Where culture can link with biological diversity

What is culture? And how does culture link to biodiversity conservation? The concept of culture marshals multiple meanings, and has come to be defined differently depending on the historical era, ideology or social group. Nonetheless, UNESCO’s World Declaration on Cultural Diversity, has defined culture broadly as representing “psychological, physical, intellectual and emotional characteristics that a certain society or a societal group possesses.1 In addition, included in this are not only arts and literature, but also lifestyle, ways of harmony, values, traditions and religions as well.” The Korea National Culture Encyclopedia similarly emphasizes the relationship of humans with their environment, defining culture as a “product of physical-psychological processes through which the individuals or human populations of a society have changed nature.” Cultural diversity (that is, the diverse methods through which a group or a societal culture expresses culture (International Conference on Biological and Cultural Diversity, 2010) can therefore be expressed through a variety of methods, including artistic creation, production, dissemination, distribution and transmission, etc., in addition to the various methods of expression, proliferation and delivery of human cultural heritage through diverse cultural expressions. Here, I focus on the diverse and many links between culture and the environment that allow culture to exist, and that are transmitted through the generations.

Biocultural diversity – a practical encounter between biological and cultural diversity

Although the key aspects of biological diversity are separated mainly into species, habitats and ecosystems (reference), the influence of humans on bio-organisms occurs on a landscape scale and global scale. Need another sentence here to link the previous sentence with the next one. We therefore need to emphasize awareness of biological diversity that goes beyond biological concepts alone. In particular, biological diversity and cultural diversity are linked in landscapes where traditional livelihoods, and ultimately human survival, are based on natural resources (Wu, 2011). Within these landscapes, biological culture forms, advances and also changes (Maffi and Woodley, 2010; Hong, 2011a,b). Protected and sanctuary areas are now appearing throughout the world as the wisdom of utilizing bio-organisms is projected onto the entity of culture during the long history of the humankind. Residents protect these places and recognize them as places that represent their identity.

If biological diversity indicates ecological health and qualitative characteristics within the natural ecosystems, then cultural diversity has a critical capacity of improving the resilience of socio-ecological systems (Maffi, 1998). In order to ensure the survival of cultural diversity, the capacity of human systems that adapt to changes must be improved.

Table 1 presents a study that serves as a bridge that can connect nature with systems of culture, which are separated academically. Currently, many disciplines explore aspects of biodiversity and culture in isolation. Nonetheless, the disciplines and foci listed in Table 1 can serve as a bridge to connect biological and cultural diversity. For example, at the center of these fields, scientific knowledge (landscape ecology, biological diversity, etc.) can also be associated with development processes and international politics; international politics can be associated with the preservation of biological resources (Commons studies, political ecology, etc.); along with humanities research (anthropology, environmental sociology, environmental history, etc.) that is associated with significant changes in humans and societies (Rapport, 2006). Nature and culture come in contact in many areas, including values, religion, lifestyle, knowledge and language (Berkes, 2004; Berkes et al., 2000). The natural environment supports culture in that the process of culture, behavior, beliefs and diverse cultural results are manifested and settled in the landscape. The link between cultural diversity and biological diversity is practical, as well as spiritual. Throughout the world, because the key regions with high biological diversity tend to be inhabited by ethnic minorities and have high density in linguistic diversity, they are places of high importance in terms of cultural diversity. Since the 1990s, discussions about the link between biological diversity and cultural diversity have been actively conducted; the concepts of “bioculture” and “biocultural diversity,” where the boundaries of the two areas meet, are now established; and the related academic disciplines have been advancing rapidly (Pretty et al., 2009).

International recognition and proliferation of concept of biocultural diversity

Increasingly, business people and politicians in developed nations have been challenged to consider the severity of climate change and the effects of indiscriminant development. By using various cases, the level of dependence of humans on bio-organisms and ecosystems, and how culture is linked to biological diversity, and how culture has come to being have been explained. International organizations such as the UNEP, UNESCO, CBD and the IUCN, have demonstrated a high level of recognition for the mutual relationship between biological diversity and cultural diversity. For example, the UNEP GEO-4 (2007) recommended that human cultural diversity, which affects ecosystems and biological diversity, be included in the concept of biological diversity; the UNESCO has convened meetings of experts in Aichi, Japan (April 2004) and Paris, France (September 2007) to discuss action on biological diversity and cultural diversity. Furthermore, Article 8j of the CBD emphasizes the importance of sustainable use and preservation of biological diversity. Increasingly, scientific conferences are also focused on biological diversity and indigenous peoples; at the 4th IUCN World Conservation Congress (The Fourth WCC, Barcelona), included a symposium and events related to biological diversity and indigenous people. During 2009–2012, IUCN programs were approved to recognize the importance of cultural diversity and cultural values related to the nature and indigenous people. At the IUCN’s Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP), a variety of projects are being pursued under the vision that the world is intertwined with biological diversity and cultural diversity.

2010 was the UN’s International Year of Biological Diversity and also the International Year of Rapprochement of Cultures. These designations were particularly significant, given the destruction of Earth’s ecosystems due to climate change, indiscriminant development, resource use-motivated destruction of original forms of ecosystems, pollution, etc. and deterioration of value of biocultural diversity. Amidst the variety of commemorative programs conducted worldwide, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) international conference was held from 8 to 10 June 2010. The Convention on Biological Diversity is an inter-national agreement of the UNEP enacted in 1993 and purposed with the conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of diverse biological species, commercial use of genetic resources, and joint sharing of generated profits from these and other uses. As required indicators for discussions on the sustainability of the global environment and communities, interests in biological diversity and cultural diversity already carry an international importance (CBD, 2013).

The launch of ‘Island Biocultural Diversity Initiative’

Improving the quality of life of islanders by preserving and utilizing the unique biological resources and cultural resources of South Korea’s archetypal island region of the South–West Sea archipelago is well warranted; sharing their ecological values with the world is worthwhile as well (Hong, 2012). The 5th World Conservation Congress (WCC) held in Jeju-do, Korea in September 2012 highlighted the need to preserve biological diversity and use resources sustainably. It proposed and passed an initiative to “Strengthen Biocultural Diversity and Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Asia-Pacific Island Regions” (Table 2). This initiative noted that – due to the climate change-driven changes in fisheries of the island-coastal areas, excessive human activities and marine pollution – the sudden changes in the island ecosystems that have occurring have tipped the balance between humans and nature, damaging not only landscape diversity but also cultural diversity (Whittaker and Fernandez-Palacios, 2007). Humans have been utilizing the surrounding landscape and biological resources for a long-term and, have developed new species through cultivation (such as grains and live stocks). The utilization of biological diversity has become the background that promotes cultural diversity such as food culture, residence culture, and so on. Ecological knowledge in these island cultures appears to have surpassed neighboring regions and has been spreading at next generation. In addition, the local languages and dialects are susceptible to Westernization and are also facing rapid destruction. The indigenous knowledge of natural resource use is facing demise in a similar way to the biological diversity, affected by reckless energy development and land use (Hong et al., 2013).

How to preserve disappearing indigenous knowledge is therefore a major issue. In particular, if we believe that, as in the past, the future survival of humans will depend largely on biological diversity, then the biocultural flexibility and sustainability seen in mutual relationship between biological diversity and cultural diversity can be used to inform future co-existence with ecosystems that can support human existence. On the basis of ecological knowledge that uses the biological diversity of the island-coastal areas (that have become highly vulnerable ecosystems with increasing climate change and development), this proposal discusses the development of biocultural diversity and biocultural characteristics of sustaining mechanisms, while proposing co-operative networks with domestic and international organizations. The aim is to establish preservation strategies (Hong et al., 2013). The ‘Island Biocultural Diversity Initiative’ was launched through international workshops based on this proposition at the World Conservation Congress (WCC2012, Jeju-do), to provide leadership and encourage action that supports the retention of biocultural diversity.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST) (NRF-2009-361-A00007).

References

• Berkes, 2004 F. Berkes Rethinking community-based conservation. Conservation Biology, 18 (3) (2004), pp. 621-630
• Berkes et al., 2000 F. Berkes, J. Colding, C. Folke Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications, 10 (5) (2000), pp. 1251-1262
• CBD, 2013 CBD, 2013. Convention on biological diversity. United Nations Environment Programme. <http://www.cbd.int/convention/>.
• Hong, 2011a S.-K. Hong Biocultural diversity and traditional ecological knowledge in island regions of Southwestern Korea. Journal of Ecology and Field Biology, 34 (2) (2011), pp. 137-147
• Hong, 2011b S.-K. Hong Eco-cultural diversity in island and coastal landscapes: conservation and development. S.K. Hong, J. Wu, J.E. Kim, N. Nakagoshi (Eds.), Landscape Ecology in Asian Cultures, Springer-Tokyo (2011), pp. 11-28
• Hong, 2012 S.-K. Hong Tidal-flat islands in Korea: exploring biocultural diversity. Journal of Marine and Island Cultures, 1 (1) (2012), pp. 11-20
• Hong et al., 2013 S.-K. Hong, L. Maffi, G. Oviedo, H. Matsuda, J.-E. Kim Island biocultural diversity initiative. INTECOL E-bulletin, 7 (March) (2013), pp. 7-9
• International Conference on Biological and Cultural Diversity, 2010 International Conference on Biological and Cultural Diversity, 2010. Working document on a proposed joint programmes of work on biological and cultural diversity lead by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biodiversity and UNESCO, 2010 June 8–10, Montreal.
• Maffi, 1998 L. Maffi Language: a resource for nature. Nature and resources. UNESCO Journal on the Environment and Natural Resource Research, 34 (4) (1998), pp. 12-21
• Maffi and Woodley, 2010 L. Maffi, E. Woodley Biocultural Diversity Conservation – A Global Sourcebook. Earthscan, London (2010). 282p
• Pretty et al., 2009 J. Pretty, B. Adams, F. Berkes, Ferreira, S. de Athayde, N. Dudley, E. Hunn, L. Maffi, K. Milton, D. Rapport, P. Robbins, E. Sterling, S. Stolton, A. Tsing, E. Vintinner, S. Pilgrim The intersection of biological diversity and cultural diversity: towards integration. Conservation and Society, 7 (2) (2009), pp. 100-112
• Rapport, 2006 D.J. Rapport Sustainability science: an ecohealth perspective. Sustainability Science, 2 (2006), pp. 77-84
• Whittaker and Fernandez-Palacios, 2007 R.J. Whittaker, J.M. Fernandez-Palacios Island Biogeography-Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation. Oxford University Press (2007)
• Wu, 2011 J. Wu Integrating nature and culture in landscape ecology. S.K. Hong, J. Wu, J.E. Kim, N. Nakagoshi (Eds.), Landscape Ecology in Asian Cultures, Springer-Tokyo (2011), pp. 301-321