The contribution of livestock breeds to biocultural landscapes – an overlooked topic

Authors and Affiliations: 

Stephen J.G. HALL

Estonian University of Life Sciences, Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences,Kreutzwaldi 5, Tartu, Estonia

Corresponding author: 
Stephen J.G. HALL
Abstract: 

Biocultural landscapes are the results of the conversion, by people, of pristine post-glacial environments. Livestock were the agents for these changes. The present-day diversity of livestock breeds is the result of the interaction of social, agronomic and environmental factors (Hall, 2004) and breeds have adaptive features, reflected in their geographical distributions (Hoffmann, 2013). Thus, livestock are interfaces between human activities and the biotic environment, providing physical links between ecosystem services and cultural heritage (Ovaska and Soini, 2016).
These ecosystem-culture links are often expressed as local food products, but livestock are also fundamental to the sustainable conservation and practical management of some of the most highly valued rural landscapes. Particularly in grazed woodlands and rangelands, as well as in pastures under common tenure, livestock breeds play key roles (Bernués et al., 2005; Eriksson, 2010). Because of their multifunctional nature, these landscapes can be difficult for policy makers to categorize (Jakobsson and Lindborg, 2015) and are often at particular risk of loss in spite of their cultural significance and visual appeal.
The understanding, interpretation, conservation, resilience and sustainable development of rural landscapes will be advanced by an appreciation of the diversities of locally adapted livestock breeds (Hessle et al., 2014). Livestock breeds provide a model for investigating the practicability of accommodating cultural values within the concept of ecosystem services (Cooper et al., 2016; Hirons et al., 2016; Winthrop, 2014). However, discourse on cultural landscapes seldom, if ever, takes account of livestock biodiversity.
The present paper will correct this omission by demonstrating how an understanding of livestock can deepen understanding of cultural landscapes and by proposing a theoretical framework for the appreciation of livestock breeds as biocultural phenomena.

References: 

Bernués, A., et al., 2005. An integrated approach to studying the role of grazing livestock systems in the conservation of rangelands in a protected natural park (Sierra de Guara, Spain). Livestock Production Science 96, 75-85.

Cooper, N., et al., 2016. Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’. Ecosystem Services 21, 218-229.

Eriksson, M. O. G., 2010. Management of Natura 2000 habitats. Fennoscandian wooded pastures 9070. Technical report 2008 21/24. European Commission, Brussels.

Hall, S.J.G. 2004. Livestock biodiversity. Genetic resources for the farming of the future. Blackwell Science.

Hessle, A., et al., 2014. Effects of breed on foraging sites and diets in dairy cows on mountain pasture. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 10, 334-342.

Hirons, M., et al., 2016. Valuing cultural ecosystem services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 41, 545-574.

Hoffmann, I., 2013. Adaptation to climate change - exploring the potential of locally adapted breeds. Animal 7, 346-362.

Jakobsson, S., Lindborg, R., 2015. Governing nature by numbers—EU subsidy regulations do not capture the unique values of woody pastures. Biological Conservation 191, 1-9.

Ovaska, U., Soini, K., 2016. Native breeds as providers of ecosystem services: the stakeholders’ perspective. TRACE: Finnish Journal for Human-Animal Studies 2, 28-51.

Winthrop, R. H., 2014. The strange case of cultural services: limits of the ecosystem services paradigm. Ecological Economics 108, 208-214.

Oral or poster: 
Oral presentation
Abstract order: 
10