Landscape and biocultural diversity

The International Conference on Biological and Cultural Diversity held in Montreal on June 2010, produced the Declaration on Biocultural Diversity and the UNESCO-SCBD Joint Programme on the linkages between cultural and biological diversity. The first meeting for the implementation of the Joint Programme was held in Florence (Italy) in April 2014. The scientific and policy dimensions of the linkages between cultural and biological diversity are of utmost importance in Europe where policies are devoted to the conservation of biodiversity and cultural heritage, but rarely focused on the result of interactions between nature and culture expressed by the rural landscape. The Florence Conference gathered scientists from different disciplines considering biocultural diversity as a good example of a topic requiring a transdisciplinary approach not always supported by university and research. This not only for an effective understanding of the biodiversity associated with landscapes shaped by the man, but also for the further development of the Joint Programme in terms of research and political implementation. The meeting was organized into a scientific part and a workshop for the drafting of a declaration on biocultural diversity. The declaration states that the European rural landscape (about 80 % of the European Union territory) is predominantly a biocultural multifunctional landscape, while the current state of biological and cultural diversity in Europe results from the combination of historical and ongoing environmental and land-use processes and cultural heritage. This book shows the existence and the importance of biocultural diversity associated to European landscape. This heritage should be studied, preserved and valorized by public policies.

Karim-Aly S. Kassam: Biocultural Diversity and Indigenous Ways of Knowing: Human Ecology in the Arctic

While the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) addresses the safety of species and ecosystems diversity, the European Landscape Convention (ELC) stresses the importance of preserving, managing and creating high-quality landscapes encompassing both natural and man-affected ones, in accordance to cultural values and taking into account people’s perceptions of landscapes. This recent pan-European policy may be a strong support to widen the application of the CBD, but is this really happening? As a matter of fact, although almost all of the European Member States have ratified both the CBD and the ELC, it is not obvious at all that respective national policies proceed in an integrated way. The paper will focus on the potential interactions between the CBD and the ELC in sustaining biocultural diversity, then a brief overview, will show how the landscape conception promoted by the ELC is influencing sectorial biodiversity national policies.

Most of Eriksen's research over the years has somehow or other dealt with the local implications of globalization. He has looked at ethnic dynamics, the challenges of forging national identities, creolization and cosmopolitanism, the legacies of plantation societies and, more recently, climate change in the era of 'accelerated acceleration'. Here we want to talk not just about cultural diversity and not just look at biological diversity, but both, because he believes that there are some important pattern resemblances between biological and cultural diversity. And many

Biodiversity and global health—hubris, humility and the unknown

The ecosystem approach—as endorsed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) in 2000—is a strategy for holistic, sustainable, and equitable natural resource management, to be implemented via the 12 Malawi Principles. These principles describe the need to manage nature in terms of dynamic ecosystems, while fully engaging with local peoples. It is an ambitious concept. Today, the term is common throughout the research and policy literature on environmental management. However, multiple meanings have been attached to the term, resulting in confusion. We reviewed references to the ecosystem approach from 1957 to 2012 and identified 3 primary uses: as an alternative to ecosystem management or ecosystem-based management; in reference to an integrated and equitable approach to resource management as per the CBD; and as a term signifying a focus on understanding and valuing ecosystem services. Although uses of this term and its variants may overlap in meaning, typically, they do not entirely reflect the ethos of the ecosystem approach as defined by the CBD. For example, there is presently an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services, but focusing on these alone does not promote decentralization of management or use of all forms of knowledge, both of which are integral to the CBD’s concept. We highlight that the Malawi Principles are at risk of being forgotten. To better understand these principles, more effort to implement them is required. Such efforts should be evaluated, ideally with comparative approaches, before allowing the CBD’s concept of holistic and socially engaged management to be abandoned or superseded. It is possible that attempts to implement all 12 principles together will face many challenges, but they may also offer a unique way to promote holistic and equitable governance of natural resources. Therefore, we believe that the CBD’s concept of the ecosystem approach demands more attention.La Necesidad de Desenredar Conceptos Clave del Argot Ambiente-EstrategiaResumenLa estrategia ambiental – como es promocionada por la Convención Biológica sobre Diversidad en 2000 – es una estrategia para un manejo holístico, sustentable y equitativo de recursos naturales, que habrá de implementarse por vía de los 12 Principios de Malawi. Estos principios describen la necesidad de manejar la naturaleza en términos de ecosistemas dinámicos, mientras se compromete totalmente con las personas locales. Es un concepto ambicioso. Hoy en día, el término es común en la investigación y la literatura de políticas sobre el manejo ambiente. Sin embargo, se han relacionado múltiples significados con el término, lo que resulta en confusión. Revisamos referencias a la estrategia ambiental de 1957 a 2012 e identificamos tres usos principales: como una alternativa para manejo ambiental o basado en ecosistemas; en referencia a una estrategia integrada y equitativa para el manejo de recursos según la CBD; y como un término que indica un enfoque en el entendimiento y la valuación de los servicios ambientales. Aunque los usos de este término y sus variantes pueden traslaparse en su significado, típicamente no reflejan en su totalidad los valores de la estrategia ambiental como fue definida por la CBD. Por ejemplo, actualmente hay un énfasis creciente en los servicios ambientales, pero enfocarse solamente en estos no promueve la descentralización del manejo o el uso de todas las formas de conocimiento, siendo ambas integrales para el concepto de la CBD. Resaltamos que los Principios de Malawi están en riesgo de ser olvidados. Para entender mejor estos principios, se requiere de más esfuerzo para implementarlos. Dichos esfuerzos deben ser evaluados, idóneamente con estrategias comparativas, antes de permitir que el concepto de la CBD de manejo holístico y comprometido socialmente sea abandonado o reemplazado. Es posible que los intentos por implementar los 12 principios juntos enfrentarán muchos obstáculos, pero también pueden ofrecer una forma única de promover el gobierno holístico y equitativo de los recursos naturales. Así, creemos que el concepto de estrategia ambiental de la CBD exige mayor atención.

Introduction: Places with high species diversity have high linguistic diversity, whereas areas with low species diversity tend to have low linguistic diversity. Objective: To characterize the intriguing relationship between biological and cultural diversity, a correlation that has been discussed at a global scale, but here tested for the first time in Mexico. Methods: We compiled exhaustive databases on both endangered species and endangered languages, and reviewed available literature on Mexico’s biocultural diversity with a focus on endangered and critically endangered species and languages. Results: With 364 living languages, Mexico is the world’s fifth most linguistically diverse country, but 64 of these languages are facing a very high risk of disappearance and 13 have already disappeared. Mexico is also the fourth most biologically diverse country, but 1 213 species of its flora and fauna are threatened with extinction and at least 127 species were recently extinct. Conclusions: Indigenous peoples are custodians of much of the world’s biocultural diversity. As the world grows less linguistically and culturally diverse, it is also becoming less biologically diverse. Mexico’s biological and linguistic diversity show strong geographic overlap, with the states of Oaxaca, Chiapas, Veracruz, Guerrero, and Michoacán harboring most species and most languages. Similarly, Mexico’s biodiversity hotspots mirror language hotspots, and areas with the highest number of endangered species overlap with areas where the endangerment of languages is also the highest.

BackgroundThe intensification of production and socio-economic changes have accelerated the loss of local traditional knowledge and plant resources. Understanding the distribution and determinants of such biocultural diversity is essential in planning efficient surveys and conservation efforts. Because the concept of biocultural diversity in socio-ecological adaptive systems comprises biological, cultural, and linguistic diversity, linguistic information should serve as a surrogate for the distribution of local biological and cultural diversity. In this study, we spatio-linguistically evaluated the names of local trees and rice landraces recorded in Ehime Prefecture, southwestern Japan.MethodsHierarchical clustering was performed separately for the names of local trees and rice landraces. By considering innate flora differences and species having multiple local names, a novel distance index was adopted for local tree names. For the names of rice landraces, Jaccard distance was adopted. V-measure and factor detector analysis were used to evaluate the spatial association between the isogloss maps of the folk nomenclature derived from the clustering and multiple thematic maps.ResultsLocal tree names showed stronger spatial association with geographical factors than rice landrace names. One folk nomenclature group of trees overlapped well with the slash-and-burn cultivation area, suggesting a link between the naming of trees and the traditional production system. In contrast, rice landraces exhibited stronger associations with folklore practices. Moreover, influences of road networks and pilgrimages on rice landraces indicated the importance of human mobility and traditional rituals on rice seed transfer. High homogeneity and low completeness in the V-measure analysis indicated that the names of local trees and rice landraces were mostly homogenous within current municipalities and were shared with a couple of adjacent municipalities. The isogloss maps help to illustrate how the biological and cultural diversity of wild trees and rice landraces are distributed. They also help to identify units for inter-municipal collaboration for effective conservation of traditional knowledge related to those plant resources and traditional rice varieties themselves.ConclusionsOur spatio-linguistic evaluation indicated that complex geographical and sociological processes influence the formation of plant folk nomenclature groups and implies a promising approach using quantitative lexico-statistical analysis to help to identify areas for biocultural diversity conservation.

The global climate and biodiversity crises are closely intertwined, yet no policy instrument currently tackles both jointly. This is problematic, as the lack of international platforms for designing coordinated and coherent policy frameworks that align targets across the nexus of biodiversity and climate change poses risks to nature and people. Here, we argue that the successful implementation of both the Paris Agreement and the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) requires a joint work programme between the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Such a joint work programme could fill the current global governance vacuum and address critical implementation gaps, while fostering innovation and synergies in climate and biodiversity action. Based on a review of existing work programmes under the UNFCCC and interagency and joint work programmes established with the CBD, we provide a concept of how this joint programme could be set up, ideas on the type of issues it should tackle and recommendations for successful implementation. Policy implications: The UNFCCC and CBD are unique platforms for providing the evidence to, and guiding the way through the changes we need, but higher levels of integration between the biodiversity and climate change agendas are needed to plug the implementation gap between the GBF and the Paris Agreement. The upcoming Conference of the Parties (COP) for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP16) present a clear policy window for the two conventions to introduce a formal governance structure, such as the one proposed in this contribution, that brings together ideas, people, organizations and processes necessary for joining the dots on how to both stabilize our climate and recover our nature.

The emerging concern in the last few decades for conserving 'diversity' is an impetus to conserve not only the whole spectmm of biota i.e. the total sum of genes, species and ecosystems but also indigenous culture, traditions, spiritual beliefs and values. This phenomenon is named Biocultural Diversity, which is a synthesis of both Biological Diversity (biodiversity) and Cultural Diversity. 1980 's was considered the decade of biodiversity, 1990's that of cultural diversity and 2000's a new field of Bio-Cultural diversity. In the first half of this paper the . interrelationship and interdependence between biodiversity and cultural diversity is discussed and in the second half how the modern global economic system is engulfing this diversity of life, knowledge, cultural heritage and practices are analysed The global distribution and patterns of biodiversity coincide with that of cultural diversity, therefore if languages and cultures disappear due to global pressure of homogenization we also lose knowledge about our environment leading to biodiversity depletion~ It is quite noticeable that the countries with people speaking largest number of languages; and countries with greatest number of traditional livelihoods and indigenous communities obviously have the greatest biological diversity. Thus only a sustainable approach can bridge the gap between modern visions of human beings and traditional cultural aspirations thereby ensuring holistic development.

The importance of montane regions for biological diversity is well known. We also know that mountains contain a great deal of cultural diversity, despite the relatively small number of people living in mountains compared to other regions. What has been less explored is the interrelationship between mountains, biological diversity, and cultural diversity. The study of biocultural diversity involves a search for patterns across landscapes. As an inherently spatial phenomenon, biocultural diversity can readily be explored through the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS). Our research has resulted in the development of a global database and map noting the linkage between high linguistic diversity and high plant diversity in montane regions throughout the world. In the present paper we focus mainly on the island of New Guinea to illustrate how important mountains are for biocultural diversity. The implications of this research for identifying areas in need of conservation and development strategies aimed at both biological and cultural diversity are briefly discussed.

Defining biocultural approaches to conservation

EMPRESAS SOCIALES RURALES, ESTRATEGIA DE DESARROLLO SUSTENTABLE Y CONSERVACION DEL PATRIMONIO CULTURAL INMATERIAL. CASO: “AMARANTO (Amaranthus spp) DE MESOAMERICA”

Biological diversity

Distribution of biological organisms and human’s utilization is significantly related and its interaction between nature and human creates culture. However, ecosystems and habitats will disappear by reckless development and climate change. Unique biological creatures that had been contributed to maintain the traditional ecological culture are drastically disappearing. Although interesting in biodiversity is focused on species, habitat and ecosystem levels, human scale should be considered to understand recent global change and environmental issues on biodiversity loss. Therefore, it is necessary to strength and expands new paradigm on biocultural diversity beyond biological concept on biodiversity. Diversity of landscape (land or island) that had created biological and cultural diversity, however, is influencing both human tradition and life. Through the landscape, biological diversity can be structured, developed and changed.