Operationalizing the biocultural perspective in conservation practice: A systematic review of the literature

Abstract

The term ‘biocultural’ brings together the words ‘biological’ and ‘cultural’ to emphasize the interconnected nature of life and human culture. Over the last 50 years, biological and cultural diversity have shown concomitant declines in abundance, leading researchers, policy makers, activists and Indigenous Peoples to increasingly turn towards biocultural theory for potential pathways forward. Amidst increasing conversations and uses of the term ‘biocultural’, we sought to interrogate the current state of knowledge within biocultural theory and to identify the various ways the term ‘biocultural’ is being applied in the academic literature on conservation. To explore this research question, we conducted a systematic review of the literature that has meaningfully engaged with biocultural theory between 2002 and 2019 to explore the most concrete and promising pathways forward for effective and ethical on-the-ground implementation. After tracing key definitions and the evolution of the term over time, we find that the word ‘biocultural’ is most commonly being applied in the realms of biocultural diversity, biocultural heritage, and biocultural approaches. After offering an overview of each of these areas, we conclude with three central findings. Firstly, we find that biocultural theory remains deeply rooted in seminal discussions around biocultural diversity. It is from this foundation that new areas of research and application have emerged in the last decade, including biocultural heritage, biocultural approaches to conservation, biocultural landscape and biocultural rights, amongst others. Secondly, biocultural theory retains strong roots in Indigenous rights and advocacy, which were originally articulated in the Declaration of Belem (1988) and continue to be evidenced by the large percentage of papers in our sample which focused on Indigenous perspectives related to biocultural diversity. Finally, we find that biocultural theory remains largely conceptual in nature, with indications that only in recent years have more applied, on-the-ground case studies started to emerge in the literature.