Fishers' multidimensional knowledge advances fisheries and aquatic science.

Fishers' Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) has multidimensional contributions to improve fisheries and aquatic ecosystems science, ranging from algae to whales and including management, conservation, ecology, and impact assessment. The challenges are to sustain this knowledge, recognize its value, and to include ILK holders in resource management and decision-making.

Climate change and community fisheries in the arctic: A case study from Pangnirtung, Canada.

Coastal fishery systems in the Arctic are undergoing rapid change. This paper examines the ways in which Inuit fishers experience and respond to such change, using a case study from Pangnirtung, Canada. The work is based on over two years of fieldwork, during which semi-structured interviews (n = 62), focus group discussions (n = 6, 31 participants) and key informant interviews (n = 25) were conducted. The changes that most Inuit fishers experience are: changes in sea-ice conditions, Inuit people themselves, the landscape and the seascape, fish-related changes, and changes in weather conditions, markets and fish selling prices. Inuit fishers respond to change individually as well as collectively. Fishers' responses were examined using the characteristics of a resilience-based conceptual framework focusing on place, human agency, collective action and collaboration, institutions, indigenous and local knowledge systems, and learning. Based on results, this paper identified three community-level adaptive strategies, which are diversification, technology use and fisheries governance that employs a co-management approach. Further, this work recognised four place-specific attributes that can shape community adaptations, which are Inuit worldviews, Inuit-owned institutions, a culture of sharing and collaborating, and indigenous and local knowledge systems. An examination of the ways in which Inuit fishers experience and respond to change is essential to better understand adaptations to climate change. This study delivers new insights to communities, scientists, and policymakers to work together to foster community adaptation.

Social-ecological memory and responses to biodiversity change in a Bribri Community of Costa Rica.

Social-ecological memory (SEM) is an analytical construct used to consider the ways by which people can draw upon biological materials and social memory to reorganize following a disturbance. Since its introduction into the literature, there have been few cases that have considered its use. We use ethnographic methods to study Bribri people's commercial crops that have been invaded by different fungal pathogens and have undergone several disturbance recovery cycles. We show how the Bribri have used social memory and ecological memory together, dynamic interactions of legacies and reservoirs, and the role of mobile links for reorganization following the impact of fungal diseases. Insights from the Bribri indicate that protection of biodiversity, management practices, and adoption of new species and varieties are all crucial. The SEM concept extends the understanding of Indigenous knowledge, to include linkages to other peoples' memory and to landscapes as reservoirs of SEM. An understanding of how people use SEM to respond to disturbances is necessary as biodiversity changes are expected to become more pronounced in the future.

Defining biocultural approaches to conservation.

We contend that biocultural approaches to conservation can achieve effective and just conservation outcomes while addressing erosion of both cultural and biological diversity. Here, we propose a set of guidelines for the adoption of biocultural approaches to conservation. First, we draw lessons from work on biocultural diversity and heritage, social-ecological systems theory, integrated conservation and development, co-management, and community-based conservation to define biocultural approaches to conservation. Second, we describe eight principles that characterize such approaches. Third, we discuss reasons for adopting biocultural approaches and challenges. If used well, biocultural approaches to conservation can be a powerful tool for reducing the global loss of both biological and cultural diversity.

Participatory research towards co-management: lessons from artisanal fisheries in coastal Uruguay.

Participatory research has become increasingly common in natural resources management. Even though participatory research is considered a strategy to facilitate co-management, there is little empirical evidence supporting this. The objective of the present paper is to analyze the contributions of participatory research to help encourage the emergence of co-management, based on a case study in Piriápolis artisanal fishery in coastal Uruguay (where management has been top-down). We argue that participatory research involving artisanal fishers, government, and other stakeholders (university scientists and NGOs) can be a key stimulus towards co-management. We build this argument by considering "seven faces" by which co-management can be analyzed: (1) as power sharing; (2) as institution building; (3) as trust building; (4) as process; (5) as learning and knowledge co-production; (6) as problem solving; and (7) as governance. Our findings show that participatory research had an impact on these various faces: (1) power was shared when making research decisions; (2) a multi-stakeholder group (POPA), with a common vision and goals, was created; (3) trust among participants increased; (4) the process of group formation was valued by participants; (5) stakeholders learned skills for participation; (6) two problem-solving exercises were conducted; and (7) a diversity of stakeholders of the initial problem identified by fishers (sea lions' impact on long-line fishery) participated in the process. The case shows that participatory research functions as a platform which enhances learning and knowledge co-production among stakeholders, paving the way towards future co-management.

The importance of place names in the search for ecosystem-like concepts in indigenous societies: an example from the Bolivian Andes.

This paper aims to deepen the search for ecosystem-like concepts in indigenous societies by highlighting the importance of place names used by Quechua indigenous farmers from the central Bolivian Andes. Villagers from two communities in the Tunari Mountain Range were asked to list, describe, map and categorize the places they knew on their community's territory. Results show that place names capture spatially explicit units which integrate biotic and abiotic nature and humans, and that there is an emphasis on topographic terms, highlighting the importance of geodiversity. Farmers' perspectives differ from the classical view of ecosystems because they 'humanize' places, considering them as living beings with agency. Consequently, they do not make a distinction between natural and cultural heritage. Their perspective of the environment is that of a personalized, dynamic relationship with the elements of the natural world that are perceived as living entities. A practical implication of the findings for sustainable development is that since places names make the links between people and the elements of the landscape, toponymy is a tool for ecosystem management rooted in indigenous knowledge. Because place names refer to holistic units linked with people's experience and spatially explicit, they can be used as an entry point to implement an intercultural dialogue for more sustainable land management.

Aldo Leopold's land health from a resilience point of view: self-renewal capacity of social-ecological systems.

Health approaches to ecology have a strong basis in Aldo Leopold's thinking, and contemporary ecohealth in turn has a strong philosophical basis in Leopold. To commemorate the 125th anniversary of Leopold's birth (1887-1948), we revisit his ideas, specifically the notions of stewardship (land ethic), productive use of ecosystems (land), and ecosystem renewal. We focus on Leopold's perspective on the self-renewal capacity of the land, as understood in terms of integrity and land health, from the contemporary perspective of resilience theory and ecological theory more generally. Using a broad range of literature, we explore insights and implications of Leopold's work for today's human-environment relationships (integrated social-ecological systems), concerns for biodiversity, the development of agency with respect to stewardship, and key challenges of his time and of ours. Leopold's seminal concept of land health can be seen as a triangulation of productive use, self-renewal, and stewardship, and it can be reinterpreted through the resilience lens as the health of social-ecological systems. In contemporary language, this involves the maintenance of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and the ability to exercise agency both for conservation and for environmental justice.

Building co-management as a process: problem solving through partnerships in Aboriginal country, Australia.

Collaborative problem solving has increasingly become important in the face of the complexities in the management of resources, including protected areas. The strategy undertaken by Girringun Aboriginal Corporation in north tropical Queensland, Australia, for developing co-management demonstrates the potential for a problem solving approach involving sequential initiatives, as an alternative to the more familiar negotiated agreements for co-management. Our longitudinal case study focuses on the development of indigenous ranger units as a strategic mechanism for the involvement of traditional owners in managing their country in collaboration with government and other interested parties. This was followed by Australia's first traditional use of marine resources agreement, and development of a multi-jurisdictional, land to sea, indigenous protected area. In using a relationship building approach to develop regional scale co-management, Girringun has been strengthening its capabilities as collaborator and regional service provider, thus, bringing customary decision-making structures into play to 'care for country'. From this evolving process we have identified the key components of a relationship building strategy, 'the pillars of co-management'. This approach includes learning-by-doing, the building of respect and rapport, sorting out responsibilities, practical engagement, and capacity-building.

Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet.

Ecosystem stewardship is an action-oriented framework intended to foster the social-ecological sustainability of a rapidly changing planet. Recent developments identify three strategies that make optimal use of current understanding in an environment of inevitable uncertainty and abrupt change: reducing the magnitude of, and exposure and sensitivity to, known stresses; focusing on proactive policies that shape change; and avoiding or escaping unsustainable social-ecological traps. As we discuss here, all social-ecological systems are vulnerable to recent and projected changes but have sources of adaptive capacity and resilience that can sustain ecosystem services and human well-being through active ecosystem stewardship.

Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning.

Over a period of some 20 years, different aspects of co-management (the sharing of power and responsibility between the government and local resource users) have come to the forefront. The paper focuses on a selection of these: knowledge generation, bridging organizations, social learning, and the emergence of adaptive co-management. Co-management can be considered a knowledge partnership. Different levels of organization, from local to international, have comparative advantages in the generation and mobilization of knowledge acquired at different scales. Bridging organizations provide a forum for the interaction of these different kinds of knowledge, and the coordination of other tasks that enable co-operation: accessing resources, bringing together different actors, building trust, resolving conflict, and networking. Social learning is one of these tasks, essential both for the co-operation of partners and an outcome of the co-operation of partners. It occurs most efficiently through joint problem solving and reflection within learning networks. Through successive rounds of learning and problem solving, learning networks can incorporate new knowledge to deal with problems at increasingly larger scales, with the result that maturing co-management arrangements become adaptive co-management in time.

Politics of co-optation: community forest management versus Joint Forest Management in Orissa, India.

The article considers the impact of introducing government co-management policy in the form of Joint Forest Management (JFM) in an area with a five-decade-old self-organized community forest management system in Orissa, India. We ask a question that appears not to have been previously examined: What happens when JFM replaces an already existing community forest management arrangement? Our comparison of the JFM arrangement with the self-organized community forest management regime (pre- and post-2002 in a selected village) provides three conclusions: (1) The level of villager participation in forest management has declined, along with the erosion of the bundle of common rights held by them; (2) multiple institutional linkages between the village and outside agencies, and reciprocal relations with neighboring villages have been abandoned in favor of a close relationship with the Forestry Department; and (3) the administration of the forestry resource has become politicized. We conclude that the "one-size-fits-all" approach of the JFM, with its pre-packaged objectives and its narrow scope of forest management, is likely to limit experimentation, learning, and institutional innovation that characterizes community forest management.

Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef and the Grand Canyon world heritage areas.

Conventional perceptions of the interactions between people and their environment are rapidly transforming. Old paradigms that view humans as separate from nature, natural resources as inexhaustible or endlessly substitutable, and the world as stable, predictable, and in balance are no longer tenable. New conceptual frameworks are rapidly emerging based on an adaptive approach that focuses on learning and flexible management in a dynamic social-ecological landscape. Using two iconic World Heritage Areas as case studies (the Great Barrier Reef and the Grand Canyon) we outline how an improved integration of the scientific and social aspects of natural resource management can guide the evolution of multiscale systems of governance that confront and cope with uncertainty, risk, and change in an increasingly human-dominated world.

Community-based conservation in a globalized world.

Communities have an important role to play in biodiversity conservation. However, community-based conservation as a panacea, like government-based conservation as a panacea, ignores the necessity of managing commons at multiple levels, with vertical and horizontal interplay among institutions. The study of conservation in a multilevel world can serve to inform an interdisciplinary science of conservation, consistent with the Convention on Biological Diversity, to establish partnerships and link biological conservation objectives with local development objectives. Improving the integration of conservation and development requires rethinking conservation by using a complexity perspective and the ability to deal with multiple objectives, use of partnerships and deliberative processes, and learning from commons research to develop diagnostic tools. Perceived this way, community-based conservation has a role to play in a broad pluralistic approach to biodiversity protection: it is governance that starts from the ground up and involves networks and linkages across various levels of organization. The shift of attention to processes at multiple levels fundamentally alters the way in which the governance of conservation development may be conceived and developed, using diagnostics within a pluralistic framework rather than a blueprint approach.

Building resilience and adaptation to manage Arctic change.

Unprecedented global changes caused by human actions challenge society's ability to sustain the desirable features of our planet. This requires proactive management of change to foster both resilience (sustaining those attributes that are important to society in the face of change) and adaptation (developing new socioecological configurations that function effectively under new conditions). The Arctic may be one of the last remaining opportunities to plan for change in a spatially extensive region where many of the ancestral ecological and social processes and feedbacks are still intact. If the feasibility of this strategy can be demonstrated in the Arctic, our improved understanding of the dynamics of change can be applied to regions with greater human modification. Conditions may now be ideal to implement policies to manage Arctic change because recent studies provide the essential scientific understanding, appropriate international institutions are in place, and Arctic nations have the wealth to institute necessary changes, if they choose to do so.

Co-management: concepts and methodological implications.

Co-management, or the joint management of the commons, is often formulated in terms of some arrangement of power sharing between the State and a community of resource users. In reality, there often are multiple local interests and multiple government agencies at play, and co-management can hardly be understood as the interaction of a unitary State and a homogeneous community. An approach focusing on the legal aspects of co-management, and emphasizing the formal structure of arrangements (how governance is configured) runs the risk of neglecting the functional side of co-management. An alternative approach is to start from the assumption that co-management is a continuous problem-solving process, rather than a fixed state, involving extensive deliberation, negotiation and joint learning within problem-solving networks. This presumption implies that co-management research should preferably focus on how different management tasks are organized and distributed concentrating on the function, rather than the structure, of the system. Such an approach has the effect of highlighting that power sharing is the result, and not the starting point, of the process. This kind of research approach might employ the steps of (1) defining the social-ecological system under focus; (2) mapping the essential management tasks and problems to be solved; (3) clarifying the participants in the problem-solving processes; (4) analyzing linkages in the system, in particular across levels of organization and across geographical space; (5) evaluating capacity-building needs for enhancing the skills and capabilities of people and institutions at various levels; and (6) prescribing ways to improve policy making and problem-solving.

The dynamics of ecosystems, biodiversity management and social institutions at high northern latitudes.

Ecosystems at high latitudes are highly dynamic, influenced by a multitude of large-scale disturbances. Due to global change processes these systems may be expected to be particularly vulnerable, affecting the sustained production of renewable wood resources and abundance of plants and animals on which local cultures depend. In this paper, we assess the implications of new understandings of high northern latitude ecosystems and what must be done to manage systems for resilience. We suggest that the focus of land management should shift from recovery from local disturbance to sustaining ecosystem functions in the face of change and disruption. The role of biodiversity as insurance for allowing a system to reorganize and develop during the disturbance and reorganization phases needs to be addressed in management and policy. We emphasize that the current concepts of ecological reserves and protected areas need to be reconsidered to developp dynamic tools for sustainable management of ecosystems in face of change. Characteristics of what may be considered as customary reserves at high latitudes are often consistent with a more dynamic view of reserves. We suggest new directions for addressing biodiversity management in dynamic landscapes at high latitudes, and provide empirical examples of insights from unconventional perspectives that may help improve the potential for sustainable management of biodiversity and the generation of ecosystem services.

Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social-ecological systems.

Ecosystems are complex adaptive systems that require flexible governance with the ability to respond to environmental feedback. We present, through examples from Sweden and Canada, the development of adaptive comanagement systems, showing how local groups self-organize, learn, and actively adapt to and shape change with social networks that connect institutions and organizations across levels and scales and that facilitate information flows. The development took place through a sequence of responses to environmental events that widened the scope of local management from a particular issue or resource to a broad set of issues related to ecosystem processes across scales and from individual actors, to group of actors to multiple-actor processes. The results suggest that the institutional and organizational landscapes should be approached as carefully as the ecological in order to clarify features that contribute to the resilience of social-ecological systems. These include the following: vision, leadership, and trust; enabling legislation that creates social space for ecosystem management; funds for responding to environmental change and for remedial action; capacity for monitoring and responding to environmental feedback; information flow through social networks; the combination of various sources of information and knowledge; and sense-making and arenas of collaborative learning for ecosystem management. We propose that the self-organizing process of adaptive comanagement development, facilitated by rules and incentives of higher levels, has the potential to expand desirable stability domains of a region and make social-ecological systems more robust to change.