Advertisement

The contributions of UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme and biosphere reserves to the practice of sustainability science

Original Article
  • 2 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Concepts, Methodology, and Knowledge Management for Sustainability Science

Abstract

Sustainability science as a transdisciplinary academic field has taken off since the beginning of the twenty-first century. Recent reflections have traced its practical origins back to the 1980s when sustainable development became popularized. Using academic and governmental literature as primary sources, I argue that these reflections are incomplete and that the practices of sustainability science as espoused today are embedded in the establishment of a normative and pragmatic form of ecosystem sciences that emerged in Europe and North America in the early twentieth century—informed by scientific principles of holism, conservation, and faith in scientific expertise and by social sensibilities of love of nature, morality, and pragmatism. Following World War II, years of scientific and intergovernmental debate led to the creation of an international program of applied research and education in the 1970s—the Man and Biosphere (MAB) Programme of the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. The most enduring legacy of the MAB Programme is the world network of Biosphere Reserves, first initiated in 1976 and now numbering 669 in 120 countries. While this program is not the only contributor to sustainability science, this network became an embodiment of sustainability science, by implementing a use-inspired, transdisciplinary research and action program at the human–environment interface. A major challenge has been to generate consistent uptake and cross fertilization by scientists internationally. Reviewing the ideas and ideals that helped found the MAB Programme uncovers enduring institutional, methodological and epistemological challenges facing sustainability scientists and suggests opportunities to transform the research and practice of sustainability science so that they better align with contemporary aspirations and values.

Keywords

Sustainability science Man and Biosphere Programme UNESCO Biosphere reserve Transdisciplinarity Transformation Sustainable development Biodiversity conservation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Data for this research included documentary materials archived at UNESCO (Paris, France), available online, and the Wilfrid Laurier Archives (Waterloo, Canada). Records of Canada’s national program include the Francis Fonds (a collection of records now 50.6 meters long), Roots Fonds, Birtch Fonds, and Canadian BRs Association Fonds. My gratitude goes out to two pioneers of Biosphere Reserves in Canada and internationally—George Francis and the late Fred Roots. Staff at the Archives at Wilfrid Laurier University, particularly Joan Mitchell and Cindy Preece, provided ongoing assistance in this project. I am also grateful to the members of the Canadian Biosphere Reserves Association and the Canadian Commission for UNESCO. Over the years, I have been well supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. I appreciate the insights on drafts of this paper from Tim Jardine, Martin Price, Louis Reed-Wood, Toddi Steelman, and Andrew Watson and acknowledge direct assistance from Felicitas Egunyu with the references and from Colleen George and Yvonne Drebert in creating Fig. 1. Finally, I am grateful for the thoughtful comments by two anonymous reviewers and for the support of the journal’s editor and editorial assistant.

References

  1. Adiseshiah M (1970) Opening address. Use and conservation of the biosphere. In: Proceedings of the intergovernmental conference of experts on the scientific basis for rational use and conservation of the resources of the biosphere Paris, 4–13 September 1968. UNESCO, Paris. pp. 237–239Google Scholar
  2. Alice M, Evans HE (1970) William Morton Wheeler, Biologist. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrow H (1923) Geography as human ecology. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 13:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batisse M (1982) The biosphere reserve: a tool for environmental conservation and management. Environ Conserv 9:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batisse M (1986) Developing and focusing the biosphere reserve concept. Nat Resour 22:2–11Google Scholar
  6. Batisse M (1993) The silver jubilee of MAB and its revival. Environ Conserv 20:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bavington D (2002) Managerial ecology and its discontents: exploring the complexities or control, careful use and coping in resource and environmental management. Environments 30:3–21Google Scholar
  8. Bettencourt LMA, Kaur J (2011) Evolution and structure of sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19540–19545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blair F (1977) Big biology: the US/IBP. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, StroudsburgGoogle Scholar
  10. Bocking S (2004) Nature’s experts: science, politics and the environment. Rutgers University Press, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  11. Bocking S (2012) Nature on the home front: British ecologists’ advocacy for science and conservation. Environ Hist 18:261–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bridgewater P (2016) The Man and Biosphere programme of UNESCO: rambunctious child of the sixties, but was the promise fulfilled? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 19:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burton I (1963) The quantitative revolution and theoretical geography. Can Geogr 7:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caradonna JL (2014) Sustainability: a history. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Carson R (1962) Silent spring. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  16. Commoner B (1971) The closing circle: nature, man, and technology. Alfred A. Knopf, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Croker RA (1991) Pioneer ecologist: the life and work of Victor Ernest Shelford. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Danilina N (2001) The zapovedniks of Russia. George Wright Forum 18:48–55Google Scholar
  19. Di Castri F (1985) Twenty years of international programmes on ecosystems and the biosphere: an overview of achievements, shortcomings and possible new perspectives. In: Maline TF, Roederer JG (eds) Global change: the proceedings of a symposium sponsored by the international council of scientific unions (ICSU) during its 20th General Assembly in Ottawa, Canada on September 25, 1984. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 314–331Google Scholar
  20. Di Castri F, Hadley M, Damlamian D (1981) MAB: the man and the biosphere program as an evolving system. Ambio 10(2/3):52–57Google Scholar
  21. Di Castri F, Baker FWG, Hadley M (1984a) Ecology in practice, part 1: ecosystem management. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  22. Di Castri F, Baker FWG, Hadley M (1984b) Ecology in practice, part 2: the social response. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  23. Drack M (2009) Ludwig Von Bertalanffy’s early system approach. Syst Res Behav Sci 26:563–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ehrenfeld D (1992) Letter to science: conservation biology: its origins and definition. Science 255(5052):1625–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Engel RJ (1983) Sacred sands: the struggle for community in the Indiana dunes. Wesleyan University Press, MiddletownGoogle Scholar
  26. Fernández-Llamazares A, Cabeza M (2017) Rediscovering the potential of indigenous story telling for conservation practice. Conserv Lett 11(3):1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12398 Google Scholar
  27. Gavin MC, McCarter J, Berkes F, Meat ATP, Sterling EJ, Tang R, Turner NJ (2018) Effective biodiversity conservation requires dynamic, pluralistic. Partnersh Based Approaches Sustain.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061846 Google Scholar
  28. Gilbert VC (2013) Reflections on the beginnings of the George Wright Society and why it was created. George Wright Forum 30:85–95Google Scholar
  29. Golley FB (1984) Introduction. In: Cooley JH, Golley FB (eds) Trends in ecological research for the 1980s. Plenum Press, New York, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  30. Golley FB (1993) A history of the ecosystem concept in ecology: more than the sum of its parts. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  31. Grober U, Cunningham R (2012) Sustainability: a cultural history. Green Books, TotnesGoogle Scholar
  32. Hadley M (2006) A practical ecology: the man and the biosphere (MAB) programme. In: Petitjean P, Zharov V, Glaser G, Richardson J, de Padirac B, Archibald G (eds) Sixty years of science at UNESCO 1945–2005. UNESCO, Paris, pp 260–296Google Scholar
  33. Halffter G (1981) The Mapimi biosphere reserve: local participation in conservation and development. Ambio 10:3–96Google Scholar
  34. Hewitt CG (1915) The protection of birds. Report of the 6th annual meeting of the Commission of Conservation Canada, 6th Annual Report. Bryant Press, Toronto, pp 117–120Google Scholar
  35. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), United Nations Environment Programme, World Wildlife Fund, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, UNESCO (1980) World conservation strategy: living resource conservation for sustainable development. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnson JT, Howitt R, Cajete G, Berkes F, Louis RP, Kliskey A (2016) Weaving Indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our methods. Sustain Sci 11:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kajikawa Y, Saito O, Takeuchi K (2017) Academic landscape of 10 years of sustainability science. Sustain Sci 12:869–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kates R (2011a) From the unity of nature to sustainability science: ideas and practice. In: Weinstein MP, Turner RE (eds) Sustainability science: the emerging paradigm and the urban environment. Springer, New York, pp 3–19Google Scholar
  39. Kates R (2011b) Gilbert F. White 1911–2006. A biographical memoir. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  40. Kates R (2011c) What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19449–19450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kealiikanakaoleohaililani K, Giardina CP (2016) Embracing the sacred: an indigenous framework for tomorrow’s sustainability science. Sustain Sci 11:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Keller DR, Golley FB (2000) Introduction: ecology as a science of synthesis. In: Keller DR, Golley FB (eds) Philosophy of ecology: from science to synthesis. University of Georgia Press, Athens, pp 1–35Google Scholar
  43. Kwa C (2005) Alexander von Humboldt’s invention of the natural landscape. Eur Legacy 10:149–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lang D, Weik A, von Wehrden H (2017) Bridging divides in sustainability science. Sustain Sci 12:875–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Leopold A (1933) Game management. C. Scribner’s & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Leopold A (1949) A sand county almanac, and sketches here and there. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Maldague M (1981) The biosphere reserve concept: its implementation and its potential as a tool for integrated development. Communication 3/1 to UNESCO MAB for the UNESCO-ICSU conference and exhibit ecology in practice: establishing a scientific basis for land management. UNESCO, Paris (MAB/CONF.81/3/1) Google Scholar
  48. McCormick J (1995) The global environmental movement. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  49. Meine C (2004) Correction lines: essays on land, leopold, and conservation. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  50. Meine C, Soulé M, Noss RF (2006) “A Mission-driven discipline”: the growth of conservation biology. Conserv Biol 20:631–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mumford L (1956) Prospect. In: Thomas Jr. WL (with the collaboration of CO Sauer, M Bates and L Mumford, eds). Man’s role in changing the face of the earth, vol 2. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, pp. 1141-1152Google Scholar
  52. Odum E (1953) Fundamentals of ecology. W.B. Saunders Company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  53. Odum E (1959) Fundamentals of ecology, 2nd edn. W.B. Saunders Company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  54. Odum E (1971) Fundamentals of ecology, 3rd edn. W.B. Saunders Company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  55. Odum E (1977) The emergence of ecology as a new integrative discipline. Science 195:1289–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Osborn F (1948) Our plundered planet. Little, Brown & Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  57. Pearsall W (1950) Mountains and moorlands. Collins, St. James Place, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Petitjean P (2006a) Giving science for peace a chance: the post-war international laboratory projects. In: Petitjean P, Zharov V, Glaser G, Richardson J, de Padirac B, Archibald G (eds) Sixty years of science at UNESCO 1945–2005. UNESCO, Paris, pp 52–56Google Scholar
  59. Petitjean P (2006b) Visions and revisions: defining UNESCO’s scientific culture, 1945–1965. In: Petitjean P, Zharov V, Glaser G, Richardson J, de Padirac B, and Archibald G (eds) Sixty years of science at UNESCO 1945–2005. UNESCO, Paris, pp. 29–34Google Scholar
  60. Pooley SP, Mendelsohn JA, Milner-Gulland EJ (2013) Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science. Conserv Biol 28(1):22–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reed MG (2016) Conservation (in)action: renewing the relevance of biosphere reserves. Conserv Lett 9(6):448–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Reed MG, Massie M (2013) Embracing ecological learning and social learning: UNESCO biosphere reserves as exemplars of changing conservation practices. Conserv Soc 11(4):391–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rokaya P, Sheikholeslami R, Kurkute S, Nazarbakhsh M, Zhang F, Reed MG (2017) Multiple factors that shaped sustainability science journal: a 10-year review. Sustain Sci 12:855–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sauer C (1925) Morphology of landscape. Univ California Publ Geogr 2(2):19–53Google Scholar
  65. Schultz L, Duit A, Folke C (2011) Participation, adaptive co-management, and management performance in the world network of biosphere reserves. World Dev 39(4):662–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. SCOPE (Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment) (1992) Report from the man and the biosphere (MAB) ICSU/SCOPE evaluation committee. SC-93/CONF.215/INV.2 7 Dec 1992. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  67. Sheail J (1995) Nature protection, ecologists and the farming context: a UK historical context. J Rural Stud 11:79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Soulé M, Estes JA, Miller B, Honnold DL (2005) Strongly interacting species: conservation policy, management, and ethics. Bioscience 55(2):168–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T (2017) The challenges of the anthropocene for biosphere reserves. Parks 23(1):89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Takeuchi K, Osamu S, Lahoti S, Gondor D (2017) Growing up: 10 years of publishing sustainability science research. Sustain Sci 12:849–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tansley AG (1935) The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16:284–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tansley AG (1945) Our heritage of wild nature: a plea for organized nature conservation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  73. Taylor WP (1936) What is ecology and what good is it? Ecology 17:333–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tengö M, Hill R, Malmer P, Raymond CM, Spierenburg M, Danielsen F, Elmqvist T, Folke C (2017) Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond—lessons learned for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 26–27:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thomas Jr WL (1956) Introductory. In: Thomas Jr. WL (with the collaboration of CO Sauer, M Bates and L Mumford eds) Man’s role in changing the face of the earth, vol 1. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London. pp. xxi–xxxviiiiGoogle Scholar
  76. Udvardy M (1975) A classification of the biogeographical provinces of the world. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, MorgesGoogle Scholar
  77. UNESCO (1970a) Plan for a long-term intergovernmental and interdisciplinary programme on man and the biosphere. Report of the General Conference, UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  78. UNESCO (1970b) Use and conservation of the biosphere, proceedings of the biosphere conference. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  79. UNESCO (1971) International co-ordinating council of the programme on man and the biosphere (MAB). UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  80. UNESCO (1974) Task force on criteria and guidelines for the choice and establishment of biosphere reserves. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  81. UNESCO (1981) Ecology in practice: insights from the programme on man and the biosphere (MAB). UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  82. UNESCO (1982) Backgrounder: the MAB programme. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  83. UNESCO (1984) Action plan for biosphere reserves. Nat Resour 22(4):11–22Google Scholar
  84. UNESCO (2007) 3rd world congress of biosphere reserves: biosphere futures, UNESCO biosphere reserves for sustainable development. Background Paper to the Palacio Municipal de Congresos, Madrid. SC-08/CONF.401/5. Paris. October 25, 2007. Paris: UNESCOGoogle Scholar
  85. UNESCO (United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (1946) UNESCO Constitution. Paris, France. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15244&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. Accessed Nov 2014
  86. UNESCO-MAB (2015) MAB strategy 2015–2025. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  87. Van der Windt HJ (2012) Biologists bridging science and the conservation movement: the rise of nature conservation and nature management in the Netherlands, 1850–1950. Environ Hist 18:209–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Vernadsky V (1998) The biosphere, English edn. Copernicus, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vogt W (1948) Road to survival. William Sloane Associates Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  90. Washington Post (1974) Joint communique, Moscow July 3 1974. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/summit/archive/com1974-1.htm. Accessed Sept 2014
  91. White G (1945) Human Adjustment to Floods. Department of Geography Research Paper No. 29. University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  92. Whitehead AN (1925) Science and the Modern World. The University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  93. Whyte A (1982) The integration of natural and social sciences in the MAB programme. Int Soc Sci J 34:411–426Google Scholar
  94. Worster D (1994) Nature’s economy: a history of ecological ideas, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  95. Worster D (2014) The higher altruism. Environ Hist 19:716–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Worthington EB (1975) The evolution of IBP. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Environment and SustainabilityUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations