Moving beyond the human–nature dichotomy through biocultural approaches: including ecological well-being in resilience indicators

Abstract

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.

Coral reef ecosystem services in the Anthropocene

“…Aquaculture, for example, is primarily adopted in marine and coastal systems to enhance food production, but can also be used to support the delivery of other services such as restoring biogenic habitat (Froehlich, Gentry, & Halpern, 2017). Moreover, people and cultures are shaped by ecosystems (Caillon, Cullman, Verschuuren, & Sterling, 2017). For instance, activities that can take place in marine and coastal environments such as shellfish harvesting form an integral part of place attachment that is connected to personal experiences, social relationships, heritage values, ecological knowledge and local identity (Poe, Donatuto, & Satterfield, 2016).…”

Embracing diverse worldviews to share planet Earth

“…In many indigenous cultures, human societies and the environment are perceived not as separate, but rather as involved in a social relationship (Berkes ) that embraces both spiritual and symbolic values (Caillon et al. ). Generally, worldviews based on indigenous experience have more completely internalized the idea that humans are living organisms among many others and that we depend on natural processes for our own survival (Saxena et al.…”

“…These cosmologies and spiritualities of indigenous peoples and other groups are anchored in specific territorial contexts and offer alternative worldviews and frameworks for guiding relationships between humans and the rest of nature (Descola 2013;Kealiikanakaoleohaililani & Giardina 2016). In many indigenous cultures, human societies and the environment are perceived not as separate, but rather as involved in a social relationship (Berkes 2012) that embraces both spiritual and symbolic values (Caillon et al 2017). Generally, worldviews based on indigenous experience have more completely internalized the idea that humans are living organisms among many others and that we depend on natural processes for our own survival (Saxena et al 2018).…”

Biocultural approaches to developing well-being indicators in Solomon Islands

“…Conservation and development programs increasingly seek improvements in human and ecological well-being. However, success in these terms hinges on an accurate understanding of place-based cultural, economic, and ecological values (Caillon et al 2017, Sterling et al 2017a. As such, we need to link human and ecological well-being explicitly, consider a wide range of variables and the feedbacks between them, and make a systematic attempt to balance specificity and scalability in different forms of local and global knowledge (Biedenweg et al 2017, Sterling et al 2017a).…”

“…Social-ecological systems theorists have defined human wellbeing as "...a state of being with others and the natural environment that arises where human needs are met, where individuals and groups can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and where they are satisfied with their way of life" (Armitage et al 2012). Universal and generic definitions of ecological well-being do not exist because it must be defined within a specific cultural context (Caillon et al 2017). Similarly, definitions of human well-being are strengthened by a nuanced understanding of context (e.g., Taylor 2008).…”