Abstract
Since the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, biodiversity has become an important topic for scientific research. Much of this research focuses on measuring and mapping the current state of biodiversity in terms of which species are present where, and how abundantly, and making extrapolations and future projections—that is, determining the trends needed for forest and nature governance. Biodiversity databases are crucial components of these activities because they store information about biodiversity and make it digitally available. For biodiversity databases to be useful, the data they contain must be reliable, standardised, and fit for upscaling. This chapter uses material from the EBONE project (European Biodiversity Observation Network) to illustrate how biodiversity databases are constructed, how data are negotiated and scaled, and how biodiversity is globalised. The findings show there is continuous interplay between scientific ideals related to objectivity and pragmatic considerations related to feasibility and data availability. A crucial feature of the discussions was statistics. It also proved to be the main device in upscaling the data. The material presented shows that biodiversity is approached in an abstract, quantitative, and technical way by a group of scientists, mostly ecologists, in a highly contextual setting, disconnected from the species and habitats that make up biodiversity and the people involved in collecting the data. Globalising biodiversity involves decontextualisation and standardisation. This chapter argues that while this is important if the results of projects like EBONE are to be usable in different contexts, there is a risk involved, as these processes may lead to the alienation of the organisations and volunteers who collect the data upon which these projects rely. If these abstract representations of biodiversity become normalised, this may result in a detached understanding of biodiversity itself and our relationships with it.
An earlier version of this chapter was published as Turnhout and Boonman-Berson (2011) Databases, scaling practices and the globalization of biodiversity. Ecology and Society, article no. 35, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art35/
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
The authors are indebted to Steve Woolgar who introduced the term ‘scaling device’ at the ‘Scaleography’ workshop, Oxford, 8 July, 2009.
- 3.
Such as those developed in earlier European Framework projects like ALTERNET, BioHab and EuMon.
- 4.
Most of the species data come from country-based recording organisations and monitoring schemes. The habitat data come from different habitat monitoring schemes, such as the Countryside Survey (UK), NILS (Sweden), SISPARES (Spain) and SINUS (Austria). The habitat data will be integrated using the habitat categories of the BioHab project.
- 5.
EBONE has ten work packages. For more information see http:www.ebone.wur.nl/UK.
- 6.
Using strata is a way to ensure that all relevant categories are sampled. In the case of biodiversity, meaningful strata are often based on habitat, soil type, biotope or land use classifications.
- 7.
This refers to the EU Habitats Directive. Annex 1 contains a list of habitat types for which EU member states are obliged to take protective measures.
References
Bell S, Marzano M, Cent J, Kobierska H, Podjed D, Vandzinskaite D, Reinert H, Armaitiene A, Grodzińska-Jurczak M, Muršič R (2008) What counts? Volunteers and their organisations in the recording and monitoring of biodiversity. Biodivers Conserv 17:3443–3454
Bisby FA (2000) The quiet revolution: biodiversity informatics and the internet. Science 289:S2309–S2312
Bowker GC (2000) Biodiversity datadiversity. Soc Stud Sci 30:643–683
BowkerBowker GC (2005) Memory practices in the sciences. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Bowker GC, Star SL (2000) Sorting things out, classification and its consequences. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Brus DJ, Knotters M, Metzger MJ, Walvoort DJJ (2011) Towards a European-wide sampling design for statistical monitoring of common habitats. Alterra Report, Wageningen, 2213
Bulkeley H (2005) Reconfiguring environmental governance: towards a politics of scales and networks. Polit Geogr 24:875–902
Bunce R, Metzger M, Jongman R, Brandt J, De Blust G, Elena-Rossello R, Groom G, Halada L, Hofer G, Howard D, Kovar P, Mücher C, Padoa-Schioppa E, Paelinx D, Palo A, Perez-Soba M, Ramos I, Roche P, Skånes H, Wrbka T (2008) A standardized procedure for surveillance and monitoring european habitats and provision of spatial data. Landscape Ecol 23:11–25
Bunce RGH, Groom GB, Jongman RHG, Padoa-Schioppa E (2005) Handbook for surveillance and monitoring of European habitats. Alterra Report, Wageningen, 1219
Callon M (1986) Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In: Law Power J (ed) Action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge?. Routledge, London
Cash DW, Adger N, Berker F, Garden P, Lebel L, Olsson P, Pritchard L, Young O (2006) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecol Soc 11(2), viewed on 12 December 2011. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art18/
Delaney D, Leitner H (1997) The political construction of scale. Polit Geography 16:93–97
EBONE (2012) WP 5 Inter-calibration of EO data with in situ observation. (online communication). Available at http://www.EBONE.wur.nl/UK/Project+Work+Packages/WP5+Inter-calibration/. Accessed 24 May 2012
Ellis R, Waterton C (2004) Environmental citizenship in the making: the participation of volunteer naturalists in UK biological recording and biodiversity policy. Sci Public Policy 31:95–105
Ellis R, Waterton C, Wynne B (2010) Taxonomy, biodiversity and their publics in twenty-first century DNA barcoding. Public Understanding Sci 19:497–512
Escobar A (1996) Construction nature : elements for a post-structuralist political ecology. Futures 28:325–343
Hajer MA (1995) The politics of environmental discourse, ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Halada L, Jongman RHG, Gerard F, Whittaker L, Bunce RGH, Bauch B, Schmeller DS (2009) The European biodiversity observation network—EBONE. In: Hrebicek J, Hradec J, Pelikán E, Pilmmann W, Holoubek I, Legat T (eds) Proceedings of the European conference of the Czech presidency of the Council of the EU: towards e-environment. Masaryk University, Prague
Hill RA, Smith GM (2004) CS2000 module 9: Data integration for localised results and support for indicators of countryside character and quality. Final report A5, NERC/Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Project Report Number C02124
Hine C (2008) Systematics as cyberscience: computers, change, and continuity in science. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Stud 14:575–599
Jasanoff S (2004) States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order. Routledge, London
Jones KT (1998) Scale as epistemology. Polit Geogr 17:25–28
Jones R (2009) Categories, borders and boundaries. Prog Hum Geogr 33:174–189
Latour B (1987) Science in action: how to follow engineers and scientists through society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Latour B, Woolgar S (1979) Laboratory life, the construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Lawrence A, Turnhout E (2010) Personal meaning in the public sphere: the standardisation and rationalisation of biodiversity data in the UK and the Netherlands. J Rural Stud 26:353–360
McGoey L (2007) On the will to ignorance in bureaucracy. Econ Soc 36:212–235
Meadowcroft J (2002) Politics and scale: some implications for environmental governance. Landscape Urban Plann 61:169–179
Pickering A (1992) From science as knowledge to science as practice. In: Pickering A (ed) Science as practice and culture. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Porter TM (1995) Trust in numbers: the pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Scott J (1998) Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press, New Haven
Shapin S, Schaffer S (1985) Leviathan and the air-pump: hobbes, boyle and the experimental life. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Stone DA (1988) Policy paradox and political reason. Scott, Foresman and Company, Illinios
Swyngedouw E (2000) Authoritarian governance, power, and the politics of rescaling. Environ Plan D 18:63–76
Takacs D (1996) The idea of biodiversity, philosophies of paradise. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Turnhout E (2009) The effectiveness of boundary objects: the case of ecological indicators. Sci Public Policy 36:403–412
Turnhout E (2010) Heads in the clouds: knowledge democracy as a utopian dream. In: In ‘t Veld R (ed) Knowledge democracy; consequences for science, politics and media. Springer, Berlin
West P, Brockington D (2006) An anthropological perspective on some unexpected consequences of protected areas. Conserv Biol 20:609–616
Wilson EO (2000) A global biodiversity map. Science 289:2279
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boonman-Berson, S., Turnhout, E. (2012). Globalising Biodiversity: Scientific Practices of Scaling and Databasing. In: Arts, B., Behagel, J., van Bommel, S., de Koning, J., Turnhout, E. (eds) Forest and Nature Governance. World Forests, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5113-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5113-2_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5112-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5113-2
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)