Kamaljit K. Sangha , Ronju Ahammad , Jeremy Russell-Smith , Leigh-Ann Wolley , ASRAC Aboriginal Corporation , Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation , Djabuguy Aboriginal Corporation
{"title":"A nature-based solutions assessment framework integrating indigenous biocultural and ecosystem services perspectives: An Australian example","authors":"Kamaljit K. Sangha , Ronju Ahammad , Jeremy Russell-Smith , Leigh-Ann Wolley , ASRAC Aboriginal Corporation , Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation , Djabuguy Aboriginal Corporation","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Assessing ecosystem services (ES) indicators has become vital to measuring the condition of ecosystems and their benefits, and informing policy and businesses for appropriate conservation and investment decisions. However, the ES indicators depending on ecosystem type, and the tools and measures developed to date mostly consider ecological attributes with little relevance to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLC) contexts. Here, together with Australian Indigenous community participants, we assess and co-develop an integrated set of ecological and socio-cultural indicators, and associated assessment tools. We reviewed relevant global literature and conducted focus group meetings with three Indigenous groups, representing Traditional (Land) Owners, senior community members and rangers in northern Australia. Our literature review identified 30 ES indicators and associated assessment tools, addressing provisioning, regulating, biodiversity and cultural services, primarily across the forest, agriculture, wetland and grassland ecosystems. Largely, biodiversity and regulating services encompassed ecological indicators rather than provisioning and cultural services. Notably, the IPLC context was not captured within the reviewed literature on indicator frameworks. The results from focus group discussions with Indigenous participants addressed this gap, describing 16 appropriate indicators (and associated measurement tools) for assessing Indigenous people’s socio-cultural, ecological and economic experiences and aspirations. The proposed bottom-up, integrated biophysical and bio-cultural indicator framework empowers local communities and is useful for informing practitioners and emerging incentivising/Payment for ES schemes. Our conceptual framework is generic to adapt to any local context, and offers potential application in evolving Nature-based Solutions markets and for informing socio-economic, natural resource use management, and policy-related IPLC contexts in Australia and globally.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 113230"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25001591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Assessing ecosystem services (ES) indicators has become vital to measuring the condition of ecosystems and their benefits, and informing policy and businesses for appropriate conservation and investment decisions. However, the ES indicators depending on ecosystem type, and the tools and measures developed to date mostly consider ecological attributes with little relevance to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLC) contexts. Here, together with Australian Indigenous community participants, we assess and co-develop an integrated set of ecological and socio-cultural indicators, and associated assessment tools. We reviewed relevant global literature and conducted focus group meetings with three Indigenous groups, representing Traditional (Land) Owners, senior community members and rangers in northern Australia. Our literature review identified 30 ES indicators and associated assessment tools, addressing provisioning, regulating, biodiversity and cultural services, primarily across the forest, agriculture, wetland and grassland ecosystems. Largely, biodiversity and regulating services encompassed ecological indicators rather than provisioning and cultural services. Notably, the IPLC context was not captured within the reviewed literature on indicator frameworks. The results from focus group discussions with Indigenous participants addressed this gap, describing 16 appropriate indicators (and associated measurement tools) for assessing Indigenous people’s socio-cultural, ecological and economic experiences and aspirations. The proposed bottom-up, integrated biophysical and bio-cultural indicator framework empowers local communities and is useful for informing practitioners and emerging incentivising/Payment for ES schemes. Our conceptual framework is generic to adapt to any local context, and offers potential application in evolving Nature-based Solutions markets and for informing socio-economic, natural resource use management, and policy-related IPLC contexts in Australia and globally.
期刊介绍:
The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published.
• All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices.
• New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use.
• Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources.
• Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators.
• Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs.
• How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes.
• Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators.
• Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.