Hubbry Logo
BioregionBioregionMain
Open search
Bioregion
Community hub
Bioregion
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Bioregion
Bioregion
Bioregion
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Primary drainage basins in Canada

A bioregion is a geographical area defined not by administrative boundaries, but by distinct characteristics such as plant and animal species, ecological systems, soils and landforms, human settlements, and topographic features such as drainage basins (also referred to as "watersheds").[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] A bioregion can be on land or at sea. The idea of bioregions was adopted and popularized in the mid-1970s by a school of philosophy called bioregionalism, which includes the concept that human culture can influence bioregional definitions due to its effect on non-cultural factors.[9] Bioregions are part of a nested series of ecological scales, generally starting with local watersheds, growing into larger river systems, then Level III or IV ecoregions (or regional ecosystems), bioregions, then biogeographical realm, followed by the continental-scale and ultimately the biosphere.[10][11]

Within the life sciences, there are numerous methods used to define the physical limits of a bioregion based on the spatial extent of mapped ecological phenomena—from species distributions and hydrological systems (i.e. Watersheds) to topographic features (e.g. landforms) and climate zones (e.g. Köppen classification). Bioregions also provide an effective framework in the field of Environmental history, which seeks to use "river systems, ecozones, or mountain ranges as the basis for understanding the place of human history within a clearly delineated environmental context".[12] A bioregion can also have a distinct cultural identity[13][8] defined, for example, by Indigenous Peoples whose historical, mythological and biocultural connections to their lands and waters shape an understanding of place and territorial extent.[14] Within the context of bioregionalism, bioregions can be socially constructed by modern-day communities for the purposes of better understanding a place "with the aim to live in that place sustainably and respectfully."[15]

Bioregions have practical applications in the study of biology, biocultural anthropology, biogeography, biodiversity, bioeconomics, bioregionalism, bioregional mapping, community health, ecology, environmental history, environmental science, foodsheds, geography, natural resource management, urban Ecology, and urban planning.[16][17] References to the term "bioregion" in scholarly literature have grown exponentially since the introduction of the term—from a single research paper in 1971 to approximately 65,000 journal articles and books published to date.[18] Governments and multilateral institutions have utilized bioregions in mapping Ecosystem Services and tracking progress towards conservation objectives, such as ecosystem representation.[19]

Background

[edit]

The first confirmed use of the term "bioregion" in academic literature was by E. Jarowski in 1971, a marine biologist studying the blue crab populations of Louisiana. The author used the term sensu stricto to refer to a "biological region"—the area within which a crab can be provided with all the resources needed throughout its entire life cycle.[20] The term was quickly adopted by other biologists, but eventually took on a broader set of definitions to encompass a range of macro-ecological phenomena.

The term bioregion as it relates to bioregionalism is credited to Allen Van Newkirk, a Canadian poet and biogeographer.[21][22][23] In this field, the idea of "bioregion" likely goes back much earlier than published material suggests, being floated in early published small press zines by Newkirk, as well as in conversational dialogue.[24] This can be exemplified by the fact that Newkirk had met Peter Berg (another early scholar on bioregionalism) in San Francisco in 1969 and again in Nova Scotia in 1971 where he shared the idea with Berg. He would go on to found the Institute for Bioregional Research and issue a series of short papers using the term bioregion as early as 1970. Peter Berg, who would go on to found the Planet Drum foundation, and become a leading proponent of "bioregions" learned of the term in 1971 while Judy Goldhaft and Peter Berg were staying with Allen Van Newkirk, before Berg attended the first United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm during June 1972.[25][26] The Planet Drum Foundation published their first Bioregional Bundle in that year, that also included a definition of a bioregion.[27][28] Helping refine this definition, Author Kirkpatrick Sale wrote in 1974 that "a bioregion is a part of the earth's surface whose rough boundaries are determined by natural rather than human dictates, distinguishable from other areas by attributes of flora, fauna, water, climate, soils and landforms, and human settlements and cultures those attributes give rise to.[13]

Several other marine biology papers picked up the term,[29][30][23] and in 1974 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published its first global-scale biogeographical map entitled "Biotic Provinces of the World".[31] However, in their 1977 article "Reinhabiting California", director of the IUCN and founder of the Man and Biosphere project Raymond Dasmann and Peter Berg pushed back against these global bodies that were attempting to use the term bioregion in a strictly ecological sense, which separated humans from the ecosystems they lived in, specifically naming that Biotic Provinces of the World Map, was not a map of bioregions.

"Reinhabitation involves developing a bioregional identity, something most North Americans have lost or have never possessed. We define bioregion in a sense different from the biotic provinces of Raymond Dasmann (1973) or the biogeographical province of Miklos Udvardy. The term refers both to geographical terrain and a terrain of consciousness—to a place and the ideas that have developed about how to live in that place. Within a bioregion, the conditions that influence life are similar, and these, in turn, have influenced human occupancy."

This article defined bioregions as distinct from biogeographical and biotic provinces that ecologists and geographers had been developing by adding a human and cultural lens to the strictly ecological idea.[32][33][34]

In 1975, A. Van Newkirk published a paper entitled "Bioregions: Towards Bioregional Strategy for Human Cultures" in which he advocates for the incorporation of human activity ("occupying populations of the culture-bearing animal") within bioregional definitions.[23]

Etymology

[edit]

Bioregion as a term comes from the Greek bios (life), and the French region (region), itself from the Latin regia (territory) and earlier regere (to rule or govern). Etymologically, bioregion means "life territory" or "place-of-life".[35][36]

Bioregionalism

[edit]
Main article: Bioregionalism

Bioregions became a foundational concept within the philosophical system called Bioregionalism. A key difference between ecoregions and biogeography and the term bioregion is that while ecoregions are based on general biophysical and ecosystem data, human settlement and cultural patterns play a key role in how a bioregion is defined.[37][38] A bioregion is defined along the watershed, and hydrological boundaries, and uses a combination of bioregional layers, beginning with the oldest "hard" lines: geology, topography, tectonics, wind, fracture zones and continental divides, working its way through the "soft" lines: living systems such as soil, ecosystems, climate, marine life, and flora and fauna, and lastly the "human" lines: human geography, energy, transportation, agriculture, food, music, language, history, Indigenous cultures, and ways of living within the context set into a place, and its limits to determine the final edges and boundaries.[39][40][13] This is summed up well by David McCloskey, author of the Cascadia Bioregion map: "A bioregion may be analyzed on physical, biological, and cultural levels. First, we map the landforms, geology, climate, and hydrology and how these environmental factors work together to create a common template for life in that particular place. Second, we map flora and fauna, especially the characteristic vegetative communities, and link them to their habitats. Third, we look at native peoples, western settlement, and current land-use patterns and problems, in interaction with the first two levels."[41]

A bioregion is defined as the largest physical boundaries where connections based on that place will make sense. The basic units of a bioregion are watersheds and hydrological basins, and a bioregion will always maintain the natural continuity and full extent of a watershed. While a bioregion may stretch across many watersheds, it will never divide or separate a water basin.[42] As conceived by Van Newkirk, bioregionalism is presented as a technical process of identifying "biogeographically interpreted culture areas called bioregions". Within these territories, resident human populations would "restore plant and animal diversity," "aid in the conservation and restoration of wild eco-systems," and "discover regional models for new and relatively non-arbitrary scales of human activity in relation to the biological realities of the natural landscape".[21] His first published article in a mainstream magazine was in 1975 in his article Bioregions: Towards Bioregional Strategy in Environmental Conservation.[21][23] In the article, Allen Van Newkirk tentatively defines a bioregion as: "biologically significant areas of the Earth's surface which can be mapped and discussed as distinct existing patterns of plant, animal, and habitat distributions as related to range patterns and… deformations, attributed to one or more successive occupying populations of the culture-bearing animal (aka humans)....Towards this end a group of projects relating to bioregions or themes of applied human biogeography is envisaged.[43]

For Newkirk, the term "bioregion" was a way to combine human culture with earlier work on biotic provinces. So, he called this new field "regional human biogeography" and was the first to use terms such as "bioregional strategies" and "bioregional framework" for adapting human cultures into a place.[22] This idea was carried forward and developed by ecologist Raymond Dasmann and Peter Berg in an article they co-authored called Reinhabiting California in 1977, which rebuked earlier ecologist efforts to only use biotic provinces, and biogeography, which excluded humans from the definition of bioregion.[44][45][46][47]

Peter Berg and Judy Goldhaft founded the Planet Drum Foundation in 1973,[48][43] located in San Francisco which celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2023.[49] Planet Drum, from their website, defines a bioregion as "a geographical area with coherent and interconnected plant and animal communities, and other natural characteristics (often defined by a watershed) plus the cultural values that humans have developed for living in harmony with these natural systems. Because it is a cultural idea, the description of a specific bioregion uses information from both the natural sciences and other sources. Each bioregion is a whole 'life-place' with unique requirements for human inhabitation so that it will not be disrupted and injured. People are counted as an integral aspect of a place's life."[48]

At a 1991 Symposium on Biodiversity of Northwestern California, Peter Berg stated "A bioregion can be determined initially by the use of climatology, physiography, animal and plant geography, natural history and other descriptive natural sciences. The final boundaries of a bioregion are best described by the people who have lived within it, through human recognition of the realities of living-in-place. All life on the planet is interconnected in a few obvious ways, and in many more that remain barely explored. But there is a distinct resonance among living things and the factors which influence them that occurs specifically within each separate place on the planet. Discovering and describing that resonance is a way to describe a bioregion."[50][51]

Thomas Berry, an educator, environmentalist, activist, and priest, who authored the United Nations World Charter for Nature, and historian of the Hudson River Valley, was also deeply rooted in the bioregional movement, and helping bioregionalism spread to the east coast of North America.[52] In 1984 he wrote "A bioregion is simply an indenfidable geographic area whose life systems are self-contained, self- sustaining and self renewing. A bioregion, you might say, is a basic unit within the natural system of earth. Another way to define a bioregion is in terms of watersheds. Bioregions must develop human populations that accord with their natural context. The human is not exempt from being part of the basic inventory in a bioregion."[53]

Kirkpatrick Sale another early pioneer of the idea of bioregions, wrote in his book Dwellers in the Land, "A bioregion is a part of the earth's surface whose rough boundaries are determined by natural and human dictates, distinguishable from other areas by attributes of flora, fauna, water, climate, soils and land-forms, and human settlements and cultures those attributes give rise to. The borders between such areas are usually not rigid – nature works with more flexibility and fluidity than that – but the general contours of the regions themselves are not hard to identify, and indeed will probably be felt, understood, sensed or in some way known to many inhabitants, and particularly those still rooted in the land."[13]

One of the other early proponents of bioregionalism, and who helped define what a bioregion is, was American biologist and environmental scientist Raymond F. Dasmann. Dasmann studied at UC Berkeley under the legendary wildlife biologist Aldo Leopold, and earned his Ph.D. in zoology in 1954. He began his academic career at Humboldt State University, where he was a professor of natural resources from 1954 until 1965. During the 1960s, he worked at the Conservation Foundation in Washington, D.C., as Director of International Programs and was also a consultant on the development of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. In the 1970s he worked with UNESCO where he initiated the Man and the Biosphere Programme(MAB), an international research and conservation program. During the same period he was Senior Ecologist for the International Union for Conservation of Nature in Switzerland, initiating global conservation programs which earned him the highest honors awarded by The Wildlife Society, and the Smithsonian Institution.[54][55]

Working with Peter Berg, and also contemporary with Allen Van Newkirk, Dasmann was one of the pioneers in developing the definition for the term "Bioregion", as well as conservation concepts of "Eco-development" and "biological diversity," and identified the crucial importance of recognizing indigenous peoples and their cultures in efforts to conserve natural landscapes.[33]

Because it is a cultural idea, the description of a specific bioregion is drawn using information from not only the natural sciences but also many other sources. It is a geographic terrain and a terrain of consciousness.[56] Anthropological studies, historical accounts, social developments, customs, traditions, and arts can all play a part. Bioregionalism utilizes them to accomplish three main goals:

  1. restore and maintain local natural systems;
  2. practice sustainable ways to satisfy basic human needs such as food, water, shelter, and materials; and
  3. support the work of reinhabitation.[57]

The latter is accomplished through proactive projects, employment and education, as well as by engaging in protests against the destruction of natural elements in a life-place.[58]

Bioregional goals play out in a spectrum of different ways for different places. In North America, for example, restoring native prairie grasses is a basic ecosystem-rebuilding activity for reinhabitants of the Kansas Area Watershed Bioregion in the Midwest, whereas bringing back salmon runs has a high priority for Shasta Bioregion in northern California. Using geothermal and wind as a renewable energy source fits Cascadia Bioregion in the rainy Pacific Northwest. Less cloudy skies in the Southwest's sparsely vegetated Sonoran Desert Bioregion make direct solar energy a more plentiful alternative there. Education about local natural characteristics and conditions varies diversely from place to place, along with bioregionally significant social and political issues.[57]

Bioregional mapping

[edit]
Main article: Bioregional mapping

An important part of bioregionalism is bioregional mapping. Instructions for how to map a bioregion were first laid out in a book Mapping for Local Empowerment, written by University of British Columbia by Douglas Aberley in 1993,[59][60] followed by the mapping handbook Giving the Land a Voice in 1994.[61] This grew from the Tsleil-Waututh First Nation, Nisga'a, Tsilhqotʼin, Wetʼsuwetʼen first nations who used Bioregional Mapping to create some of the first bioregional atlases as part of court cases to defend their sovereignty in the 1980s and 1990s, one such example being the Tsilhqotʼin Nation v British Columbia.[59][62]

In these resources, there are two types of maps: Bioregional Maps and maps of Bioregions, which both include physical, ecological and human lines.[63] A bioregional map can be any scale, and is a community and participatory process to map what people care about. Bioregional maps and atlases can be considered tools and jumping off points for helping guide regenerative activities of a community. Mapping a bioregion is considered a specific type of bioregional map, in which many layers are brought together to map a "whole life place", and is considered an 'optimal zone of interconnection for a species to thrive', i.e. for humans, or a specific species such as salmon, and uses many different layers to see what boundaries "emerge" and make sense as frameworks of stewardship.[64]

A good example of this is the Salmon Nation bioregion, which is the Pacific Northwest and northwest rim of the Pacific Ocean as defined through the historic and current range of the salmon, as well as the people and ecosystem which have evolved over millennia to depend on them.[65][66] This style of bioregional mapping can also be found in the works of Henry David Thoreau who when hired to make maps by the United States government, chose instead to create maps "that charts and delineates the local ecology and its natural history as well as its intersection with a human community".[67]

This type of mapping is consistent with, and aligns with an indigenous and western worldview.[62]

This is put well by Douglas Aberley and chief Michael George noting that:

"Once the bioregional map atlas is completed it becomes the common foundation of knowledge from which planning scenarios can be prepared, and decisions ultimately made. Complex information that is otherwise difficult to present is clearly depicted. The community learns about itself in the process of making decisions about its future."[62]

Sheila Harrington, in the introduction to Islands of the Salish Sea: A Community Atlas goes one step further, noting that:

"The atlas should be used as a jumping off place for decision making about the future. From the holistic image of place that the maps collectively communicate, what actions could be adopted to achieve sustainable prosperity? What priorities emerge from a survey of damaged lands and unsolved social ills? What underutilized potentials can be put to work to help achieve sustainability? The atlas can become a focus for discussions setting a proactive plan for positive change."[68][69]

Defining a specific bioregion

[edit]

Mapping a bioregion consists of:

  1. Choosing and creating a base map and a scale, generally using a hydrological or watershed map. Because bioregional maps are whole systems maps, they can travel across watersheds, but will not divide them.[60][70][71][72]
  2. Survey and decide what needs to be mapped in this area. What are the physical and ecological communities in that place that need to be included? This can include watershed information, animal communities, vegetation types, and physiographic (landform) regions.[73][70]
  3. In addition to the above, "it is necessary to make human occupation of any land area a part of the bioregion definition equation. [By so doing] this approach captures the essence of the bioregional ideal: to irrevocably human activity into processes of sustainable land, plant, and atmospheric interaction"[73][74][70][8]
  4. Include time. From points 2 and 3, how has this information changed from glacial times (or before) to the present? in this way, we map not only the present interactions between humans, ecosystems, physical landforms and water cycles, but also can map such changes over a long period of time.[73]
  5. Examine the extent of what it is that you would like to map. Is the area big enough? Small enough? Does the area consist of a whole system? Is this space large enough to support the inhabitant populations and nutrient cycling?[70]
  6. Outline the different extents and boundaries you are including, and layer them together to see what "emerges".

Your final map will generally help demarcate a bioregion, or life place.[73][60][70]

Methodology and classification

[edit]

While references to bioregions (or biogeographical regions) have become increasingly common in scholarly literature related to life sciences, "there is little agreement on how to best classify and name such regions, with several conceptually related terms being used, often interchangeably."[75] Bioregions can take many forms and operate at many scales – from very small ecosystems or 'biotopes' to ecoregions (which can be nested at different scales) to continent-scale distributions of plants and animals, like biomes or realms. All of them, technically, can be considered types of bioregions sensu lato and are often referred to as such in academic literature.

In 2014, J. Marrone documented a history of 13 biogeographical concepts in "On Biotas and their names".[76] A recent review of scholarly literature finds 20 unique biotic methods to define bioregions—based on populations of specific plant and animals species or species assemblages. These range from global and continental scales to sub-continental and regional scales to sub-regional and local scales.

Biotic Methods
Bioregion Type Bioregion Definition Examples Approx. Scale
domain A biogeographical domain is a macroecological region spanning a continent or group of continents or major bioclimatic regions, which can be used to study the dispersal of particular species.[77] "isoclimatic Mediterranean" continental or global
realm In biogeography, realms most often refer to the broadest classification of Earth's land surface, based on distributional patterns of terrestrial organisms in eight major divisions.[78] Within the IUCN Ecosystem Typology, Level 1 "realms" refer to 5 major divisions of the biosphere—Terrestrial, Subterranean, Freshwater, Marine, Atmospheric.[79] "terrestrial" or "Nearctic" continental or global
biome A standardized typology for large-scale areas characterized by vegetation, soil, climate, and wildlife in 14 major categories per Dinerstein et al.[80] Within the IUCN Ecosystem Typology, Level 2 "biomes" are reduced to 7 "core" terrestrial types, including an anthropogenic land-use type, and several additional "transitional" biome types.[81] "temperate grasslands and savannas" sub-continental
functional group A hierarchical classification system that, in its upper levels, defines ecosystems by their convergent ecological functions (biomes) and, in its lower levels, distinguishes ecosystems with contrasting assemblages of species engaged in those functions. Within the IUCN Ecosystem Typology these are Level 3 "functional groups".[82] "trophic savannas" sub-continental
ecozone A division of the Earth's land surface distinguished by the evolutionary histories and distribution patterns of its life forms. Ecozones can refer both to biome-scale divisions (per J. Schulz)[83] or continent-scale divisions (per Cox et al.).[84] "Great Plains" (i.e. 9 per EPA) sub-continental (EPA Level I ecoregion) or continental
province/ecoprovince or biotic province Specific biogeographical areas on land and sea delineated by common landforms and ecological conditions.[85][86][87] "S. Central Semi-arid Prairies" (terrestrial, 9.4 per EPA), "Louisianan province" (marine) regional (EPA Level II ecoregion)
ecoregion Areas which harbor ecosystems generally similar in character as defined by prevalent flora and fauna across both terrestrial and marine domains. Within the IUCN Ecosystem Typology these are comparable to Level 4 "regional subgroups".[88][89] "Cross Timbers savanna-woodland" (i.e. terrestrial ID 390 per Dinerstein et al.), "N. Gulf of Mexico" (i.e. marine ID 43 per Spalding et al.) sub-regional (EPA Level III ecoregion)
ecosystem A specific community of interacting organisms and the interactions of biotic and abiotic components in a given area, generally defined at smaller scales.[90] "Northern Cross Timbers" (i.e. 29a per EPA) local (EPA Level IV ecoregion)
ecotone, ecoline A transition area between two biological communities where two communities meet and integrate.[91] "Thames estuary" sub-regional or local
zoogeographic region; phytogeographic region Areas with relatively uniform conditions defining distinct animal population ranges;[92] areas with relatively uniform climatic conditions defining distinct plant populations.[93] "lion range"; "floristic kingdom" sub-continental or regional
chorotype The delineation of groups of species that have coincident ranges (there are two differing uses of the term in biogeography).[94] "holarctic chorotype" sub-continental or regional
area of endemism (AoE) A single defined geographic location that is the only place where a particular species (or several species) can be found (e.g. islands).[95] "Austral Patagonia" sub-continental or regional
concrete biota All the flora and fauna species encountered in all habitats within an area surrounding a particular locality; the lowest (most elementary) level of floral/faunal organization of the biota.[96] "concrete flora" or "concrete fauna" local or sub-regional
nuclear area or centre of endemism A specific geographic area from which species originate and disperse.[97] "The Yucutan centre" sub-continental or regional
phytocorion or floristic province A specific geographic area possessing a large number of distinct plant taxa.[98] "Zambezian phytocorion" sub-continental or regional
chronofauna; horofauna A geographically restricted natural assemblage of interacting animal populations maintained over a geologically significant period of time;[99] an assemblage of the animal groups that coexist and diversify in a given area over a prolonged time, representing a lasting biogeographic unit.[100] "Permian vertebrate chronofauna" sub-continental or regional
cenocron A given area in which an animal or plant group or community has entered, wherever its origin, within a defined period of geological time, used in cladistic biogeography.[101] "Mexican Plateau cenocron" continental or sub-continental
generalized track A graph of geographic distribution that connects the different localities or distribution areas of a particular taxon or group of taxa (L. Croizat).[102] "ratite birds track" global or continental
species assemblage A group of organisms belonging to a number of different species that co-occur regionally and interact through trophic and spatial relationships.[103] Related terms include biogeographical assemblage and taxonomic assemblage.[76] "Terai Arc Landscape" sub-continental or regional
biotope/ecotope or habitat The natural environment or "home" in which an organism or population normally lives through a significant portion of its life cycle.[104] "European butterfly biotope" sub-regional or local

In addition, 5 abiotic methods have been utilized to inform the delineation of biogeographical extents.[105]

Abiotic Methods
Delineation Type Method Examples Approx. Scale
climate zone Climatological: maps of land divided based on patterns of seasonal precipitation, humidity, and temperature (Köppen climate classifications, Hardiness Zones, etc.)[106][107] "Hardiness zone (e.g. 7a, 7b, 7c)" continental or sub-continental
landform Topographical: maps of the forms and features of land surfaces creating natural boundaries across distance and elevation (e.g. mountains, ravines, basins, plateaus, etc.)[108] "Tibetan Plateau" sub-continental or regional
soil zone Pedological: maps of soil types by major classifications including soil texture (e.g. sandy, clay, etc.)[109] "Histosol region" sub-continental or regional
watershed Hydrological: maps of drainage basins or 'watersheds' where all flowing surface water converges to a single point, such as a spring or lake, or flows into another body of water.[110] "Hudson Valley" sub-continental or regional
cultural area or cultural region Anthropological: tribal domains or territories based on historical and cultural knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.[14] "Zuni Nation" regional or sub-regional

Ecoregions

[edit]
Main article: Ecoregion
The Ötztal Alps, a mountain range in the central Alps of Europe, are part of the Central Eastern Alps, and can both be termed as ecoregions.

Ecoregions are one of the primary building blocks of bioregions, which are made up of "clusters of biotically related ecoregions".[111]

An Ecoregion (ecological region) is an ecologically and geographically defined area that is smaller than a bioregion, which in turn is smaller than a biogeographic realm.[11] Ecoregions cover relatively large areas of land or water, and contain characteristic, geographically distinct assemblages of natural communities and species.[112] They can include geology physiography, vegetation, climate, hydrology, terrestrial and aquatic fanua, and soils, and may or may not include the impacts of human activity (e.g. land use patterns, vegetation changes etc.). The biodiversity of flora, fauna and ecosystems that characterize an ecoregion tends to be distinct from that of other ecoregions.[113]

The phrase "ecological region" was widely used throughout the 20th century by biologists and zoologists to define specific geographic areas in research. In the early 1970s the term 'ecoregion' was introduced (short for ecological region), and R.G. Bailey published the first comprehensive map of U.S. ecoregions in 1976.[114] The term was used widely in scholarly literature in the 1980s and 1990s, and in 2001 scientists at the U.S. conservation organization World Wildlife Fund (WWF) codified and published the first global-scale map of Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (TEOW), led by D. Olsen, E. Dinerstein, E. Wikramanayake, and N. Burgess.[115] While the two approaches are related, the Bailey ecoregions (nested in four levels) give more importance to ecological criteria and climate zones, while the WWF ecoregions give more importance to biogeography, that is, the distribution of distinct species assemblages.[116]

Ecoregions can change gradually, and have soft transition areas known as ecotones. Because of this, there can be some variation in how ecoregions are defined. The US Environmental Protection Agency has four ranking systems they use, which lists there being 12 type one ecoregions, and 187 type III ecoregions in North America[117] while another study on the Biodiversity of the Klamath-Siskiyou Ecoregion, researchers found that North America contains 116 ecoregions nested within 10 major habitat types.[111]

The TEOW framework originally delineated 867 terrestrial ecoregions nested into 14 major biomes, contained with the world's 8 major biogeographical realms. Subsequent regional papers by the co-authors covering Africa, Indo-Pacific, and Latin America differentiate between ecoregions and bioregions, referring to the latter as "geographic clusters of ecoregions that may span several habitat types, but have strong biogeographic affinities, particularly at taxonomic levels higher than the species level (genus, family)".[118][119][120] In 2007, a comparable set of Marine Ecoregions of the World (MEOW) was published, led by M. Spalding,[121] and in 2008 a set of Freshwater Ecoregions of the World (FEOW) was published, led by R. Abell.[122]

In 2017, an updated version of the terrestrial ecoregions dataset was released in the paper "An Ecoregion-Based Approach to Protecting Half the Terrestrial Realm" led by E. Dinerstein with 48 co-authors.[88] Using recent advances in satellite imagery the ecoregion perimeters were refined and the total number reduced to 846 (and later 844), which can be explored on a web application developed by Resolve and Google Earth Engine.[123] For conservation practitioners and organizations monitoring progress towards the goals of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in particular the goal of ecosystem representation in Protected Area networks, the most widely used bioregional delineations include the Resolve Ecoregions and the IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology.

In bioregionalism, an ecoregion can also use geography, ecology, and culture as part of its definition.[41]

See also

[edit]


References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Bioregion

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A bioregion is a geographic region delineated by ecological criteria, including watersheds, soil types, zones, and assemblages of and , rather than socio-political boundaries. This framework emphasizes the interconnectedness of biophysical processes within a defined , typically larger than an individual but smaller than a . The concept gained prominence through , a philosophical and practical approach originating in during the 1970s, which advocates for human societies to align economic, cultural, and political structures with the carrying capacities and rhythms of their local environments. Key principles include reinhabitation—developing intimate knowledge of and adaptation to place-specific conditions—and sustainable resource use limited to what the bioregion can renew. Proponents, such as those associated with the Planet Drum Foundation, argue that this fosters resilience against disruptions from globalized systems, though empirical validation remains centered on case studies rather than large-scale implementations. Notable examples include the Cascadia bioregion spanning the Pacific Northwest of North America, defined by the Cascade and Coast mountain ranges, the Columbia River watershed, and temperate rainforest ecosystems. Scientific delineations, such as those by the U.S. Geological Survey for Pacific regions or One Earth's global framework of 185 bioregions, integrate data on evolutionary history, hydrology, and biodiversity to map these units for conservation and land-use planning. While bioregionalism has influenced environmental policy and community initiatives, critics note potential conflicts with economic interdependence and the challenges of enforcing fluid natural boundaries in practice.

Definition and Fundamentals

Core Definition

A bioregion constitutes a geographically distinct area delineated by biophysical and ecological criteria, including watersheds, physiographic landforms, regimes, compositions, and assemblages of endemic plant and animal , in contrast to arbitrary political or administrative divisions. This framework recognizes the causal linkages among hydrological cycles, geological structures, and biotic communities that govern nutrient flows, migrations, and resilience, forming self-sustaining units observable through empirical mapping of environmental gradients. Such boundaries remain dynamic, reflecting evolutionary processes and climatic variability rather than fixed lines, as evidenced by analyses of floral and faunal distributions across terrains. In scale, bioregions intermediate between finer-grained ecoregions—defined by homogeneous habitat types—and broader biogeographic realms encompassing continental-scale evolutionary histories, typically spanning hundreds to thousands of square kilometers. For instance, delineations often align with major river basins or mountain ranges, where precipitation patterns and edaphic factors predict vegetation zonation, as quantified in hydrological unit classifications like those developed by the U.S. Geological Survey since the 1970s. This approach underpins ecological assessments by prioritizing verifiable indicators, such as indices and watershed connectivity, over subjective cultural overlays.

Etymology and Conceptual Evolution

The term "bioregion" derives from the prefix "bio-," rooted in the Greek bios meaning life, combined with "region," from the Latin regio denoting a territory or district. Its earliest recorded English usage dates to 1945 in an anthropological publication, Man: A Monthly Record of Anthropological Science, where it referred to biologically defined areas. The first confirmed scientific application appeared in 1971, when E. Jarowski used it in a study of () populations along the coast, delineating zones based on environmental factors influencing migration and distribution. In the 1970s, amid rising environmental awareness, the term gained traction in discussions of human-ecological integration. Allen Van Newkirk introduced it prominently in his 1975 article "Bioregions: Towards Bioregional Strategies for Human Cultures," proposing bioregions as natural units for aligning human activities with ecological boundaries rather than arbitrary political divisions. This usage built on earlier biogeographic concepts, such as Raymond F. Dasmann's "biotic provinces" from the 1960s, which classified continental flora and fauna assemblages, but shifted emphasis toward practical territorial strategies. The modern conceptual framework crystallized through the partnership of Dasmann, a wildlife ecologist, and , a countercultural activist associated with the Planet Drum Foundation. Their 1977 essay "Reinhabiting ," published in The CoEvolution Quarterly, redefined bioregions as "life-territories" characterized by watersheds, landforms, climate, native biota, and cultural adaptations, advocating "reinhabitation"—a deliberate reorientation of human societies to live within a region's . This evolution transformed bioregions from static scientific descriptors into dynamic models for , influencing subsequent works like Berg's editorship of bioregional anthologies and the first North American Bioregional Congress in 1984, which formalized principles for place-based governance. By the 1980s, the idea had expanded globally, incorporating and critiquing industrial , though retaining a core focus on biophysical limits over socio-political constructs.

Scientific and Ecological Basis

Distinctions from Ecoregions and Biogeographic Units

Bioregions are delineated at an intermediate , typically larger than ecoregions but smaller than biogeographical realms, with an average land area of approximately 715,000 km² encompassing multiple finer-scale units. Ecoregions, by contrast, represent relatively large areas of ecological homogeneity defined by characteristic assemblages of natural communities sharing a majority of , distinct species distributions, and unique ecological or evolutionary phenomena, as outlined in classifications by organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These units prioritize biotic factors like , , and processes alongside abiotic elements such as , , and soils, serving primarily as tools for assessment and conservation prioritization without a singular emphasis on hydrological continuity. Biogeographical units, including realms, provinces, and districts, operate at broader scales rooted in historical , delineating areas based on phylogenetic patterns, levels, and long-term evolutionary divergence driven by geological barriers and dispersal limitations, such as those formalized in Alfred Russel Wallace's 19th-century framework. Unlike these units, which focus on static pools and ancestral connections, bioregions integrate dynamic ecological criteria, including the intersection of biomes with contemporary geological structures like mountain ranges and climate zones, to capture functional interdependencies across terrestrial and freshwater systems. This approach yields 185 global bioregions nested within 14 realms, emphasizing operational boundaries for ecological management over purely historical ones. A defining feature of bioregional delineation is the primacy of hydrological criteria, such as watershed basins and river systems, which ensure the natural continuity of flows and associated cycles, often transcending ecoregional or political lines where biotic similarities alone might suggest otherwise. Ecoregions, while incorporating as one factor among many (e.g., in EPA frameworks that consider distributions alongside and ), do not elevate it to a foundational boundary, allowing divisions based on prevailing types even across drainage divides. Biogeographical units similarly de-emphasize in favor of faunal and floral turnover gradients shaped by tectonic and climatic history. This watershed-centric orientation in bioregions supports their utility in frameworks advocating aligned patterns, distinguishing them from the more descriptively ecological focus of ecoregions and the phylogenetically oriented scope of biogeographical units.

Biophysical and Hydrological Criteria

Biophysical criteria for bioregion delineation emphasize integrated physical and biological features that create distinct ecological zones, including , , soils, and patterns. provides the foundational landforms and geological structures, such as mountain ranges, plateaus, and sedimentary basins, which shape diversity and influence dispersal. factors, encompassing temperature gradients, regimes, and levels, determine the potential for specific biotic communities by controlling primary and phenological cycles. Edaphic properties like , depth, and nutrient content interact with to regulate infiltration and plant rooting zones, further homogenizing or differentiating regional ecosystems. serves as a dynamic indicator, with assemblages of dominant reflecting the cumulative effects of these biophysical elements, enabling mapping through of canopy structure and distribution. Hydrological criteria focus on flow dynamics and drainage networks as unifying forces within bioregions, prioritizing watersheds over arbitrary boundaries to preserve aquatic-terrestrial linkages. A watershed, delineated by topographic divides where precipitation collects and channels into common outlets, constitutes the core hydrological unit, with nested hierarchies from small sub-basins (e.g., 10-100 km²) to large basins (e.g., >10,000 km²) capturing and nutrient cycling. River systems and associated riparian zones are assessed for flow permanence, discharge variability, and connectivity to aquifers, ensuring bioregional boundaries align with natural hydrological continuity rather than political divisions. These criteria, often quantified using digital elevation models and stream gauging data, support ecosystem-based management by integrating floodplains, wetlands, and coastal interfaces as integral components. In practice, frameworks like the U.S. Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) system classify watersheds into 12-digit subregions based on nested drainage areas, providing a scalable basis for bioregional hydrological assessment.

Historical Development

Origins in Ecological Thought (1970s Onward)

The concept of the bioregion emerged in ecological thought during the , amid rising environmental concerns and the North American , which critiqued industrial-scale development and sought localized, nature-aligned living. Ecologist Raymond F. Dasmann, whose prior work emphasized ecosystem integrity in , began exploring place-based ecological units in the early , advocating for boundaries drawn from natural and biota rather than administrative lines. This laid groundwork for as a framework integrating human societies with contiguous ecological systems. A foundational articulation came in the 1977 article "Reinhabiting " by Dasmann and activist , published in The Ecologist (Vol. 7, No. 10). They defined a bioregion as a "life-place"—a distinct bounded by watersheds, patterns, types, and assemblages of that impose inherent constraints and opportunities on sustainable human inhabitation. Unlike rigid biogeographic provinces, bioregions were framed dynamically, encompassing both biophysical realities and evolving cultural adaptations, with "reinhabitation" proposed as a process of becoming ecologically native through practices like and watershed . Berg, drawing from countercultural influences, emphasized bioregions as scales for self-reliant communities, countering the homogenizing effects of globalized economies. The term "" itself was coined earlier by Allen Van Newkirk in a 1975 magazine piece, but Dasmann and Berg's synthesis propelled its adoption in ecological discourse, intersecting with deep ecology's holistic views. Through Berg's Planet Drum Foundation, founded in 1973, these ideas disseminated via publications and gatherings, influencing 1980s extensions into and indigenous integration, though early proponents like Dasmann cautioned against romanticizing pre-industrial societies without empirical validation of ecological limits. Scholarly reception noted bioregionalism's roots in but highlighted its activist origins, which sometimes prioritized philosophical reinhabitation over quantifiable metrics.

Key Figures and Scholarly Milestones

, an environmental activist, and Raymond F. Dasmann, an ecologist, co-authored the seminal article "Reinhabiting California" in 1977, which provided one of the earliest comprehensive formulations of as a framework for aligning human societies with ecological boundaries. Originally drafted by as "Strategies for Reinhabiting the Bioregion," the piece emphasized reinhabitation—becoming native to one's place through awareness of local ecological relationships—and argued for cultural adaptation to bioregional scales rather than arbitrary political divisions. Dasmann, drawing from his expertise in wildlife ecology, contributed biophysical criteria to distinguish bioregions from mere administrative units, influencing subsequent scholarly work on human-ecological integration. Berg further advanced the concept through practical organization, founding the Planet Drum Foundation in 1973 to promote bioregional awareness and mapping, which hosted early conferences and publications that disseminated the idea beyond academic circles. Poet Gary Snyder, active in the environmental movement, contributed intellectually by integrating bioregional principles into his writings on place-based ethics and wildness, as seen in works like Turtle Island (1974), which advocated for watershed-scale thinking and indigenous-inspired land stewardship without explicitly coining the term. A key scholarly milestone came in 1985 with Kirkpatrick Sale's Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision, which synthesized into a proposing decentralized aligned with natural regions, critiquing industrial centralization and outlining bioregionally scaled economies and . Sale's analysis, grounded in historical precedents of regional self-sufficiency, marked a shift toward explicit implications, influencing later applications in studies despite lacking empirical validation of large-scale implementations. These figures and works, emerging amid ecological concerns, established 's intellectual foundation, though subsequent scholarship has scrutinized its assumptions about seamless ecological-cultural congruence.

Bioregionalism as a Framework

Core Principles and Sustainability Claims

Bioregionalism posits that human communities should align their social, economic, and cultural practices with the natural characteristics of their surrounding bioregion, such as watersheds, soil types, and native biota, to foster long-term ecological harmony. This approach, initially articulated by and Raymond Dasmann in 1977, defines bioregions as "bio-cultural" entities encompassing both physical landscapes and the human consciousness shaped by them, advocating for "living-in-place" where inhabitants derive necessities like food, energy, and materials primarily from local sources without disrupting broader ecosystems. Central to this is the principle of reinhabitation, which calls for ethical, responsible lifestyles that not only sustain but actively restore local ecosystems through practices like and watershed-based decision-making. Key tenets include localization of economies and to enhance resilience, emphasizing self-reliance in resource use while sharing knowledge across bioregions rather than promoting isolation. Proponents argue for appropriate technologies—such as small-scale and local —that meet human needs without exceeding the bioregion's , thereby allowing simultaneous flourishing of human and non-human life. These principles draw from ecological sciences, prioritizing biophysical limits over abstract political boundaries, as evidenced in early formulations that integrated , physiography, and for delineating regions. Sustainability claims within bioregionalism assert that place-based organization counters industrial globalization's environmental degradation by enabling regenerative land use and reducing transport-related emissions through localized production. Advocates, including Berg, contend this framework builds autonomous, resilient communities capable of maintaining biodiversity and soil health indefinitely, as demonstrated in conceptual models for watershed-scale planning. However, these assertions remain largely theoretical, with limited large-scale empirical validation; studies note bioregionalism's potential as a sustainability strategy but highlight its roots in philosophical rather than rigorously tested outcomes, often relying on case-specific anecdotes from initiatives like Cascadia rather than controlled metrics of long-term viability.

Political and Economic Implications

Bioregionalism advocates reorganizing political boundaries and structures around natural watershed and ecological limits rather than arbitrary national or administrative divisions, aiming to foster decentralized decision-making and local . Proponents argue this approach enhances democratic participation by aligning with biophysical realities, such as river basins that ignore political borders, thereby reducing the inefficiencies of centralized nation-state in addressing ecological issues. For instance, bioregional frameworks propose community-based that prioritizes local and consensus over top-down policies, potentially mitigating conflicts arising from mismatched political units and environmental flows. However, such carries risks of political fragmentation and weakened on transboundary challenges like or pandemics, as bioregional polities may lack the scale for coordinated defense, , or of across diverse populations. Critics note that while critiques the extractive tendencies of nation-states, its emphasis on place-based could exacerbate ethnic or resource-based tensions in heterogeneous regions, with limited empirical precedents beyond small-scale experiments like watershed councils in the . Real-world applications, such as Cascadia's cultural , have influenced local advocacy but failed to supplant federal structures, underscoring scalability barriers in diverse democracies. Economically, bioregionalism promotes localization of production and consumption to match regional carrying capacities, emphasizing in food, energy, and materials to minimize transport emissions and dependency on global supply chains. This model envisions economies centered on renewable resources, circular systems, and , where trade is limited to surplus exchanges, purportedly incentivizing as depletion directly impacts local populations. Theoretical benefits include reduced waste—through practices like and —and greater resilience to shocks, as seen in initiatives that localize 20-30% of food sourcing in participating UK communities by 2020. Yet, economic localization often conflicts with principles of , potentially raising costs and limiting specialization; for example, bioregions lacking rare minerals or may face shortages without imports, undermining affordability and dependent on global markets. Empirical critiques highlight that while small-scale bioregional economies can achieve metrics—like lower per-capita emissions in localized systems—scaling to urban densities proves challenging, with studies showing higher inefficiencies in isolated production versus integrated networks. Proponents' claims of democratic economic remain largely untested at population levels exceeding millions, where coordination failures could amplify inequalities between resource-rich and -poor bioregions.

Mapping and Examples

Methodologies for Delineation

Bioregions are delineated through integrative approaches that prioritize natural geophysical and biological boundaries over arbitrary political lines, often starting with major watersheds as core units due to their influence on ecological processes and resource cycling. Hydrological criteria, such as river basins and drainage divides, form the foundational layer, as these features dictate water flow, , and connectivity; for instance, the U.S. Geological Survey's Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) system classifies watersheds into nested levels (e.g., 2-digit regions covering ~250,000 square miles) that align with bioregional scales for mapping purposes. Early bioregional methodologies, developed in the 1970s by figures like , relied on qualitative assessments of , physiography (landforms and ), floristic and faunal distributions, and to identify life-zones where endemic and evolutionary adaptations predominate. These criteria emphasize observable patterns, such as shared vegetation communities shaped by soil types and elevation gradients, to approximate boundaries where ecological transitions occur, as seen in initial mappings of North American bioregions like the or Cascadia. Contemporary scientific delineations incorporate quantitative biogeographic tools, including of occurrence to detect areas of high biotic similarity or turnover (e.g., using dissimilarity matrices like Jaccard or Sorensen indices). Network-based methods model connectivity via , where nodes represent sites and edges denote shared taxa, enabling reproducible identification of bioregion cores and edges; a 2019 study applied this to global datasets, revealing hierarchical structures that outperform subjective expert delineations in transparency and testability. In , the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for (IBRA, version 7 as of 2012) combines remotely sensed on , , , soils, and to define 89 terrestrial bioregions, updated periodically with field validations to reflect biophysical coherence. Hybrid approaches in bioregional assessments, such as Australia's Bioregional Assessment Program (initiated 2012), fuse (surface and modeling), ( inventories), and to evaluate resource impacts, producing maps that delineate bioregions as units of ~30,000–300,000 square kilometers for policy applications. These methods prioritize empirical data over cultural overlays, though proponents like Berg noted potential refinements via local indigenous knowledge of seasonal patterns, provided it aligns with verifiable natural indicators. Challenges include scale dependency—e.g., overemphasis on watersheds may ignore atmospheric or gradients—and the need for multi-source validation to mitigate biases in input datasets.

Prominent Bioregions: Cascadia and Others

The Cascadia bioregion spans the Pacific Northwest of North America, encompassing watersheds of rivers draining into the Pacific Ocean through the temperate rainforest zone, from southeastern Alaska's panhandle southward to Cape Mendocino in northern California. This delineation crosses international and state boundaries, including British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and parts of Montana and Wyoming in some broader definitions tied to the Cascadia Subduction Zone and continental divide. Characterized by geological features such as subduction zones, volcanic arcs, and glaciated mountains, Cascadia supports diverse ecosystems including coastal rainforests, alpine meadows, and inland sagebrush steppes across approximately 75 ecoregions. The term originated in natural sciences for geological and botanical formations before adoption in bioregionalism to advocate alignment of human activities with these natural systems. Cascadia exemplifies bioregionalist principles through initiatives emphasizing local , such as salmon restoration tied to shared river basins and advocacy for governance reflecting ecological connectivity over political lines. Proponents highlight its role in fostering , with cultural movements like the Cascadian flag and bioregional congresses promoting "reinhabitation" practices adapted to the region's and . Empirical delineation relies on biophysical criteria including patterns averaging 1,000-5,000 mm annually in coastal areas and endemic species distributions, such as the and western red cedar. Beyond Cascadia, other delineated bioregions include the Klamath Mountains, spanning northwestern California and southwestern Oregon, defined by rugged terrain, Mediterranean climate influences, and high plant endemism with over 3,500 vascular plant species, many restricted to serpentine soils. This bioregion features distinct floristic provinces like the California chaparral and mixed conifer forests, supporting biodiversity hotspots amid fire-adapted ecosystems. Similar approaches identify the Sonoran Desert bioregion in the southwestern United States and Mexico, bounded by arid basins, saguaro-dominated landscapes, and seasonal monsoons driving ecological processes across 260,000 square kilometers. These examples illustrate bioregions' emphasis on hydrological divides and biotic communities, though delineation varies by scholarly focus on criteria like soil types and faunal ranges.

Applications and Recent Advances

In Resource Management and Policy

Bioregional frameworks in resource management emphasize delineating administrative and planning boundaries according to ecological features such as watersheds, soil types, and vegetation zones, aiming to align human activities with natural processes for more effective stewardship. In Australia, the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA), established in 1996 and covering 89 terrestrial bioregions, serves as a core tool for the National Reserve System, guiding the identification of conservation priorities and reservation targets across approximately 17.9 million square kilometers of land. This approach facilitates coordinated management of biodiversity and resources by transcending state boundaries, with policies under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) incorporating IBRA data to assess cumulative impacts and set measurable outcomes for threatened species recovery. Marine bioregional plans, implemented by the government since 2011 for regions like the North-west and Temperate East, identify key ecological features and vulnerabilities, leading to the establishment of over 50 marine protected areas and spatial management measures to mitigate threats from fishing and shipping. These plans integrate empirical data on species distributions and habitat connectivity, with monitoring frameworks evaluating effectiveness through indicators such as levels and metrics; for instance, the North-west plan has informed restrictions on demersal in 20% of the region to protect benthic habitats. In freshwater contexts, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority employs bioregions to manage water allocations and , balancing agricultural extraction with ecological flows, as evidenced by the Basin Plan's 2012 targets reducing use by up to 40% in some valleys to restore health. In the United States, bioregional-inspired policies manifest in watershed-based management, such as the Agency's Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) system, which delineates nested watersheds for targeted resource policies, enabling coordinated pollution control and restoration across political jurisdictions. A case in , , integrated bioregional planning for food-water-energy issues, linking urban development to aquifer recharge and agricultural efficiency, resulting in policies that reduced per capita water use by 20% between 2010 and 2015 through localized conservation incentives. Empirical assessments of such approaches indicate potential benefits in when priorities align across stakeholders, as seen in restoration initiatives where bioregional mapping improved outcomes by 15-30% in priority-setting accuracy compared to ad-hoc methods, though long-term effectiveness hinges on enforcement and rather than boundary delineation alone. Critics note that while bioregional policies promote causal alignment between ecosystems and , evidence of superior outcomes remains context-dependent; for example, Australia's bioregional plans have accelerated development approvals but faced challenges in addressing climate-driven shifts in bioregion boundaries, requiring ongoing adaptive revisions.

Bioregional Design and 2020s Innovations

Bioregional design applies ecological boundaries, such as watersheds and ecoregions, to inform , , and , prioritizing local materials, climate-adapted structures, and self-reliant systems to minimize environmental disruption. This approach emphasizes aligning human development with biophysical limits, including , , and native biota, rather than arbitrary political divisions, to foster regenerative and reduce reliance on long-distance supply chains. Core precepts include "with the land" by integrating ecological identity and from the outset, as outlined in bioregional planning guidelines that stress flows and as foundational metrics. In practice, bioregional design promotes circular metabolisms, where waste from one process becomes input for another, often drawing on frameworks like One Planet Living, which specifies ten principles for zero-carbon living, , and local sourcing across developments. Empirical applications demonstrate reduced carbon footprints through site-specific adaptations, such as using or timber from proximate forests in arid or forested zones, respectively, which enhance thermal performance without imported energy-intensive materials. These designs have been tested in eco-villages and regenerative projects, yielding data on improved and compared to conventional builds. The have seen innovations scaling bioregional design via networked hubs and digital tools for resilience amid climate volatility. Bioregional hubs emerged as integrated settlements functioning as "living laboratories," harmonizing ecosystems with modular, low-impact housing and food systems; for instance, prototypes in 2025 emphasize cooperative networks for equitable resource sharing across regions. The Institute's Design Lab, active through the decade, advanced bioregional solutions for fundamental needs like water management, incorporating data-driven modeling to predict disruptions and promote regeneration in vulnerable watersheds. Further advances include "bioregioning" practices, formalized post-2020 as and tools to enable regional , with events like the 2025 Bioregional Confluencing aggregating global efforts to standardize delineation methodologies using GIS and community input. Architectural innovations, such as those in Lot 8's Bioregional , integrated local biomaterials with software for adaptive structures, achieving up to 40% energy savings in pilot builds by 2025. These developments, while promising, rely on verifiable pilots rather than unproven claims, with peer-reviewed analyses highlighting challenges in data gaps for long-term efficacy.

Criticisms and Empirical Challenges

Practical and Scalability Issues

Implementing bioregionalism encounters substantial practical hurdles in boundary delineation, as determining precise ecological limits—such as watersheds, distributions, and geological features—often involves subjective interpretations that vary by and expert input, complicating consensus among stakeholders. These mapping challenges are exacerbated in areas with overlapping or transitional ecosystems, where rigid bioregional lines may ignore dynamic natural processes like species migration influenced by climate variability. Governance coordination poses further obstacles, particularly when bioregions transect existing political jurisdictions, as seen in proposals like Cascadia, which spans U.S. states and Canadian provinces, leading to conflicts over , regulatory authority, and that nationalist frameworks resist. initiatives frequently falter due to insufficient resources, training, and institutional support, with volunteer-driven efforts struggling against entrenched bureaucratic structures and lacking enforceable mechanisms for cross-jurisdictional cooperation. Scalability remains empirically unproven, with scholarly assessments highlighting a dearth of rigorous case studies demonstrating widespread success beyond small-scale or theoretical applications, often attributing this to an overreliance on local practices without accounting for broader systemic interdependencies. In urban contexts, bioregional strains against dense populations' demands for imported goods, , and specialized not viable at regional scales, fostering potential economic isolation and inequality as rural-urban divides persist without integrated global supply chains. Critics contend that while critiques growth economies, its decentralized model risks inefficiency in producing complex technologies or handling large-scale environmental threats like transboundary , which require supranational coordination rather than insular regionalism.

Ideological and Global Integration Critiques

Bioregionalism has faced ideological criticism for fostering and by prioritizing localized identities tied to natural boundaries, potentially leading to cultural insularity and economic that discourages broader human interconnections. Critics, including social ecologist , argue this emphasis risks romanticizing pre-industrial lifestyles and undermines progressive social movements by diverting focus from class-based or urban struggles to ecologically deterministic place-based loyalties. Its loose alignment with introduces further tensions, as bioregional decentralization lacks a coherent foundation in deep ecology's biocentric tenets, often weakening both by assuming unexamined synergies rather than resolving philosophical divergences. On global integration, bioregionalism's advocacy for self-sufficient regional economies clashes with empirical realities of interconnected supply chains, where local resource limits—such as of specialized minerals or technologies—render full infeasible without compromising productivity or innovation. The framework's rejection of supranational in favor of ecologically defined territories ignores causal dependencies in , like transboundary or , rendering it analytically limited in addressing planetary-scale dynamics. This localist orientation can exacerbate inequalities by creating exclusionary boundaries that prioritize ecological homogeneity over diverse human mobilities and trade flows essential for economic resilience. Proponents counter that critiques exploitative without fully supplanting it, yet empirical implementations, such as small-scale transition initiatives, have not scaled to demonstrate viability amid global capital mobility, highlighting gaps in integrating with international institutions like the WTO or UN frameworks. Ideologically, its anarchist roots may appeal to anti-hierarchical sentiments but falter in reconciling with statist realities, potentially fostering identitarian exclusions akin to neo-communal retrenchment rather than inclusive realism.

References

  1. https://www.oneearth.org/what-is-a-bioregion/
  2. https://www.fs.usda.gov/psw/publications/documents/wild/welsh/welsh3.PDF
  3. https://brandonletsinger.com/watersheds-ecoregions-bioregions/what-is-a-bioregion/
  4. https://planetdrum.org/bioregionalism-an-introduction/
  5. https://www.sipec.aoyama.ac.jp/uploads/03/Bioregionalism%2520A%2520Brief%2520Introduction%2520and%2520Overview.pdf
  6. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/werc/science/bioregions-pacific-us
  7. https://www.oneearth.org/bioregions-2023/
  8. https://earth.org/bioregionalism/
  9. http://www.scmbc.org/projects
  10. https://medium.com/oneearth/a-brief-history-of-bioregions-and-bioregionalism-in-scholarly-literature-ea141f9f480f
  11. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/bioregion_n
  12. https://deptofbioregion.org/bioregionalism/history/
  13. https://brandonletsinger.com/bioregional-history/bioregions-bioregionalism-literature-review-1970-1985/
  14. https://cascadiaunderground.org/reinhabiting-california/
  15. https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/260/385
  16. https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoregions
  17. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-025-02724-5
  18. https://deptofbioregion.org/bioregions/ecoregions-watersheds/
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5554710/
  20. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01866919
  21. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecm.1615
  22. https://www.fs.usda.gov/biology/resources/pubs/watershed/maps/watershed_classification_guide2011FS978.pdf
  23. https://www.epa.gov/hwp/integrated-assessment-healthy-watersheds
  24. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=hist_fac
  25. https://reader.exacteditions.com/issues/5704/page/29
  26. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47695167_BIOREGIONALISM_AS_A_NEW_DEVELOPMENT_PARADIGM
  27. https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/260/386
  28. https://planetdrum.org/our-founder-peter-berg/
  29. https://www.ugapress.org/9780820322056/dwellers-in-the-land/
  30. https://archive.org/details/dwellersinlandbi0000sale
  31. https://cascadiabioregion.org/what-is-bioregionalism
  32. https://deptofbioregion.org/principles/
  33. https://cascadiabioregion.org/department-of-bioregion/the-practice-of-bioregionalism-an-interview-with-richard-evenoff
  34. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14649357.2025.2524106
  35. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pan3.10548
  36. https://longnow.org/ideas/bioregional-futures/
  37. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/nation-states-are-destroying-the-world-could-bioregions-be-the-answer/
  38. https://weall.org/resource/bioregionalism
  39. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gec3.12722
  40. https://wiki.communitiesforfuture.org/wiki/Bioregionalism_and_economic_localisation
  41. https://centerforneweconomics.org/publications/mother-of-all-an-introduction-to-bioregionalism/
  42. https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/david-haenke-on-bioregionalism-ecological-economics-77be911685ce
  43. https://www.resilience.org/stories/2015-08-31/should-we-move-to-bioregionalism/
  44. https://ernesto-87727.medium.com/bioregionalism-and-the-future-of-sustainability-f4cb6726e388
  45. https://brandonletsinger.com/maps/the-basic-litmus-test-for-a-bioregion/
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6485529/
  47. https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/biodiversity/bioregions-and-evc-benchmarks
  48. https://www.csiro.au/en/research/natural-environment/water/bioregional-assessments
  49. https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/66/2/197/2670349
  50. https://decolonialatlas.wordpress.com/2014/12/10/the-cascadia-bioregion/
  51. https://regeneratecascadia.org/learn/cascadia-bioregion-2/
  52. https://cascadiabioregion.org/bioregional-boundaries
  53. https://earthlawcenter.squarespace.com/s/Cascadia-Bioregion.pdf
  54. https://www.cascadianow.org/bioregionalism
  55. https://cascadiabioregion.org/what-is-a-bioregion
  56. https://www.fs.usda.gov/psw/publications/skinner/psw_2006_skinner002.pdf
  57. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/land/nrs/science/ibra/australias-bioregion-framework
  58. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/marine/marine-bioregional-plans
  59. https://www.mdba.gov.au/basin/landscapes/bioregions
  60. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ecology-and-evolution/articles/10.3389/fevo.2022.958684/full
  61. https://environment.qld.gov.au/management/planning-guidelines/bioregional-planning
  62. https://bioregion.uk/principles
  63. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/05/bioregional-design-climate-change-global-challenges/
  64. https://www.bioregional.com/one-planet-living
  65. https://www.weforum.org/videos/bioregional-architecture/
  66. https://focities.com/designing-tomorrow-bioregional-hubs/
  67. https://www.bfi.org/programs/bfi-design-lab/
  68. https://tonycho1111.substack.com/p/an-introduction-to-bioregional-hubs
  69. https://cascadiabioregion.org/department-of-bioregion/bioregional-confluencing-2025-ambling-toward-planetary-bioregional-congressing
  70. https://designforsustainability.medium.com/bioregioning-the-defining-practice-of-regenerative-cultures-14af7ce71742
  71. https://uni.xyz/journal/bioregional-design-architecture-the-inno
  72. https://www.bioregionalearth.org/blog/regenerate-cascadia
  73. https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1485&context=showcase
  74. https://www.studocu.com/en-za/messages/question/6714148/bioregionalism-are-two-approaches-that-attempt-to-conceive-of-issues-of-environmental-ethics-through
  75. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30302156
  76. https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/question/what-are-the-drawbacks-of-bioregionalism/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.