Conservation or co-evolution? Intermediate levels of aboriginal burning and hunting have positive effects on kangaroo populations in Western Australia

pre-printStudies of conservation in small scale societies typically portray indigenous peoples as either sustainably managing resources, or forsaking long-term sustainability for short-term gains. To explain this variability, we propose an alternative framework derived from a co-evolutionary perspective. In environments with long histories of consistent interaction, we suggest that local species will frequently be well adapted to human disturbance; but where novel interactions are introduced, human disturbance may have negative environmental consequences. To test this co-evolutionary hypothesis, we examine the effect of Aboriginal burning and hunting on hill kangaroo (Macropus robustus) abundance. We find that hill kangaroo populations peak at intermediate levels of human disturbance, showing that in ecosystems characterized by long-term human- environmental interactions, humans can act as trophic mediators, resulting in patterns consistent with epiphenomenal conservation. Framing the question within this co-evolutionary perspective provides an explanation for the underlying mechanisms that drive environmental outcomes of subsistence practices

Alternative aboriginal economies: Martu livelihoods in the 21st century

book chapterIn the western deserts of Australia, hunting and gathering endures as an important social and economic activity. That foraging persists within the boundaries of developed industrialized nation states may come as a surprise to those who evaluate foraging as less profitable than agricultural, wage or market alternatives (or to those who see it as a somehow inferior economic mode, e.g., Morgan 1877). However, the tendency to dismiss foraging as a less viable mode of production may be an error given the evidence that foraging can sometimes be the best option within constraints (e.g., Tucker et al 2010, Kramer and Greaves, chapter 2, this volume). If this is the case in Australia, then the maintenance of foraging into the twenty-first century may be as much an economic decision as one aimed at maintaining social relations, identity and connections to traditional lands and practices

The social significance of subtle signals

Acts of prosociality, such as donating to charity, are often analyzed similarly as acts of conspicuous advertising; both involve costly signals revealing hidden qualities that increase the signaller's prestige. However, experimental work suggests that grand gestures, even if prosocial, may damage one's reputation for trustworthiness and cooperativeness if they are perceived as prestige-enhancing: individuals may gain some types of cooperative benefits only when they perform prosocial acts in particular ways. Here, we contrast subtle, less obviously costly, interpersonal forms of prosocial behaviour with high cost displays to a large audience, drawing on the example of food sharing in subsistence economies. This 31 contrast highlights how highly visible prosocial displays may be effective for attracting new partners, while subtle signals may be crucial for ensuring trust and commitment with long term partners. Subtle dyadic signals may be key to understanding the long-term maintenance of interpersonal networks that function to reduce unanticipated risks

Emergent sustainability in open property regimes

Current theoretical models of the commons assert that common-pool resources can only be managed sustainably with clearly defined boundaries around both communities and the resources that they use. In these theoretical models, open access inevitably leads to a tragedy of the commons. However, in many open-access systems, use of common-pool resources seems to be sustainable over the long term (i.e., current resource use does not threaten use of common-pool resources for future generations). Here, we outline the conditions that support sustainable resource use in open property regimes. We use the conceptual framework of complex adaptive systems to explain how processes within and couplings between human and natural systems can lead to the emergence of efficient, equitable, and sustainable resource use. We illustrate these dynamics in eight case studies of different social–ecological systems, including mobile pastoralism, marine and freshwater fisheries, swidden agriculture, and desert foraging. Our theoretical framework identifies eight conditions that are critical for the emergence of sustainable use of common-pool resources in open property regimes. In addition, we explain how changes in boundary conditions may push open property regimes to either common property regimes or a tragedy of the commons. Our theoretical model of emergent sustainability helps us to understand the diversity and dynamics of property regimes across a wide range of social–ecological systems and explains the enigma of open access without a tragedy. We recommend that policy interventions in such self-organizing systems should focus on managing the conditions that are critical for the emergence and persistence of sustainability

Living on a flammable planet: interdisciplinary, cross-scalar and varied cultural lessons, prospects and challenges: Table 1.

Living with fire is a challenge for human communities because they are influenced by socio-economic, political, ecological and climatic processes at various spatial and temporal scales. Over the course of 2 days, the authors discussed how communities could live with fire challenges at local, national and transnational scales. Exploiting our diverse, international and interdisciplinary expertise, we outline generalizable properties of fire-adaptive communities in varied settings where cultural knowledge of fire is rich and diverse. At the national scale, we discussed policy and management challenges for countries that have diminishing fire knowledge, but for whom global climate change will bring new fire problems. Finally, we assessed major fire challenges that transcend national political boundaries, including the health burden of smoke plumes and the climate consequences of wildfires. It is clear that to best address the broad range of fire problems, a holistic wildfire scholarship must develop common agreement in working terms and build across disciplines. We must also communicate our understanding of fire and its importance to the media, politicians and the general public. This article is part of the themed issue ‘The interaction of fire and mankind’

Emergent sustainability in open property regimes

Current theoretical models of the commons assert that common-pool resources can only be managed sustainably with clearly defined boundaries around both communities and the resources that they use. In these theoretical models, open access inevitably leads to a tragedy of the commons. However, in many open-access systems, use of common-pool resources seems to be sustainable over the long term (i.e., current resource use does not threaten use of common-pool resources for future generations). Here, we outline the conditions that support sustainable resource use in open property regimes. We use the conceptual framework of complex adaptive systems to explain how processes within and couplings between human and natural systems can lead to the emergence of efficient, equitable, and sustainable resource use. We illustrate these dynamics in eight case studies of different social–ecological systems, including mobile pastoralism, marine and freshwater fisheries, swidden agriculture, and desert foraging. Our theoretical framework identifies eight conditions that are critical for the emergence of sustainable use of common-pool resources in open property regimes. In addition, we explain how changes in boundary conditions may push open property regimes to either common property regimes or a tragedy of the commons. Our theoretical model of emergent sustainability helps us to understand the diversity and dynamics of property regimes across a wide range of social–ecological systems and explains the enigma of open access without a tragedy. We recommend that policy interventions in such self-organizing systems should focus on managing the conditions that are critical for the emergence and persistence of sustainability

What do you mean, ‘megafire’?

BACKGROUND : ‘Megafire’ is an emerging concept commonly used to describe fires that are extreme in terms of size, behaviour, and/or impacts, but the term’s meaning remains ambiguous. APPROACH : We sought to resolve ambiguity surrounding the meaning of ‘megafire’ by conducting a structured review of the use and definition of the term in several languages in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. We collated definitions and descriptions of megafire and identified criteria frequently invoked to define megafire. We recorded the size and location of megafires and mapped them to reveal global variation in the size of fires described as megafires. RESULTS : We identified 109 studies that define the term ‘megafire’ or identify a megafire, with the term first appearing in the peer-reviewed literature in 2005. Seventy-one (~65%) of these studies attempted to describe or define the term. There was considerable variability in the criteria used to define megafire, although definitions of megafire based on fire size were most common. Megafire size thresholds varied geographically from > 100–100,000 ha, with fires > 10,000 ha the most common size threshold (41%, 18/44 studies). Definitions of megafire were most common from studies led by authors from North America (52%, 37/71). We recorded 137 instances from 84 studies where fires were reported as megafires, the vast majority (94%, 129/137) of which exceed 10,000 ha in size. Megafires occurred in a range of biomes, but were most frequently described in forested biomes (112/137, 82%), and usually described single ignition fires (59% 81/137). CONCLUSION : As Earth’s climate and ecosystems change, it is important that scientists can communicate trends in the occurrence of larger and more extreme fires with clarity. To overcome ambiguity, we suggest a definition of megafire as fires > 10,000 ha arising from single or multiple related ignition events. We introduce two additional terms – gigafire (> 100,000 ha) and terafire (> 1,000,000 ha) – for fires of an even larger scale than megafires.DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: A list of the references from which the data were extracted can be found in the Appendix A: Data sources. The data used in this study are openly available at zenodo.org: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6252145.Threatened Species Recovery Hub; NSW Bushfire Risk Management Research Hub; Australian Wildlife Society; World Wildlife Fund.http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gebZoology and Entomolog