scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation

TL;DR: In this article, the authors used the Conceptual Framework of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) to analyse the biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation by indigenous peoples and local communities globally.
Abstract: Pollinators underpin sustainable livelihoods that link ecosystems, spiritual and cultural values, and customary governance systems with indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) across the world. Biocultural diversity is a shorthand term for this great variety of people–nature interlinkages that have developed over time in specific ecosystems. Biocultural approaches to conservation explicitly build on the conservation practices inherent in sustaining these livelihoods. We used the Conceptual Framework of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to analyse the biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation by IPLCs globally. The analysis identified biocultural approaches to pollinators across all six elements of the Conceptual Framework, with conservation-related practices occurring in 60 countries, in all continents except Antarctica. Practices of IPLCs that are important for biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation can be grouped into three categories: the practice of valuing diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; landscape management practices; and diversified farming systems. Particular IPLCs may use some or all of these practices. Policies that recognize customary tenure over traditional lands, strengthen indigenous and community-conserved areas, promote heritage listing and support diversified farming systems within a food sovereignty approach are among several identified that strengthen biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation, and thereby deliver mutual benefits for pollinators and people. Pollinators are integral to ecosystem functions and human wellbeing, yet conservation approaches often ignore indigenous and biocultural perspectives and practices. This Analysis uses the IPBES framework to categorize biocultural practices and identify policies to support their roles in pollinator conservation.

Summary (4 min read)

Introduction

  • Pollinators are integral to a good quality of life for people globally, contributing to sustainable livelihoods, maintenance of ecosystem health and function, food production, cultural, spiritual and social values 1 .
  • Inclusive policy for their conservation requires innovative, multiscale assessments that include evidence from science and other knowledge systems 2 .
  • Biocultural approaches to conservation, which explicitly build on local cultural perspectives and recognize feedbacks between ecosystems and quality of life, have emerged as key to the necessary inclusivity 4 .
  • The authors provide the first global analysis and review of current literature about biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation, drawing on and augmenting work undertaken for the first IPBES assessment 9 .
  • Particular IPLCs may use some or all of these practices.

Results of the Analysis

  • All six elements of the IPBES CF are presented in Figure 1 (a); and Figure 1 (b) presents the analysis of IPLCs' biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation into these elements, which includes b Indigenous and local knowledge is defined here in accordance with Diaz et al.
  • It is also referred to by other terms such as, for example, Indigenous, local or traditional knowledge, traditional ecological/environmental knowledge (TEK), farmers' or fishers' knowledge, ethnoscience, indigenous science, folk science." recognition of drivers of unsustainable practices for pollinators which are evident among some IPLCs.
  • The arrows between the elements reflect influences and interactions 5 which are not further described here.

Figure 1 (a) IPBES Conceptual Framework 5 and (b) analysis of biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation according to this Conceptual Framework

  • Pollinators, pollination and good quality of life Pollinators and plant-pollinator interaction networks make vital contributions to IPLCs' quality of life, in both subsistence and market economies, as part of socio-cultural heritage, identity, and social relations 11 .
  • Beekeeping provides a critical anchor for rural economies because: (1) minimal investment is required; (2) diverse products can be sold; (3) land ownership or rental is usually not necessary; (4) nutritional and medicinal benefits derive; (5) timing and location of activities are flexible; and (6) links to ILK and traditions are usually numerous 12 .
  • Honey hunting makes significant contributions to some IPLCs, providing vital sustenance and deep connections with quality of life .
  • Examples of contemporary honey-hunters include: the forest peoples of Indonesia; Ogiek people in Kenya; and Xingu people in Brazil 11 .
  • The collection of entire bee colonies means that high protein components such as brood, royal jelly and pollen form important dietary constituents 14 .

Figure 2 Global patterns of the contribution of biocultural approaches for pollinators and pollination to quality of life, from studies/sites identified in the analysis: (a) beekeeping; (b) honey hunting; (c) Intangible Cultural Heritage listed as globally significant; (d) Cultural and Mixed Sites inscribed on the World Heritage List (WHL) with significance for pollinators

  • Pollinators' roles in rituals, dances, myths and legends of IPLCs are recognised as globally significant through inclusions in the Intangible Cultural Heritage of UNESCO .
  • The World Heritage List is divided into sites listed for their cultural heritage; those listed for their natural heritage; and those that have both cultural and natural heritage, known as "mixed sites".
  • Virtually all natural sites protect pollinators and many cultural and mixed sites protect and celebrate biocultural linkages between people and pollinators .
  • Examples of sites that recognise biocultural approaches include the Coffee Cultural Landscape of Colombia, and the Osun Sacred Grove protected by Yoruba peoples near Osogbo, Nigeria.
  • The Agave Landscape in Mexico recognizes biocultural interactions with this bat-pollinated plant used since at least the 16th century to produce tequila spirit, and for at least 2,000 years to make other fermented drinks, fibre and cloth.

Anthropogenic assets

  • IPLCs develop and use anthropogenic assets, particularly technologies for honey-hunting and beekeeping 15 , that underpin the good quality of their lives.
  • Honey hunters manufacture ladders in Ethiopia 16 and ropes from lianas in India 17 for tree-climbing.
  • In France and Spain, anthropogenic assets include traditional swarming methods, harvest and honey extraction techniques, and diverse smokers 19 .
  • Examples include its use for arrow cement in Bolivia; to soften skins, and make jewelry in Africa; and to make hunting tools, firesticks and didgeridoos, a traditional musical instrument, in Australia 10 .

Biocultural pollinator institutions and governance

  • IPLCs' governance and institutional arrangements are central to biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation .
  • Governance systems consist of actors (individuals and organisations), institutions (formal and informal rules and norms) and multi-level interactions (across scales and between organisations and institutions) 29 .
  • Actors in biocultural governance systems often include actual pollinators, as IPLCs attribute authority to many spirits who are pollinators, including birds, bats, butterflies, bees and other insects 10 .
  • Multilevel interactions highlight risks to these biocultural approaches, arising from lack of recognition of customary tenure and other rights at the nation-state level.
  • Ogiek honey-hunters recently won the case ACHRP vs Republic of Kenya App. No. 006/2012 in the African Court of Human and Peoples' Rights.

Drivers of change

  • Many IPLCs report pollinator and pollination declines associated with expansion of industrial forestry and agriculture into their traditional lands, driving habitat loss and degradation, and replacing biodiverse habitat with monocultures 11 .
  • Loss and decline of the stingless bees is linked with a loss of traditional knowledge and practices such as ethnomedicine (use of honey), cosmogony, and handcraft (using cerumen) 10 .
  • Pollinators can themselves become threatened as IPLCs experience scarcity of wild food resources.
  • Large flying foxes (Pteropus vampyrus natunae) in Kalimantan, Indonesia, are threatened by over-hunting for food 44 .
  • Language holds culturally specific knowledge of local biodiversity, ethnobiological knowledge, as well as knowledge about traditional resource use, management practices and taxonomy.

Figure 3 Drawings by J.M.F. Camargo 52 , marked with the Kayapó names of the different anatomical structures of a bee (left) and ontogenetic stages of bee development (right). Reproduced with permission.

  • Nature's contributions to people Nature's contributions to people (NCP) include all the contributions, both positive and negative, of nature (i.e. systems of life) to quality of life for people 8 .
  • NCP are created through interactions between systems of life, anthropogenic assets, and institutions and governance.
  • The context-specific perspective is recognised as potentially producing bundles or groups that follow from distinct lived experiences such as farming, or hunting and gathering.
  • The authors analysis identified three such bundles or groups that are considered NCP as part of, and ways to foster, biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation: (1) the practice of valuing diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; (2) landscape management practices; and (3) diversified farming systems.
  • Many IPLCs favour heterogeneity in land-use as well as in their gardens, tend to the conservation of nesting trees and flowering resources for bees, butterflies and other pollinators, name and classify a great range of wild bees, observe their habitat and food preferences.

Figure 4 Landscape management practices (a and b) and diversified farming systems (c and d), based on Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK), that are part of and foster pollinators' roles in Nature's Contributions to People (NCP)

  • Three types of diversified farming systems based on ILK, scattered across the globe, were identified as part of, and ways to foster NCP .
  • Evidence is accumulating that commodity agroforestry, practiced by IPLCs and resulting in a landscape matrix of fragments of high-biodiversity native vegetation amidst the agricultural crop, both produces food and maintains pollination services 54 .
  • Home Gardens, capitalised to distinguish those characterised by producing a wide diversity of foods and medicinal plants, display complexity and multi-functionality, and provide habitat for a great diversity of pollinators 55 .
  • Shifting cultivation (seasonal rotation of crops, trees, animals and intercropping) demonstrates diverse interdependencies with pollinators and remains important in many regions, particularly through the tropical world 56 .
  • The traditional Mayan Milpa shifting cultivation produces a patchy landscape with forests in different stages of succession with a diverse array of plants, nearly all of which are pollinated by insects, birds and bats 57 .

Seven policies to support biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation

  • IPLCs across the globe continue to practice many successful biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation.
  • Indigenous Protected Areas in Australia required prior informed consent for their creation, and have protected culturally-significant pollinationdependent fruit, their bird and bat pollinators, and their habitats 10 .
  • The Intangible Cultural Heritage List promotes understanding of practices which are listed-for example the protection of traditional knowledge of Totanac people, which includes agroforestry systems that protect pollinators and stingless beekeeping.
  • Fostering livelihoods based on beekeeping can overcome many barriers to effective pollinator protection when they are able to link: (1) customary economies (that require ongoing protection of pollinators); (2) markets (that give these products economic significance); and (3) investments from government in accompanying research, market analysis and brokering 11 .
  • Promoting food sovereignty helps pollination protection because of its connection with diversified farming systems and management practices that foster diversity and abundance of pollinators and pollination resources 65 .

Conclusion

  • Pollinators and pollination have become worldwide heritage and IPLCs' have ancient and recent associations with these organisms, creating rich and unique biocultural manifestations.
  • The contributions of IPLCs are therefore essential to decision-making and actions for the preservation of these key ecological resources.
  • The authors consider that the suggested seven policies will strengthen vital ILK while providing ongoing opportunities for education, development and empowerment of the wellbeing of IPLCs and mutual benefits with broader societies.
  • Local community-driven conservation initiatives can be successful and should be encouraged.
  • The authors conclude that pollination and pollinators can be better preserved by acknowledging IPLCs and working together between ILK and science for sustainable ecosystem governance and management in this time of rapid global change.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Biocultural approaches to pollinator
conservation
Article
Accepted Version
Hill, R., Nates-Parra, G., Quezada-Euán, J. J. G., Buchori, D.,
LeBuhn, G., Maués, M. M., Pert, P. L., Kwapong, P. K., Saeed,
S., Breslow, S. J., Carneiro da Cunha, M., Dicks, L. V.,
Galetto, L., Gikungu, M. G., Howlett, B. G., Imperatriz-
Fonseca, V. L., Lyver, P. O.'B., Martín-López, B., Oteros-
Rozas, E., Potts, S. G. and Roué, M. (2019) Biocultural
approaches to pollinator conservation. Nature Sustainability, 2.
pp. 214-222. ISSN 2398-9629 doi:
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0244-z Available at
https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/82035/
It is advisable to refer to the publishers version if you intend to cite from the
work. See Guidance on citing
.
To link to this article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0244-z
Publisher: Nature
All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law,
including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other
copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are dened in
the End User Agreement
.

www.reading.ac.uk/centaur
CentAUR
Central Archive at the University of Reading
Reading’s research outputs online

1
Biocultural approaches to pollinator 1
conservation 2
3
Abstract 4
Pollinators underpin sustainable livelihoods that link ecosystems, spiritual and cultural values, and 5
customary governance systems with indigenous peoples
a
and local communities (IPLC) across the 6
world. Biocultural diversity is a short-hand term for this great variety of people-nature interlinkages 7
that have developed over time in specific ecosystems. Biocultural approaches to conservation 8
explicitly build on the conservation practices inherent in sustaining these livelihoods. We used the 9
Conceptual Framework of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to 10
analyse the biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation by indigenous peoples and local 11
communities globally. The analysis identified biocultural approaches to pollinators across all six 12
elements of the Conceptual Framework, with conservation-related practices occurring in sixty 13
countries, in all continents except Antarctica. Practices of IPLC that are significant for biocultural 14
approaches to pollinator conservation can be grouped into three categories: the practice of valuing 15
diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; landscape management practices; and diversified 16
farming systems. Particular IPLCs may use some or all of these practices. Policies that recognise 17
customary tenure over traditional lands, strengthen Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas, 18
promote heritage listing and support diversified farming within a food sovereignty approach, are 19
among several identified that strengthen biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation, and 20
thereby deliver mutual benefits for pollinators and people. 21
a
Here we follow the global norm of using lower case for “indigenous” while recognising the norm in Australia and New
Zealand is to use upper case, following Johnson, J.T. et al. (2007) Creating anti-colonial geographies: Embracing indigenous
peoples' knowledges and rights. Geographical Research 45 (2), 117-120.

2
22
23
24
25
Keywords: biocultural diversity, indigenous peoples, local communities, conservation, biodiversity, 26
governance, cultural values 27
28

3
Introduction 29
Pollinators are integral to a good quality of life for people globally, contributing to sustainable 30
livelihoods, maintenance of ecosystem health and function, food production, cultural, spiritual and 31
social values
1
. Inclusive policy for their conservation requires innovative, multiscale assessments that 32
include evidence from science and other knowledge systems
2
. Yet conservation science has often 33
neglected societies’ values, world views and knowledge systems and ignored culturally-grounded 34
approaches
3
. In this context, biocultural approaches to conservation, which explicitly build on local 35
cultural perspectives and recognize feedbacks between ecosystems and quality of life, have emerged 36
as key to the necessary inclusivity
4
. Biocultural approaches are underpinned by the concept of 37
biocultural diversity, which recognises that culture and biodiversity are linked and may be mutually 38
constituted
5
. Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) are integral to the biocultural 39
diversity that has developed in ecosystems over millennia, including large areas of the globe, many 40
with high biodiversity, over which IPLCs have management responsibility
6
. The Intergovernmental 41
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services (IPBES) is promoting inclusivity in 42
assessments through the IPBES Conceptual Framework
5
, their valuation approaches
7
, and by 43
providing space for context-specific culturally-grounded ways of assessing nature’s contributions to 44
people (NCP)
8
. In this paper, we provide the first global analysis and review of current literature 45
about biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation, drawing on and augmenting work 46
undertaken for the first IPBES assessment
9
. 47
48
For the first time in any global environmental assessment, the IPBES global pollination assessment 49
included indigenous and local knowledge (ILK)
b
. This incorporation of ILK focused on the 50
contributions of pollination and pollinators to two elements of the IPBES Conceptual Framework—51
good quality of life and nature’s contributions to people
10
. For this paper, we analyse biocultural 52
approaches, based on ILK, according to all six elements of the IPBES Conceptual Framework (CF)
5
53
(Figure 1). We focus on the knowledge of IPLCs, both groups identified essentially by their (multi-54
scalar) linkages with their traditional territories (see Methods, Box 1). Our analysis demonstrates 55
that practices of IPLCs that are significant for pollinator conservation can be grouped into three 56
categories: (1) the practice of valuing diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; (2) landscape 57
management practices; and (3) diversified farming systems. Particular IPLCs may use some or all of 58
these practices. Seven policies to strengthen these approaches are presented, followed by 59
concluding comments about implications for future science and policy. Methods for analysis, 60
literature review and (self)-identification of IPLCs are presented at the end of the article. 61
Results of the Analysis 62
All six elements of the IPBES CF are presented in Figure 1(a); and Figure 1 (b) presents the analysis of 63
IPLCs’ biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation into these elements, which includes 64
b
Indigenous and local knowledge is defined here in accordance with Diaz et al. 2015 as “A cumulative body of
knowledge, practice and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by
cultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (including humans) with one another and with
their environment. It is also referred to by other terms such as, for example, Indigenous, local or traditional
knowledge, traditional ecological/environmental knowledge (TEK), farmers’ or shers’ knowledge,
ethnoscience, indigenous science, folk science.”

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors synthesize literature regarding objectives and effects of cultural burning in this region within an ecosystem services framework, and evaluate the effects of burning on understory plant diversity, wildlife, fruit production, parasites, and other key aspects of resource quality.

26 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a survey of 1182 forest landowners from 25 European countries was conducted to evaluate which ecosystems are currently promoted by European landowners, what their the future could be, and which factors support or hinder these processes.
Abstract: The ecosystem services framework has become one of the most important paradigms in forest planning and management as a way to link the multiple provisioning, regulating, and cultural services derived from ecosystems and their benefits to human wellbeing. Recently, there have been multiple efforts in emphasizing the importance of cultural ecosystem services (CES). However, the consideration of CES in management models remains a challenge. In the current context of increased demand for the joint supply of multiple ecosystem services, we aim to evaluate which CES are currently promoted by European landowners, what their the future could be, and which factors support or hinder these processes. Our findings are based on a survey of 1182 forest landowners from 25 European countries. By using a mixed-method approach that combines descriptive, ordination, and cluster analysis with qualitative data, our results reveal that CES are currently of high relevance in European forests and forest owners and managers have a generally positive attitude toward further promotion of CES through forest management. There is a high degree of synergy between CES, which suggests that many of them could be jointly promoted. Our analysis further identifies the existence of four differentiated types of forest owners based on their attitudes and management in relation to CES. These groups also differ in regard to the challenges and barriers they perceive in relation to forest CES. These diverse perspectives among Europe’s landowners suggest the need for different strategies that satisfy the diverse context-related social-ecological needs required to further promote CES in European forests.

23 citations


Cites background from "Biocultural approaches to pollinato..."

  • ...Further differences exist in relation to the socio-demographic characteristics of forest operators, the size of their properties, and their level of organization (Hirsch and Schmizhüsen 2010, Pulla et al. 2013)....

    [...]

  • ...In relation to land tenure, approximately half of the European forest surface belongs to private forest owners (Hirsch and Schmizhüsen 2010)....

    [...]

  • ...The age and gender distribution in the dataset mirrored the heterogeneous characteristics of forest operators in Europe (Hirsch and Schmizhüsen 2010, Pulla et al. 2013)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Indigenous land and sea management (ILSM) has been the focus of large government investment in Australia and globally as mentioned in this paper and beyond environmental benefits, such investments can deliver a suite of social,...
Abstract: Indigenous land and sea management (ILSM) has been the focus of large government investment in Australia and globally. Beyond environmental benefits, such investments can deliver a suite of social,...

22 citations


Cites background from "Biocultural approaches to pollinato..."

  • ...…for Indigenous1 peoples’ roles in land and sea management is increasing globally as a result of recognition of their rights and interests (Escobar 2010; Garnett et al. 2018), and increased attention to the value of the planet’s remaining biocultural diversity (Gavin et al. 2015; Hill et al. 2019)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors synthesize aspects of this literature, focusing on several key concepts, debates, patterns, trends, and drivers of biodiversity loss, and explore what might be required to reverse the ongoing decline in the fabric of life on Earth.
Abstract: Biodiversity, a term now widely employed in science, policy, and wider society, has a burgeoning associated literature. We synthesize aspects of this literature, focusing on several key concepts, debates, patterns, trends, and drivers. We review the history of the term and the multiple dimensions and values of biodiversity, and we explore what is known and not known about global patterns of biodiversity. We then review changes in biodiversity from early human times to the modern era, examining rates of extinction and direct drivers of biodiversity change and also highlighting some less-well-studied drivers. Finally, we turn attention to the indirect drivers of global biodiversity loss, notably humanity's increasing global consumption footprint, and explore what might be required to reverse the ongoing decline in the fabric of life on Earth. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Volume 47 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

21 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Sandra Díaz1, Sebsebe Demissew2, Julia Carabias3, Carlos Alfredo Joly4, Mark Lonsdale, Neville Ash5, Anne Larigauderie, Jay Ram Adhikari, Salvatore Arico6, András Báldi, Ann M. Bartuska7, Ivar Andreas Baste, Adem Bilgin, Eduardo S. Brondizio8, Kai M. A. Chan9, Viviana E. Figueroa, Anantha Kumar Duraiappah, Markus Fischer, Rosemary Hill10, Thomas Koetz, Paul Leadley11, Philip O'b. Lyver12, Georgina M. Mace13, Berta Martín-López14, Michiko Okumura5, Diego Pacheco, Unai Pascual15, Edgar Selvin Pérez, Belinda Reyers16, Eva Roth17, Osamu Saito18, Robert J. Scholes19, Nalini Sharma5, Heather Tallis20, Randolph R. Thaman21, Robert T. Watson22, Tetsukazu Yahara23, Zakri Abdul Hamid, Callistus Akosim, Yousef S. Al-Hafedh24, Rashad Allahverdiyev, Edward Amankwah, T. Stanley Asah25, Zemede Asfaw2, Gabor Bartus26, Anathea L. Brooks6, Jorge Caillaux27, Gemedo Dalle, Dedy Darnaedi, Amanda Driver (Sanbi), Gunay Erpul28, Pablo Escobar-Eyzaguirre, Pierre Failler29, Ali Moustafa Mokhtar Fouda, Bojie Fu30, Haripriya Gundimeda31, Shizuka Hashimoto32, Floyd Homer, Sandra Lavorel33, Gabriela Lichtenstein34, William Armand Mala35, Wadzanayi Mandivenyi, Piotr Matczak36, Carmel Mbizvo, Mehrasa Mehrdadi, Jean Paul Metzger37, Jean Bruno Mikissa38, Henrik Moller39, Harold A. Mooney40, Peter J. Mumby41, Harini Nagendra42, Carsten Nesshöver43, Alfred Oteng-Yeboah44, György Pataki45, Marie Roué, Jennifer Rubis6, Maria Schultz46, Peggy Smith47, Rashid Sumaila9, Kazuhiko Takeuchi18, Spencer Thomas, Madhu Verma48, Youn Yeo-Chang49, Diana Zlatanova50 
National University of Cordoba1, Addis Ababa University2, National Autonomous University of Mexico3, State University of Campinas4, United Nations Environment Programme5, UNESCO6, United States Department of Agriculture7, Indiana University8, University of British Columbia9, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation10, University of Paris-Sud11, Landcare Research12, University College London13, Autonomous University of Madrid14, University of Cambridge15, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research16, University of Southern Denmark17, United Nations University18, Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources and Environment19, The Nature Conservancy20, University of the South Pacific21, University of East Anglia22, Kyushu University23, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology24, University of Washington25, Budapest University of Technology and Economics26, Environmental Law Institute27, Ankara University28, University of Portsmouth29, Chinese Academy of Sciences30, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay31, Kyoto University32, Joseph Fourier University33, National Scientific and Technical Research Council34, University of Yaoundé35, Polish Academy of Sciences36, University of São Paulo37, École Normale Supérieure38, University of Otago39, Stanford University40, University of Queensland41, Azim Premji University42, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ43, University of Ghana44, Corvinus University of Budapest45, Stockholm University46, Lakehead University47, Indian Institute of Forest Management48, Seoul National University49, Sofia University50
TL;DR: The first public product of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is its Conceptual Framework as discussed by the authors, which will underpin all IPBES functions and provide structure and comparability to the syntheses that will produce at different spatial scales, on different themes, and in different regions.

1,585 citations


"Biocultural approaches to pollinato..." refers background in this paper

  • ...…approaches to pollinator conservation into these elements, which includes 64 b Indigenous and local knowledge is defined here in accordance with Diaz et al. 2015 as “A cumulative body of knowledge, practice and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
19 Jan 2018-Science
TL;DR: The notion of nature's contributions to people (NCP) was introduced by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) as mentioned in this paper, a joint global effort by governments, academia, and civil society to assess and promote knowledge of Earth's biodiversity and ecosystems and their contribution to human societies.
Abstract: A major challenge today and into the future is to maintain or enhance beneficial contributions of nature to a good quality of life for all people. This is among the key motivations of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), a joint global effort by governments, academia, and civil society to assess and promote knowledge of Earth's biodiversity and ecosystems and their contribution to human societies in order to inform policy formulation. One of the more recent key elements of the IPBES conceptual framework ( 1 ) is the notion of nature's contributions to people (NCP), which builds on the ecosystem service concept popularized by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) ( 2 ). But as we detail below, NCP as defined and put into practice in IPBES differs from earlier work in several important ways. First, the NCP approach recognizes the central and pervasive role that culture plays in defining all links between people and nature. Second, use of NCP elevates, emphasizes, and operationalizes the role of indigenous and local knowledge in understanding nature's contribution to people.

1,470 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
08 Dec 2016-Nature
TL;DR: There are well-documented declines in some wild and managed pollinators in several regions of the world, however, many effective policy and management responses can be implemented to safeguard pollinators and sustain pollination services.
Abstract: Wild and managed pollinators provide a wide range of benefits to society in terms of contributions to food security, farmer and beekeeper livelihoods, social and cultural values, as well as the maintenance of wider biodiversity and ecosystem stability. Pollinators face numerous threats, including changes in land-use and management intensity, climate change, pesticides and genetically modified crops, pollinator management and pathogens, and invasive alien species. There are well-documented declines in some wild and managed pollinators in several regions of the world. However, many effective policy and management responses can be implemented to safeguard pollinators and sustain pollination services.

1,121 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present the rationale for the inclusive valuation of nature's contributions to people (NCP) in decision making, as well as broad methodological steps for doing so, and argue that transformative practices aiming at sustainable futures would benefit from embracing such diversity, which require recognizing and addressing power relationships across stakeholder groups that hold different values on human nature-relations and NCP.

985 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that there is little to suggest that the forest transition model is useful for tropical areas, at least under current sociopolitical structures, and a model that incorporates the agricultural matrix as an integral component of conservation programs is proposed.
Abstract: Among the myriad complications involved in the current food crisis, the relationship between agriculture and the rest of nature is one of the most important yet remains only incompletely analyzed. Particularly in tropical areas, agriculture is frequently seen as the antithesis of the natural world, where the problem is framed as one of minimizing land devoted to agriculture so as to devote more to conservation of biodiversity and other ecosystem services. In particular, the "forest transition model" projects an overly optimistic vision of a future where increased agricultural intensification (to produce more per hectare) and/or increased rural-to-urban migration (to reduce the rural population that cuts forest for agriculture) suggests a near future of much tropical aforestation and higher agricultural production. Reviewing recent developments in ecological theory (showing the importance of migration between fragments and local extinction rates) coupled with empirical evidence, we argue that there is little to suggest that the forest transition model is useful for tropical areas, at least under current sociopolitical structures. A model that incorporates the agricultural matrix as an integral component of conservation programs is proposed. Furthermore, we suggest that this model will be most successful within a framework of small-scale agroecological production.

597 citations

Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (16)
Q1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "Biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation" ?

21 a Here the authors follow the global norm of using lower case for “ indigenous ” while recognising the norm in Australia and New Zealand is to use upper case, following Johnson, J. T. et al. ( 2007 ) Creating anti-colonial geographies: Embracing indigenous peoples ' knowledges and rights. 

205 ecological and behavioural characteristics as well as seasonal occurrence are used by IPLCs to classify 206 different plant and animal species, resulting in unique understandings of the systems of life45,46. 

Invasive species, such as African and European bees, are recognised 174 by IPLCs in South and Central America as driving declines in native pollinators and their products, 175 including stingless bee honey10. 

Participatory evaluation of pollinator-friendly farming 321 practices has been used by the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) as an 322 effective framework for co-producing knowledge between scientists and farmers63. 

The United Nations 402 recognizes that no formal definition of whom are indigenous peoples and/or local 403 communities is needed—self-identification is the key requirement. 

Examples of Intangible 94 Cultural Heritage that rely on pollinator-dependent resources include knotted bag-making by forest 95 peoples of Papua, and barkcloth-making by the Baganda people in Uganda. 

Their contributions to the sustainable use and 440 conservation of biocultural diversity over millennia benefits many peoples globally, and the authors are 441 deeply grateful. 

Traditional 163 farming systems are undervalued relative to commercial, industrial and trade-oriented resource 164 exploitation of the same spaces, despite the ecosystem services that traditional farming protects. 

The authors thank the indigenous peoples and local communities globally who provided their knowledge of 438 practices and philosophies underpinning conservation of pollinators and pollination to the hundreds 43913of publications that the authors reviewed for this article. 

Indigenous land reconfiguration and fragmented institutions: A 550 historical political ecology of Tsimane' lands (Bolivian Amazon). 

Land tenure systems are often multi-layered, for example in the 138 Philippines people can have tenure rights to communal, corporate and individual lands30. 

Examples of sites that recognise biocultural approaches include the Coffee Cultural 101 Landscape of Colombia, and the Osun Sacred Grove protected by Yoruba peoples near Osogbo, 102 Nigeria. 

The final steps to enable this analysis involved firstly updating 422 the review with publications since 2015 (the cut-off date for the IPBES pollination report), and 423 heritage sites and elements listed in 2016-17; and secondly re-analysing the data gathered through 424 the dialogues11 and literature to respond to all elements of the IPBES CF. 

Their analysis identified three such bundles or 236 groups that are considered NCP as part of, and ways to foster, biocultural approaches to pollinator 237 conservation: (1) the practice of valuing diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; (2) landscape 238 management practices; and (3) diversified farming systems. 

a global call was issued for indigenous and local knowledge holders from IPLCs and 385 experts who wished to contribute information relevant to pollinators and pollination, to participate 386 in global and community dialogues. 

While the IPBES global pollination 377 assessment did not fully succeed in achieving such engagement, as knowledge-holders and their 378 institutions were not involved in the latter parts of the assessment, several methods, including 379 global and community dialogues in the early phases and tailored literature analyses, ensured a high-380 degree of rigour in their approach to working with ILK 67.