and habitat conditions (e.g. availability of food and nesting material, flood risk; Herse et al., 2020). Thus, to assist in identifying low‐impact strategies for potential future egg harvests, we conducted a field experiment alongside customary harvesters to compare the effects of alternative egg harvest regimes on swan nesting at Te Waihora.…”