Biocultural restoration in Hawaiʻi also achieves core conservation goals

Abstract

Biocultural approaches to restoration have demonstrated multiple benefits for human communities, but the ecological benefits and trade-offs involved have received little attention. Using a case study from Hawaiʻi, we examined if forest restoration aimed at reviving and maintaining cultural interactions with the forest is compatible with other priority conservation metrics. We identified species of high biocultural value for an Indigenous (Native Hawaiian) community, and then tested if these species also have high conservation value in terms of their biogeographic origin, ability to support native wildlife, and ability to persist independently within the restored context. Additionally, we tested if an assemblage of species with high biocultural value can also support high functional trait diversity. We found bioculturally important species to have high conservation values for all metrics tested, except for the ability to conserve rare or endangered endemic species. However, a broader application of biocultural conservation, such as the revival of the "sacred forest" concept, can address this priority as part of a mosaic of different species assemblages and levels of access. We also found that biocultural value may, at least in part, be a function of coevolutionary time: the length of time over which a community has interacted with a given species. Given that forests are invaluable to many Indigenous communities and, given the existential threats many of these communities currently face, we suggest that forests containing species assemblages of high biocultural value, such as those in Hawaiʻi, be considered as critical cultural habitat.

The Dilemma of Scale: competing imperatives for global restoration

“…Recent work amplifies the concept, insisting that biophysical and cultural systems are inextricably linked (Hertog & Turnhout 2018; Winter et al 2018; Evans & Davis 2019), that cultural values of ecosystems are central to the task of restoration (Cross et al 2019), and that ecosystem restoration is a reflection of commonly held values and beliefs (Martin 2017). It demands explicit stakeholder equity (McDermott 2009), it centers social justice within the restoration framework (Winter et al 2020), and it situates SoER as part of a larger remediation process for communities (Fernández‐Manjarrés et al 2018).…”

The Hawaiian Koʻa Card: coral health and bleaching assessment color reference card for Hawaiian corals

“…Hawai'i has a long history of effective traditional resource management [39] and a more recent history of marine resource declines. There are major differences between traditional and contemporary management, but there are also similar elements and ways of incorporating past management practices that are vastly applicable today [40].…”

Three Approaches to Restoration and Their Implications for Social Inclusion

“…Resilience approaches incorporate elements of both the "return" and "reorganize" approaches discussed above, but differ in that they value regenerative capacities and stress the propensity for long-term management, study, and interaction across scales and among communities, researchers and other stakeholders (Winter et al 2020). These approaches often incorporate biophysical qualities and socio-cultural elements.…”