Abstract

Ko koe ki tēnā, ko ahau ki tēnai kīwai o te kete (you at that, and I at this handle of the basket). This Māori (New Zealanders of indigenous descent) saying conveys the principle of cooperation-we achieve more through working together, rather than separately. Despite decades of calls to rectify cultural imbalance in conservation, threatened species management still relies overwhelmingly on ideas from Western science and on top-down implementation. Values-based approaches to decision making can be used to integrate indigenous peoples' values into species conservation in a more meaningful way. We used such a values-based method, structured decision making, to develop comanagement of pekapeka (Mystacina tuberculata) (short-tailed bat) and tara iti (Sternula nereis davisae) (Fairy Tern) between Māori and Pākehā (New Zealanders of European descent). We implemented this framework in a series of workshops in which facilitated discussions were used to gather expert knowledge to predict outcomes and make management recommendations. For both species, stakeholders clearly stated their values as fundamental objectives from the start, which allowed alternative strategies to be devised that naturally addressed their diverse values, including mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge and perspectives). On this shared basis, all partners willingly engaged in the process, and decisions were largely agreed to by all. Most expectations of conflicts between values of Western science and Māori culture were unfounded. Where required, positive compromises were made by jointly developing alternative strategies. The values-based process successfully taha wairua taha tangata (brought both worlds together to achieve the objective) through codeveloped recovery strategies. This approach challenges the traditional model of scientists first preparing management plans focused on biological objectives, then consulting indigenous groups for approval. We recommend values-based approaches, such as structured decision making, as powerful methods for development of comanagement conservation plans between different peoples.

Highlights

  • Conservation actions have been overwhelmingly inspired by biological insights and implemented top-down

  • Decisions made during the structured decision making (SDM) process would form the basis of a permit application to Department of Conservation (DOC)

  • The working group tasked with developing the decisions included the key stakeholders normally approached during permit evaluation and consultation by DOC and as such provides a collective view to submit for approval

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Conservation actions have been overwhelmingly inspired by biological insights and implemented top-down. Despite over 2 decades of calls for more equal and inclusive conservation, where agencies work with communities and indigenous groups (United Nations 1992; Wright et al 1995; Tallis & Lubchenco 2014; Lyver et al 2018), inclusivity remains the exception (Mascia et al 2003; Gregory 2016). Evidence-based conservation is a much-needed improvement of current practice, but it Facilitating Comanagement does not need to clash with inclusivity. Evidence-based conservation itself is not objective because it is embedded in Western science beliefs about how to correctly interact with the environment (Giles et al 2016; Salomon et al 2018)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call