The Tropical Conservation and Development Program at the University of Florida (TCD) has a long history of working collaboratively with communities, practitioners, and other local organizations to bridge academic and practical ways of knowing and contribute to effective implementation of conservation linked to human well-being. Notable examples include MERGE and Working Forests in the Tropics. A recent major TCD project on Governance and Infrastructure in the Amazon (GIA) demonstrated the lead role that forest and riverine peoples play in effective protection of the landscapes where they live and have sovereign rights. They have done this from time immemorial, not as “conservationists” but inherently to their way of life and conception of themselves.
In dialogue with GIA partners, especially community leaders, about how to build on the project’s first phase, we got a clear message that they did not see themselves as “beneficiaries” of knowledge and training provided by academia, but as partners in a reciprocal exchange of knowledge and experiences (“diálogo de saberes”). Embedded in this discussion was a challenge to equalize power relations between forest communities and outside supporters, including academia (Sabo et al. in prep.). In response, we convened thematic working groups and a “Voices from the Forest” workshop to integrate academic and Indigenous worldviews and create a shared vision of conservation (video, project concept).
This trajectory aligned us with the emerging field of biocultural conservation, and motivated TCD and the GIA team to deepen our conceptual understanding of biocultural conservation, learn about its implementation in practice, and assess needs and opportunities for academia to effectively contribute to biocultural conservation. During 2023, with support from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the UF Office of Research, a working group of UF/TCD faculty and students conducted an extensive review of academic literature; reviewed and consulted leading academic programs; reviewed past TCD programs and interviewed TCD alumni. Finally, to assess specific needs and opportunities in the Amazon region, we consulted leaders of Indigenous community organizations, NGOs who work closely with communities, and regional academic programs.
We hope that this space is a point of departure to assess possible future actions and collaborations among the academic community, practitioners, community leaders, and funders. We look forward to feedback and continued discussion. Below you will find a list of the Program’s products so far, that includes a white paper, reports, conceptual proposal and others.
- Literature review on the biocultural conservation concept and its implementation in practice.
- White paper on how academic programs can effectively support a biocultural approach to conservation.
- Conceptual proposal on how to put these approaches and principles into practice.
For over thirty years, the University of Florida Tropical Conservation and Development Program (TCD) has excelled in training future leaders on the problems and solutions of tropical development through interdisciplinarity, collaborative research, and capacity-training. TCD has a robust history bridging theory and practice to advance biodiversity conservation, sustainable resource use, and human well-being in the tropics and elsewhere (https://uftcd.org/). TCD is now interested in exploring how it can better respond to the wicked problem of biocultural conservation (BCC).
Based on our literature review and conceptual understanding of biocultural conservation (Buschbacher et al. in prep.), we identify two fundamental premises of biocultural conservation:
- Interdependence of biological and cultural diversity. Effective conservation requires integrated conservation strategies across biophysical and cultural realms (knowledge systems, spirituality, language).
- Indigenous (or community) agency and empowerment. Local communities with sovereign territory and a strong sense of identity, place and social integration are the key protagonists of biocultural conservation.
Biocultural approaches can expand existing conservation frameworks by identifying and honoring the relationships between people and other parts of nature, offering actions based on conservation priorities and cultural values aligned with local priorities (Maffi 2010; Gavin et al. 2015). Rather than breaking the relations between people and other parts of nature, there is the need to include a larger range of worldviews, knowledge, and values that capture place-based relationships that support social–ecological systems over the long term (Sterling et al 2017; Reyes-Garcia et al. 2022). Reyes-Garcia et al. (2023) reflect on the importance of adopting biocultural conservation as a guiding framework for assessing academia’s role in invoking transformative change. The biocultural conservation approach, or community-based conservation in general, promotes individual and collective choices that can move political will toward protecting and enhancing the biocultural conservation vision.
Our literature review of academic experiences and research aimed at the implementation of biocultural conservation (Fonseca et al. in prep.) identified 5 emergent themes for the implementation of biocultural conservation:
- Indigenous (or community) empowerment and agency
- Collaboration and partnership
- Knowledge
- Rights and Governance
- Territorial/resource/species management
Communities are embedded within multi-scalar legal; policy, economic and governance systems, and biocultural conservation is a long-term process. Therefore, the needs and opportunities for academia to contribute to biocultural conservation are wide-ranging, calling for bi-directional and multi-directional linkage and collaboration between academia, communities, local government, regional and national governments to address biophysical, sociocultural and governance challenges.
Both reviews of biocultural conservation highlight empowerment and agency of local communities. The role of academia must be seen as supporting these “front line conservationists,” with implications for the nature of collaborative relationships, the focus and approach to knowledge, and the purpose and goals of their activities. Our fundamental premise is that academia must incorporate and address the needs and interests of potential community partners.
Academia is primarily engaged with production and dissemination of knowledge. The foregoing considerations emphasize that knowledge must be co-constructed and thus transdisciplinary. Furthermore, the way that academia works interactively with Indigenous and traditional communities must be productive for all and contribute to both short and long-term outcomes.
Synthesizing these considerations, we propose a framework of three key dimensions of an academic approach to biocultural conservation:
- Collaborative: Foster partnerships and collaboration to leverage resources, expertise and networks; awareness and addressing of power relationships. In the case of academia, fundamentally addressing relational power calls for co-designing and co-implementing research, education and capacity activities.
- Transdisciplinary knowledge: Recognition, dialogue and integration of plural (academic and non-academic) forms of knowledge, worldviews, and ways of knowing.
- Impact oriented: Address the needs of local communities, aiming for positive outcomes in the present while also increasing capacity for the future.
Figure 1: Three dimensions of an academic approach to Biocultural Conservation.
We use this framework to structure our analysis and presentation of principles, new approaches, and best practices for how we can incorporate a biocultural approach into academia to effectively contribute to addressing Biocultural Conservation as a potential solution to the interconnected challenges of climate change mitigation, biodiversity protection, and socioenvironmental justice.