BRUNCKHORST, D.J. (1995) Sustaining
Nature and Society - A Bioregional Approach. Inhabit
3: 5-9.
D.J. Brunckhorst
Australian Nature Conservation Agency
PO Box 636 Canberra 2601 Australia
Introduction
Novel approaches to sustaining society and biodiversity are needed.
The impetus for the development of innovative approaches in the
theory, practice and research for planning and managing on a regional
basis comes from several directions, including economic, ecological
and social studies. In essence, these studies have observed failures
in current planning and management to employ scientific activity,
to produce practical information for decision making and planning
that meets socio-economic needs while conserving and respecting
the limits of biophysical resources. Many of these problems relate
more to management problems than to our lack of knowledge about
ecosystems and human effects on them. Such management problems
include, for example, too much top-down approaches, economic determinism,
institutional and cross-jurisdictional competition and poor use
of existing information.
Sustainable Societies: Social History Lessons
Each generation has its own rendezvous with the land, for despite our fee titles and claims of ownership, we are all brief tenants on this planet. By choice or by defalt, we will carve a land legacy for our heirs.
Stewart L. Udall
The Quiet Crisis
The founder of the social ecology discipline, Murray Bookchin, contends that all environmental problems are social problems, indeed he says that it is a "rapacious society (cf. people) unsure about its own nature and direction" which is responsible for eroding and degrading the environment.
The evolution of social values compatible with ecological sustainability probably goes back to the beginnings of human society. Bellett argues that morality began as a necessary element of co-operative social behaviour during our evolution as hunter-gatherers. Mutual benefit and the desire for approval might drive this process. Cultural beliefs about reality and the nature of the 'good life' probably guides human perception of what is to be of sufficient mutual benefit to require restraint, and therefore social approval. It is interesting to note that the political origins of 'bioregionalism', can be traced back to the eighteenth century when agrarian communities were threatened by the burgeoning industrial revolution.
No doubt, cultures of modern societies are more complex and multi-faceted, however their fundamental basis remains unchanged. Values consistent with ecological sustainability are constrained by a given community's cultural history. Such values must be perceived to be in the long term interests of the people and their descendants (Bellett 1990). Hence, development of ethics, practices, management or action plans which ignore biological and cultural reality are unlikely to be agents of change.
Landscapes and seascapes are not just visual symbols of natural
or human environments, they are agents of cultural power by which
social and subjective identities evolve.
Ecosystems, greater ecosystems and landscapes
The most common use of the term ecosystem is in a localised sense referring to a distinct and coherent assemblage of organisms and the physical environment with which they interact. It is supposed to represent a bounded, self-maintaining system of varied, living and non-living, interacting parts.
Several obstacles are now known to limit ecosystem approaches to integrated environmental planning. These include obstacles to integration not only of a narrow view and application of ecosystem-based management, but also impediments to holistic approaches to watershed management, wildlife management, community based programs, land/sea management and resource use, and ecologically sustainable development. In fact it is very difficult to define human management units within such a framework. So, there are information base and conceptual problems in applying systems approaches in general and ecosystem approaches in particular to social environmental issues. Finally, the connectivity of nature (including human activity) across adjacent and even more distant ecosystems is increasingly being recognised.
There are, of course, a whole lot of other obstacles to integration which I will not deal with here, suffice to say that, in general, their successful integration will be at the scale of across related ecosystems at a minimum.
Hence, there is a growing necessity and interest in the broader use of concepts of ecosystem for management, and a growing number of precedents for its broader use (e.g., Slocombe 1992, 1993, Noss 1983, 1994, Brunckhorst & Bridgewater 1994). Grumbine (1990) encouraged this broader view of ecosystems, referring to it as a greater-ecosystem concept that is useful for planning and management at regional scales.
Ultimately a synthesis of desirable and culturally meaningful
characteristics are required in a bioregional planning framework
to integrate environmental and sustainable development objectives
(Figure 1). The developing landscape ecology discipline attempts
to couple biodiversity, ecosystem function and larger scale processes.
A strategic bioregional framework for planning and management
reflects nature and society - it is multi-stakeholder groups that
are striving to establish co-operative programs that address ecological,
cultural and economic issues at the scale of the regional landscape
(Brunckhorst & Bridgewater 1994).
Protected Areas in the Landscape
The entry of landscape ecology into the areana of environmental policy and planning has not been without difficulties and a process requiring cultural and institutional change (see Slocombe 1993). People traditionally responsible for policy, law planning, and research (politicians, bureaucrats, social scientists, lawyers and engineers) had little or no background in ecology. Likewise, ecologists were equally devoid of an understanding of social needs, policy, finance or planning. However,the integrative framework provided by "cultural bioregional theory" based on landscape ecology is beginning to take shape. Through landscape ecology, many other aspects of the arts, culture and science are integrated (Caldell 1990). If sustainability is to be an achievable human aspiration, there must be few barriers between fields of expertise and an enabling function, including building the various resource capacities and sectoral interests required.
What is the role of protected areas in sustaining nature and society? An important element of any strategy to maintain ecosystem function and biodiversity is a system of protected areas, which should be designed and managed to represent and protect the diversity of ecological processes, communities, species and gene pools (Global Biodiversity Strategy 1992). Establishment of conservation reserves have generally been opportunistic and ad hoc. Hence, most systems of protected areas whether terrestrial or marine do not represent the diversity of ecosystems and species assemblages adequately and it is unclear how individual reserves, large or small, contribute to the maintenance of ecological process and function at regional and larger scales. Therefore, future proposals for new reserves will need to be efficient and scientifically defensible. They should also aim to contribute to social aspirations.
The main objectives of protected areas are to assist in the maintenance of ecosystem function and biological diversity across landscapes and seascapes.
However, the functions of reserves (should) go far beyond the usual perception of the word "protection". They are valuable, beyond their boundaries, in providing for the rehabilitation of environments, as nutrient sinks, for landscape stability and, the replenishment of species assemblages, or the protection of natural resource stocks for breeding or recruitment to other places. In highly modified and degraded areas a principle objective of a protected area may be as much to restore ecosystems and their functions as to protect them. The role of habitat restoration and recombinant ecology for enlarging, redesigning and linking protected areas is also likely to become increasingly important.
Clearly, a reserve system is not the solution in itself. This will ultimately depend on the success of a wide range of applications outside reserves that ensure landscape and seascape scale functional protection, habitat restoration and ecologically sustainable use. Networks of reserves need to be better managed in concert with entire regions. Accordingly, the recognition of ecological linkages across landscapes is a critical issue in the establishment of reserves, conservation efforts outside reserves, and sustainable resource use.
These connectivities already exist in nature - we need human management
systems which reflect these natural processes - a bioregional
planning framework could help achieve these common goals (Brunckhorst
& Bridgewater 1994).
Definitions: Bioregions and Bioregional Planning Frameworks
Cultural bioregions (= bioregions herein) should be the ultimate management units for sustainable societies. These are "practical" bioregions for planning and management purposes. Bioregions need to be 'recognisable' environmentally and to the people that live there and identify with them. Within a bioregional framework for planning and management, uncertainty (or lack of knowledge) about the status and function of marine ecosystems can be incorporated into an adaptive management strategy - an approach that relies on continual assessment and adjustment.
Ecologically sustainable use, supported strongly by research and monitoring, core protected areas, rehabilitation, and reduction and management of human impacts becomes the management paradigm.
I suggest the following definitions for the application of these concepts (after Brunckhorst 1994):
Bioregion - an area of land and/or water whose limits are defined not by political boundaries, but by the geographical distribution of biophysical attributes, ecological systems and human communities.
Bioregional planning - framework which allows for
the variously defined and tenured areas of land or sea within
a bioregion to be managed in a complementary way to achieve long
term nature conservation and human lifestyle objectives.
Implementing Bioregional Theory
There are four major elements to implementation:
This leads to the identification of the key tasks involved. I will suggest five very general (perhaps obvious) ones; there are others.
To develop and use a strategic bioregional framework, we recommend a process involving explicit environmental or biophysical regionalisation, readaptation to cultural identity with the environment by the communities that live there (cultural mapping excercises can be valuable), followed by explicit iterative reserve identification and selection within bioregions (Figure 2). This scientifically based procedure is designed to maximise the likelihood that protected area systems will collectively sample most biodiversity. It will also provide a flexible decision support framework for assessing the best solution to resolve inter-sectoral conflicts over land-sea use, as well as guidance for integrative local government planning and community group projects (Figure 2).
The first step combines broad scale (00's km) biophysical regionalisation
to identify relatively homogenous environmental units ('eco-regions').
This should be followed by pragmatic adjustment of delineated
regions to ensure cultural and community identity is maintained
with the bioregions - an essential requirement if bioregions are
to be socio-politically useful tools for ecological sustainability
goals (Figures 1, 2). Where data are available finer scale mapping
of species assemblages / communities is, of course, highly desirable.
Summary
I have provided some bits of philosophy and conceptual theory
for meditation. I hope, also a sense of direction for a strategic,
integrative, co-operative and flexible framework that I refer
to as a bioregional approach. These thoughts maybe useful in setting
a broad vision and to facilitate further discussion on these crucial
issues for biological and social sustainability.
The Author
David Brunckhorst has a PhD in zoology and works
on innovative reserve system design in the Australian Nature Conservation
Agency (formerly the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service).
Formally, David was principal adviser to the Federal Parliamentary
Standing Committee on the Environment. This paper does not necessarily
represent the views of either the government or the Agency. References
are available from the author on request
References (available on request)
Bellet 1990
Bookchin 1989
Brunckhorst 1994
Brunckhorst and Bridgewater 1994
Caldell 1990
Global Biodiversity Strategy 1992
Grumbine 1990
Noss 1983
Noss1994
Slocombe 1992
Slocombe 1993
Udall, Stewart L., ????
A cultivation function is required to bring about a sustainable society - creating a capacity within communities to look after their sustainable futures.
The special thing about our institutional culture is private money which is available over a much longer term basis than government money, including research money (driven by short term election cycles). We need to start balancing the two. Private funds have a choice between replacing government funds, or being able to lead and shape longer term visions for sustaining a healthy society - given the opportunity, they will do the later.
I would see as actually one of my important projects (at level
III integration) as enhancing the capacity of private funding
sources to engage in various partnerships.
George Atkin Pastoral Research Fund (melb) - postgrad.
George Alexandra Found.(melb) - health, welfare and conservation
The Andrews Foundation
Sir Reginald Myles - edu
Sidney Myer & Myer Foundation - community projects, env.
ANZ Banking gp. - env. a priority
Ian Potter Found. - sustainable land use, env. & consv.
Australia - American foundation (fulbright)
Thenie Baddans Bursary
Trust of William A Beazley
BHP Community Trust
Ella & Mitchell Brazier Trust
Winston Churchill Memorial Trust
John Clark Memorial Trust - psychology oriented projects that help communities to function as social units
Ian Clunes-Ross Trust - research esp. scientists and community
awareness
In addition there are various corporate interests genuinely interested in a sustainable society.