A new extinction risk metric considers how cultures care for species

In the shallow coastal waters of the Indian and Pacific oceans, it works as a scrounging relative of the manatee. Environmental factors such as pollution and habitat loss pose a major threat to the dugong (Dugong Dugon) survived, so much so that in December, the International Union for Conservation of Nature upgraded the species’ endangered status to vulnerable. Some countries are now endangered or critically endangered.

If that wasn’t bad enough, the sea cows are in danger of losing the protection of a population that has long watched over them: the Torres Strait Islands. These indigenous people on the coast of Australia have historically been stewards of the dugong population there, supporting the animals and monitoring their population. But the Straits Islands are also under threat, in part because sea levels are rising and sinking in their communities, and warmer air and sea temperatures are making it harder for people to live in the region.

This situation is not unique to dugongs. A global analysis of 385 important plant and animal species found that 68 percent are both biologically vulnerable and at risk of losing cultural protections, researchers reported on January 3. Journal of the Academy of Sciences.

The findings clearly illustrate that biology should not be the primary factor in shaping conservation plans, says cultural anthropologist Victoria Reyes-García. As culture declines, species that are important to culture are also threatened. To be more effective, more conservation efforts must consider the vulnerability of both the species and the people who have historically cared for them, he says.

“A lot of people in the conservation arena think it is necessary to separate people from nature,” says Reyes-García, of the Catalan Institute for Research and Advanced Studies and the Autonomous University of Barcelona. But that art has overlooked the caring relationship many cultural groups – like the Torres Strait Islanders – have with nature, he says.

“Indigenous people, local communities, other ethnic groups – they are good stewards of their biodiversity,” said Ina Vandebroek, an ethnobotanist at the University of the West Indies at Mona in Kingston, Jamaica, who was not involved in the work. “They have knowledge, deep knowledge, about their environments that we really cannot ignore.”

One way to help change conservation efforts is to give species a “biocultural status,” which provides a more complete picture of their vulnerability, Reyes-García and colleagues say. In the study, the group’s existing language use is vital research to determine the risk of a culture disappearing: The more a cultural group’s language use declines, the more that culture is threatened. The more a culture is threatened, the more vulnerable its important species are. Researchers therefore combined the species’ cultural and biological vulnerability to arrive at its biocultural status. In the case of the dugong, its biocultural status is endangered, meaning it is more at risk than its IUCN category suggests.

This approach to intersectional conservation can help species involving people who have historically cared (SN: 3/2/22). It can also be stressful when communities continue to support their stewardship, Reyes-García says. He hopes that this new framework will lead to more conservation efforts that recognize the rights of local communities and encourage their participation – based on people’s connection with nature instead of creating more separation (SN: 3/8/22).