Advertisement

Ambio

, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 468–479 | Cite as

Shrines in Central Italy conserve plant diversity and large trees

  • Fabrizio Frascaroli
  • Shonil Bhagwat
  • Riccardo Guarino
  • Alessandro Chiarucci
  • Bernhard Schmid
Report

Abstract

Sacred natural sites (SNS) are instances of biocultural landscapes protected for spiritual motives. These sites frequently host important biological values in areas of Asia and Africa, where traditional resource management is still upheld by local communities. In contrast, the biodiversity value of SNS has hardly been quantitatively tested in Western contexts, where customs and traditions have relatively lost importance due to modernization and secularization. To assess whether SNS in Western contexts retain value for biodiversity, we studied plant species composition at 30 SNS in Central Italy and compared them with a paired set of similar but not sacred reference sites. We demonstrate that SNS are important for conserving stands of large trees and habitat heterogeneity across different land-cover types. Further, SNS harbor higher plant species richness and a more valuable plant species pool, and significantly contribute to diversity at the landscape scale. We suggest that these patterns are related not only to pre-existent features, but also to traditional management. Conservation of SNS should take into account these specificities, and their cultural as well as biological values, by supporting the continuation of traditional management practices.

Keywords

Biocultural conservation Biodiversity Central Italy Old-growth forests Sacred natural sites Traditional management 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to the local communities that welcomed us to their sacred sites. We thank Andy Hector for his encouragement and support, Mariele Signorini, and Fabio Conti for precious advices on local vegetation, Elisa Locandro for assistance with sampling, Elena Conti and Reto Nyffeler for access to herbarium facilities at the University of Zurich, and Giovanni Roffarè for invaluable contributions to plant identification. FF was funded by the Research Fund of the University of Zurich and acknowledges support from the Cogito Foundation. RG gratefully acknowledges the DAAD scholarship (nr. 50015559) for a two-month stay at the Hannover University, Institut für Geobotanik, where he received valuable suggestions and reading assignments from Hansjörg Küster. Finally, we thank two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments that improved this article.

Supplementary material

13280_2015_738_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (624 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 624 kB)

References

  1. Aerts, R., K. Van Overtveld, M. Haile, M. Hermy, J. Deckers, and B. Muys. 2006. Species composition and diversity of small afromontane forest fragments in northern Ethiopia. Plant Ecology 187: 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aeschimann, D., K. Lauber, D.M. Moser, and J.P. Theurillat. 2004. Flora alpina. Bern: Haupt.Google Scholar
  3. Agnoletti, M. 2014. Rural landscape, nature conservation and culture: Some notes on research trends and management approaches from a (southern) European perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning 126: 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amici, V., S. Landi, F. Frascaroli, D. Rocchini, E. Santi, and A. Chiarucci. 2015. Anthropogenic drivers of plant diversity: Perspective on land use change in a dynamic cultural landscape. Biodiversity and Conservation 24: 3185–3199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthel, S., C.L. Crumley, and U. Svedin. 2013. Biocultural refugia: Combating the erosion of diversity in landscapes of food production. Ecology and Society 18: 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkes, F. 1999. Sacred ecology, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bhagwat, S., and C. Rutte. 2006. Sacred groves: Potential for biodiversity management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4: 519–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blasi, C., E. Biondi, R. Copiz, D. Galdenzi, and S. Pesaresi. 2010. Manuale italiano di interpretazione degli habitat (Direttiva 92/43/CEE). Roma: Ministero dell’Ambiente.Google Scholar
  9. Blicharska, M., and G. Mikusiński. 2014. Incorporating social and cultural significance of large old trees in conservation policy. Conservation Biology 28: 1558–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chiarucci, A., G. Bacaro, D. Rocchini, C. Ricotta, M.W. Palmer, and S.M. Scheiner. 2009. Spatially constrained rarefaction: Incorporating the autocorrelated structure of biological communities into sample-based rarefaction. Community Ecology 10: 209–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Colding, J., and C. Folke. 2009. Social taboos: “Invisible” systems of local resource management and biological conservation. Ecological Applications 11: 584–600.Google Scholar
  12. CSC (Censimento dei Santuari Cristiani in Italia). 2003. Censimento dei Santuari Cristiani in Italia. Retrieved 8 January, 2013, from http://www.santuaricristiani.iccd.beniculturali.it/.
  13. Dudley, N., L. Higgins-Zogib, and S. Mansourian. 2009. The links between protected areas, faiths, and sacred natural sites. Conservation Biology 23: 568–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dudley, N., S. Bhagwat, L. Higgins-Zogib, B. Lassen, B. Verschuuren, and R. Wild. 2010. Conservation of biodiversity in sacred natural sites in Asia and Africa: A review of the scientific literature. In Sacred natural sites: Conserving nature and culture, ed. B. Verschuuren, R. Wild, J. McNeeley, and G. Oviedo, 19–32. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  15. EC (European Commission). 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Luxemburg: EU.Google Scholar
  16. Ellenberg, H. 1996. Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen in ökologischer, dynamischer und historischer Sicht. Stuttgart: Ulmer.Google Scholar
  17. ESA (European Space Agency). 2010. GlobCover 2009: Global land cover map. Retrieved 30 May, 2011, from http://ionia1.esrin.esa.int/.
  18. ESRI. 2010. ArcGis 10.0. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute.Google Scholar
  19. Frascaroli, F. 2013. Catholicism and conservation: The potential of sacred natural sites for biodiversity management in Central Italy. Human Ecology 41: 587–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frascaroli, F., and B. Verschuuren. forthcoming. Linking biocultural diversity and sacred sites: Evidence and recommendations in the European framework. In Biocoltural Diversity in Europe, ed. M. Agnoletti and F. Emanueli. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. Frascaroli, F., S. Bhagwat, and M. Diemer. 2014. Healing animals, feeding souls: Ethnobotanical values at sacred sites in Central Italy. Economic Botany 68: 438–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gómez-Baggethun, E., S. Mingorria, V. Reyes-García, L. Calvet, and C. Montes. 2010. Traditional ecological knowledge trends in the transition to a market economy: Empirical study in the Doñana natural areas. Conservation Biology 24: 721–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gómez-Baggethun, E., V. Reyes-García, P. Olsson, and C. Montes. 2012. Traditional ecological knowledge and community resilience to environmental extremes: A case study in Doñana, SW Spain. Global Environmental Change 22: 640–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Götmark, F. 2013. Habitat management alternatives for conservation forests in the temperate zone: Review, synthesis, and implications. Forest Ecology and Management 306: 292–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Guarino, R., P. Menegoni, S. Pignatti, and S. Tulumello. 2015. A territorial contradiction. In Nature policies and landscape policies: Towards and alliance—Urban and landscape perspectives 18, ed. R. Gambino, and A. Peano, 69–76. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Guarino, R., M. La Rosa, and S. Pignatti. forthcoming. Flora d’Italia digitale, 2nd ed. Bologna: Edagricole. Google Scholar
  27. Joppa, L.N., and A. Pfaff. 2010. High and far: Biases in the location of protected areas. PLoS ONE 4: 1–6.Google Scholar
  28. Magurran, A.E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mallarach, J.M., and T. Papayannis. 2010. Sacred natural sites in technologically developed countries: Reflections from the experience of the Delos Initiative. In Sacred natural sites: Conserving nature and culture, ed. B. Verschuuren, R. Wild, J. McNeeley, and G. Oviedo, 198–208. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  30. Manzi, A. 2012. Storia dell’ambiente nell’Appennino Centrale. Treglio: Meta Edizioni.Google Scholar
  31. Maurer, K., A. Weyand, M. Fischer, and J. Stöcklin. 2006. Old cultural traditions, in addition to land use and topography, are shaping plant diversity of grasslands in the Alps. Biological Conservation 130: 438–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. da Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nilsson, S.G., M. Niklasson, J. Hedin, and G. Aronsson. 2002. Densities of large living and dead trees in old-growth temperate and boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management 161: 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Otero, I., M. Boada, and J.D. Tàbara. 2013. Social–ecological heritage and the conservation of Mediterranean landscapes under global change: A case study in Olzinelles (Catalonia). Land Use Policy 30: 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palang, H., H. Sooväli, M. Natrop, and G. Setten. 2004. European rural landscapes: Persistence and change in a globalising environment. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Parrotta, J., and M. Agnoletti. 2007. Traditional forest knowledge: Challenges and opportunities. Forest Ecology and Management 249: 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pignatti, S. forthcoming. Flora d’Italia, 2nd ed. Bologna: Edagricole. Google Scholar
  38. R Core Team. 2014. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.
  39. Pungetti, G., G. Oviedo, and D. Hooke. 2012. Sacred species and sites: Advances in biocultural conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rackham, O. 2006. Woodlands. London: Harper & Collins.Google Scholar
  41. Rappaport, R. 1999. Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rutte, C. 2011. The sacred commons: Conflicts and solutions of resource management in sacred natural sites. Biological Conservation 144: 2387–2394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Salick, J., A. Amend, D. Anderson, K. Hoffmeister, B. Gunn, and F. Zhendong. 2007. Tibetan sacred sites conserve old growth trees and cover in the eastern Himalayas. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 693–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sosis, R., and B.J. Ruffle. 2003. Religious ritual and cooperation: Testing for a relationship on Israeli religious and secular Kibbutzim. Current Anthropology 44: 713–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stara, K., R. Tsiakiris, and J.L.G. Wong. 2015. The trees of the sacred natural sites of Zagori, NW Greece. Landscape Research 40: 884–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tengö, M., K. Johansson, F. Rakotondrasoa, J. Lundberg, J.-A. Andriamaherilala, J.-A. Rakotoarisoa, and T. Elmqvist. 2007. Taboos and forest governance: Informal protection of hot spot dry forest in southern Madagascar. Ambio 36: 683–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Valdés, A., J. Lenoir, E. Gallet-Moron, E. Andrieu, J. Brunet, O. Chabrerie, D. Closset-Kopp, S.A.O. Cousins, et al. 2015. The contribution of patch-scale conditions is greater than that of macroclimate in explaining local plant diversity in fragmented forests across Europe. Global Ecology and Biogeography 24: 1094–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Verschuuren, B., R. Wild, J. McNeeley, and G. Oviedo. 2010. Sacred natural sites: Conserving nature and culture. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  49. Wild, R., and C. McLeod (eds.). 2008. Sacred natural sites: Guidelines for protected areas managers. Gland: IUCN.Google Scholar
  50. Willis, K.J., E.S. Jeffers, C. Tovar, P.R. Long, N. Caithness, M.G.D. Smit, R. Hagemann, C. Collin-hansen, et al. 2012. Determining the ecological value of landscapes beyond protected areas. Biological Conservation 147: 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabrizio Frascaroli
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shonil Bhagwat
    • 3
    • 4
  • Riccardo Guarino
    • 5
  • Alessandro Chiarucci
    • 2
  • Bernhard Schmid
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental StudiesUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental SciencesUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.Department of GeographyThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  4. 4.School of Geography and the EnvironmentUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  5. 5.Department STEBICEF - Botanical UnitUniversity of PalermoPalermoItaly

Personalised recommendations