Mapping cultural ecosystem services with rainforest aboriginal peoples: Integrating biocultural diversity, governance and social variation

Pert, Petina L.; Hill, Rosemary; Maclean, Kirsten; Dale, Allan; Rist, Phil; Schmider, Joann; Talbot, Leah; Tawake, Lavenie

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.10.012

Cited by 66 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, indigenous peoples commonly link forest landscapes and biodiversity to tribal identities, association with place, kinship ties, customs and protocols, stories, and songs (Gould et al 2014;Lyver et al 2017a, b). Spatial patterns of CES identified by rainforest Aboriginal peoples in Australia were related primarily to variations in social structures (e.g., adherence to cultural protocols), rather than to ecological attributes such as forest biodiversity patterns (Pert et al 2015).…”

Section: Cultural Ecosystem Services In Forest Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Populations in societies with access to surplus wealth and leisure time frequently emphasize the importance of aesthetic values, recreation and tourism (Millennium Ecosystem Asessment 2005). In contrast, indigenous peoples often express the importance of CES benefits relating to cultural identity and heritage, kinship, and knowledge integrity and transfer (Pert et al 2015;Boafo et al 2016;Sangha and Russell-Smith 2017).…”

Section: Cultural Ecosystem Services In Forest Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forests are critical habitats for biodiversity and they are also essential for the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services that are important to human well-being. There is increasing evidence that biodiversity contributes to forest ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Here we provide a review of forest ecosystem services including biomass production, habitat provisioning services, pollination, seed dispersal, resistance to wind storms, fire regulation and mitigation, pest regulation of native and invading insects, carbon sequestration, and cultural ecosystem services, in relation to forest type, structure and diversity. We also consider relationships between forest biodiversity and multifunctionality, and trade-offs among ecosystem services. We compare the concepts of ecosystem processes, functions and services to clarify their definitions. Our review of published studies indicates a lack of empirical studies that establish quantitative and causal relationships between forest biodiversity and many important ecosystem services. The literature is highly skewed; studies on provisioning of nutrition and energy, and on cultural services, delivered by mixed-species forests are under-represented. Planted forests offer ample opportunity for optimising their composition and diversity because replanting after harvesting is a recurring process. Planting mixed-species forests should be given more consideration as they are likely to provide a wider range of ecosystem services within the forest and for adjacent land uses. This review also serves as the introduction to this special issue of Biodiversity and Conservation on various aspects of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services.

show abstract

Section: Cultural Ecosystem Services In Forest Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cultural Ecosystem Services In Forest Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, we did not want to delimit the number of mentioned ESS because this might demotivate or exclude participants. In that respect, we agree with Pert et al (2015) to let the participants develop their most relevant ESS. Nevertheless, we grouped the mentioned ESS according to CICES, which was mostly suitable at division level.…”

Section: Identification and Prioritizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do ecosystem services provide an added value compared to existing forest planning approaches in Central Europe?

Meyer¹,

Schulz²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In forestry research, the concept of ecosystem services (ESS) is less prominent than in agricultural studies. One reason might be that multifunctional forestry and the concept of forest functions, i.e., societal demand from forest, are established and legally required planning approaches in Central Europe, e.g., in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. To explore differences in concept and perspective, we conducted a participatory stakeholder workshop to identify, score, and map ESS in an urban forest in Germany. For comparison, we used existing forest function maps. Forest function mapping as planning approach is based on a regional-scale expert assessment of forest agencies. The local ESS scoring showed a clear preference for recreation, drinking water, biodiversity, mediation of climate and water, and wood provision in decreasing order. Most stakeholder groups scored recreation highest. Drinking water was also important for most stakeholders. Recreation stakeholders scored unbalanced with an apparent focus on their own demand (Gini coefficient: 0.83). Contrastingly, forestry stakeholders scored the ESS in a balanced manner (Gini coefficient: 0.47). ESS and forest function maps highly overlapped. The stakeholders identified both synergies and trade-offs between timber and biodiversity and between drinking water and biodiversity depending on the management. Recreation has mostly trade-offs, with timber, hunting, and drinking water. The stakeholders mapped only few ESS in addition to forest functions, e.g., feed production, beekeeping, and biodiversity hotspots. Although forest functions consider most forest benefits despite weak stakeholder consultation, the opportunity to prioritize forest benefits and to analyze interactions is a clear added value of the ESS approach. The paradigm of simultaneous provision of all forest functions does not reflect heterogeneous societal preferences. The stakeholders showed a rather low level of conflict and a high level of understanding for differences in their prioritization. The reason might be the long local tradition of multiple-use forestry beginning in the late 1800s. The study area is an example for an urban forest of a larger city in Europe with high pressure from local recreation. It would be interesting to test the approach for other environmental conditions and locations of an urban forest. In general, the developed approach could be used to evaluate the quality of other planning instruments for multiple-use forestry worldwide regarding their consideration of stakeholder requirements and the potential added value of the ESS approach.

show abstract

“…Without treaties and water rights, Indigenous nations in Australia are compelled to think creatively to negotiate just relationships with the settler-State to exercise their responsibility to care as Country (Pert et al 2014). This creativity involves research, political negotiation, partnership building, education, and the rewriting of the NRM legislative and policy landscape.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new direction for water management? Indigenous nation building as a strategy for river health

Hemming¹,

Rigney²,

Muller³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Indigenous involvement in Australian water management is conventionally driven by a top-down approach by nonIndigenous government agencies, that asks "how do we engage Indigenous people?" and has culminated in the ineffective "consult" and "service delivery" processes evident in mainstream water management planning. This is a hopeful paper that identifies the critical importance of a "nation-based" approach for effective Indigenous engagement in water planning and policy through the work undertaken by the Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority (NRA) in the Murray Futures program. The NRA is an Indigenous government in the "settled-south" of Australia. Over past decades, the NRA has developed a range of political technologies that act as tools for redeveloping Ngarrindjeri Nationhood after colonial disempowerment and dispossession. These tools enable better collaboration with nonIndigenous governments, especially in natural resource management policy and practice. In turn, this has better enabled the NRA to exercise a decision-making and planning authority over the lands and waters in its jurisdiction, therefore, more effectively exercising its ongoing duty of care as Country. This paper presents a case study of the Sugar Shack Complex Management Plan, codeveloped by the NRA and the South Australian Government in 2015, to demonstrate the benefits that accrue when Indigenous nations are resourced as authorities responsible for reframing water management and planning approaches to facilitate the equitable collaboration of Indigenous and nonIndigenous worldviews. As a marker of the success of this strategy, the Ngarrindjeri Yarluwar-Ruwe Program, in partnership with the South Australian government, recently won the Australian Riverprize 2015 for delivering excellence in Australian river management. The Ngarrindjeri "Vision for Country" quoted above encapsulates the Ngarrindjeri philosophy of being (Ruwe/Ruwar) at the center of Ngarrindjeri innovations in water management. Its ancient but radical message has far-reaching implications for Australian water planning. Originally developed as part of the whole-of-country strategy expressed in the Ngarrindjeri Nation Yarluwar-Ruwe Plan (Ngarrindjeri Nation 2007), it asserts a sovereign vision for healthy Ngarrindjeri country, based on valuing Ngarrindjeri lifeways, values, and knowledge. Ngarrindjeri country is in the "settled south" of Australia, at the end of the iconic River Murray (Murrundi), the longest river in Australia and third longest navigable river in the world.Freshwater flows through the Murray-Darling system into Ngarrindjeri lands are, for Ngarrindjeri, the life blood of the living body of Murrundi. The mouth of the Murray and its nearby region is a place of great spiritual and cultural significance known and formally registered as the "Meeting of the Waters" where the salt and fresh waters mix. For Ngarrindjeri, the reproduction of wellbeing is inextricably linked to interconnectivity, estuarine mixing, and the overall health of Murrundi as a living bod...

show abstract

Mapping cultural ecosystem services with rainforest aboriginal peoples: Integrating biocultural diversity, governance and social variation

Cited by 66 publications

References 36 publications

Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

Do ecosystem services provide an added value compared to existing forest planning approaches in Central Europe?

A new direction for water management? Indigenous nation building as a strategy for river health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About