Including indigenous knowledge in species distribution modeling for increased ecological insights

Abstract

Indigenous knowledge systems hold detailed information on current and past environments that can inform ecological understanding as well as contemporary environmental management. Despite its applicability, there are limited examples of indigenous knowledge being incorporated in species distribution models, which are widely used in the ecological sciences. In a collaborative manner, we designed a structured elicitation process and statistical framework to combine indigenous knowledge with survey data to model the distribution of a threatened and culturally significant species (greater bilby or mankarr [Macrotis lagotis]). We used Martu (Aboriginal people of the Australian western deserts) occurrence knowledge and presence data from track-based surveys to create predictive species distribution models with the Maxent program. Predictions of species distribution based on Martu knowledge were broader than those created with survey data. Together the Martu and survey models showed potential local declines, which were supported by Martu observation. Both data types were influenced by sampling bias that appeared to affect model predictions and performance. Martu provided additional information on habitat associations and locations of decline and descriptions of the ecosystem dynamics and disturbance regimes that influence occupancy. We concluded that intercultural approaches that draw on multiple sources of knowledge and information types may improve species distribution modeling and inform management of threatened or culturally significant species.

Trends and gaps in the use of citizen science derived data as input for species distribution models: A quantitative review

“…Indeed, by combining multiple types (or system) of knowledges, the collaboration between researchers and indigenous communities may help to expand the understanding of distribution boundaries, habitat and environmental associations, incorporate long-term observations, find local solutions for conservation actions and support the maintenance of local languages and culture. Additionally, engaging local participation may incorporate spatial guidance for gathering species records, increase the quantity of the data collected and expand the number of taxa covered by incorporating more observers [ 88 , 89 ]. However, to fully benefit from this data collection method, researchers must be familiar with social science methods.…”

“…Despite such difficulties, both scientist and communities can benefit from building on the interest and concerns of local community members when applying local knowledge and CBM [ 81 ]. Usually, the full potential of CBM programs is expressed when local communities participate actively during the entire scientific program, from the conceptual design and interpretation of results to the formulation of conclusions [ 88 , 91 ]. Such cases have rarely occurred in the last decade for SDMs, probably because these programs are typically designed to monitor environmental factors rather than to collect species occurrence.…”

Convergences and divergences between scientific and Indigenous and Local Knowledge contribute to inform carnivore conservation

“…First, ILK can fill research gaps in areas where scientific data on carnivores are meagre at best (e.g., Padmanaba et al 2013 ; Sahoo et al 2013 ). Second, collaborations between Indigenous Peoples and researchers can further our understanding of several species ecological distribution ranges, baselines and trends (Skroblin et al 2019 ), as well as recognizing local perceptions, attitudes and values towards these species. However, despite the positive contributions of ILK, studies rarely link ILK to scientific knowledge, and when they do, ILK reliability is assessed with scientific knowledge (see Gandiwa 2012 or Caruso et al 2017 for some examples).…”

The importance of Indigenous Peoples’ lands for the conservation of terrestrial vertebrates

“…Myriad examples are available on how collaboration between Indigenous Peoples and researchers has refined knowledge of species ecological distribution ranges, baselines and trends (e.g. Mistry & Berardi 2016; Skroblin et al 2019). However, such knowledge partnerships need to be negotiated appropriately (Robinson et al 2016).…”