Cultural Benefits Action Opportunity Framework

GCDAMP Annual Reporting Meeting, Jan 12, 2022

Kristin Hoelting, Ph.D. Candidate

Human Dimensions of Natural Resources

Gavin Lab, Colorado State University
Presentation Goals

 Why Improve Integration 

of Cultural Benefits?

 Our Research:

Value Pluralism and 

Knowledge Pluralism

Action Opportunity 

Framework

 Example: GCDAMP
BACKGROUND: Cultural Benefits of ES

Identity

Experiences

Capabilities

(Definition Source: Fish et al. 2016)
DIRECTIVE: 2015 ES Federal Memo

(Source: White House 2015)
DIRECTIVE: 2015 ES Federal Memo

The Memorandum directs Agencies to:

 “Develop and institutionalize policies to promote consideration of 

ecosystem services, where appropriate and practicable, in planning, 

investments, and regulatory contexts” (pg. 2).

 Consider full range of benefits and tradeoffs... including cultural 

benefits.

 Qualitative and quantitative methods

 Monetary and non-monetary values where appropriate

(Source: White House 2015)
DIRECTIVES: Equity and Justice

Executive Order 14008 of January 27, 2021

Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad

Principle 2 of the 30 by 30 Report: 

Conserve America’s Lands and Waters for the 

Benefit of All People

Nov. 15, 2021

SUBJECT: Indigenous Traditional Ecological 

Knowledge and Federal Decision Making

July 20, 2021

SUBJECT: Interim Implementation Guidance 

for the Justice40 Initiative

(Source: OSTP 

and CEQ 2021)
OUR RESEARCH: Pluralism and ES 

 Value pluralism: Pluralistic articulation or assessment 

of value, with reference to multiple, incommensurable 

value aspects and value perspectives, e.g., instrumental, 

relational, and intrinsic aspects of value. 

 Knowledge pluralism: Multiple ways of knowing, 

including distinct worldviews and diverse knowledge 

forms understood to convey truths about ecosystems 

and truths about well-being. 
1) Knowledge Forms

2) Areas of Opportunity

3) Framework
1) Knowledge Forms Critical Interpretive Synthesis: 

A systematic review 

of environmental 

management 

literature

ENACTED

(Knowledge-as-Practice)

Value Emphasis: 

Holistic

Perspective: 

Context-Specific

TRANSLATED

(Knowledge-as-Product)

MORE

CONTEXTUALIZE

D

Ethnographic 

Research

MORE

ABSTRACTED 

Standardized 

Categories or 

Indicators

Value Emphasis: Holistic/Relational 

Perspective: Context-Specific

Value Emphasis: Instrumental

Perspective: Universalizing
2) Opportunity Map

Cultural 

Comprehension

Translation 

to Product

Management 

Practice

Institutional 

Design
3) Action Opportunity Framework
GCDAMP as an Example

Lorcel/Shutterstock.com Viv1/Shutterstock.com
Knowledge Forms Available to the GCDAMP 

ABSTRACTED 

 Monetizing cultural benefits 

with general public.

 Non-monetary preference 

ranking with Tribes.

 Inventory of sites of Tribal 

importance on the landscape 

e.g., waterfalls, springs, river 

confluence, watersheds.

 Inventory of archaeological 

sites that are actively visited, 

such as salt caves.

 Plant and animal species of 

cultural importance.

 Metric: Number of trout 

removals.

CONTEXTUALIZED 

 Tribal river trip reports.

 Tribal letters to Federal 

agencies for environmental 

compliance, e.g., EIS 

process.

 Letter to the Biden 

administration; Letters to 

Secretary of the Interior.

 Videos and other media 

identifying and illustrating 

relational values Tribes hold 

for the Grand Canyon.

 Ethnographic Reports (not 

always publicly available)

 Survey questions asking how 

and why resources are 

important to Tribes.

ENACTED FORMS 

 Tribes maintain relations and 

reproduce knowledge by 

visiting sacred sites (e.g., 

river trips), storytelling, 

ceremony, and other 

practices.

 Letters to the 

administration and Federal 

agencies.

 Tribal representatives 

express traditional concepts 

and identify culturally 

appropriate management 

approaches during GCDAMP 

meetings.

 Tribes object to mechanical 

removal of trout.
Opportunity Mapping

Abstracted Translations

Management 

Practice

Institutional 

Design

Cultural 

Comprehension

Translation 

to Product

Monetary Valuation of Resources

Non-Monetary Preference 

Ranking

(Conveying Instrumental Value)

Source: NPS Tracking the Number of Times 

Mechanical Removal of Trout 

occurs.

(Attempting to bring Relational 

Value into management)
Opportunity Mapping

Translation 

to Product

Management 

Practice

Institutional 

Design

Cultural 

Comprehension

Contextualized 

Translations

FILM: “The Zuni religious leaders 

emphasized that non-Zuni people 

and federal agencies do not know 

about or appreciate these Zuni 

connections because they have 

ignored them in actions and 

policy. This film is viewed as a tool 

to educate and inform them, and 

hopefully, reinforce to the NPS the 

need for a Zuni perspective on 

how the Grand Canyon should be 

treated and managed”

(Dongoske 2020, p. 231).

Source: Skyship Films
Opportunity Mapping

Enacted Knowledge Forms

Zuni Letter to Biden 

Administration

The Zuni Tribe and Zuni people are not 

given equal opportunities and 

consideration as a result “an epistemic 

hierarchy that celebrates the virtues of 

science and capitalism, and 

universalizes Western values” (p. 7).

Translation 

to Product

Cultural 

Comprehension

Management 

Practice

Institutional 

Design

Objection to the Mechanical 

Removal of Trout. 

Source: NPS

(Enacting relational values)
• (Quantification)
Opportunities for Incorporating Knowledge

ABSTRACTED 

 Monetizing cultural benefits

with general public.

 Non-monetary preference

ranking with Tribes.

 Inventory of sites of Tribal

importance on the landscape

e.g., waterfalls, springs, river

confluence, watersheds.

 Inventory of archaeological

sites that are actively visited,

such as salt caves.

 Plant and animal species of

cultural importance.

 Metric: Number of trout

removals.

• (Quantification)
Opportunities for Incorporating Knowledge

CONTEXTUALIZED 

 Tribal river trip reports.

 Tribal letters to Federal 

agencies for environmental 

compliance, e.g., EIS 

process.

 Videos and other media 

identifying and illustrating 

relational values Tribes hold 

for the Grand Canyon.

 Ethnographic Reports (not 

always publicly available)

 Survey questions asking how 

and why resources are 

important to Tribes.

 Letter to the Biden 

administration; Letters to 

Secretary of the Interior.
Opportunities for Incorporating Knowledge

ENACTED FORMS 

 Tribes enact knowledge of

well-being through visiting

sacred sites (e.g., river trips),

storytelling, ceremony, and

other practices.

 Tribes demonstrate

relational values on river

trips with other stakeholders.

 Tribal representatives

express traditional concepts

and identify culturally

appropriate management

approaches during GCDAMP

meetings.

 Tribes object to mechanical

removal of trout.

 Letters to the

administration and Federal

agencies.
GCDAMP Decision Context

Hierarchy of Directives

Colorado River Compact Colorado River Basin Project Act

Federal 

Memoranda LAW OF THE RIVER Executive

Orders

Grand Canyon Protection Act Endangered Species Act

EIS Resource Management Goals

“TribalResources” Recreation Hydropower

Native Fish and Vegetation Sport Fishery

Archaeological and 

Cultural Resources
Framework Goals

 Achieve Value Pluralism 

through Knowledge 

Pluralism

 Identify Action 

Opportunities

 Actions that can be 

implemented within existing 

agency processes.

 Acknowledge that our 

current structures and 

systemic biases currently 

keep many opportunities out 

of reach.
Core Academic References

 Chan et al. 2012. Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and 

navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ 74: 8-18.

 Chan et al. 2018. Editorial overview: Relational values: what are they, and 

what’s the fuss about? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 

2018, 35: A1–A7.

 Dongoske, K.E. 2020. Making mitigation meaningful to descendant 

communities: An example from Zuni. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 

8: 225-235.

 Fish et al. 2016. Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel 

framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosyst Serv 21: 208-217. 

 Pascual et al. 2017. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES 

approach. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 26: 7-16.
Policy References with URLs:

 Fed. Memo. M-16-01, Oct. 7, 2015: Incorporating ecosystem services into federal decision making. 

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2016/m-16-01.pdf

 Memorandum for the Heads of Departments and Agencies, Nov. 15, 2021: Indigenous Traditional 

Ecological Knowledge and Federal Decision Making. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2021/11/111521-OSTP-CEQ-ITEK-Memo.pdf

 E.O. 13985, Jan. 20, 2021: Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through 

the Federal Government. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidentialactions/2021/01/20/executive-order-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underservedcommunities-through-the-federal-government/

 The following final 16 PDF pages are a letter from the Zuni Governor to the Biden administration 

commenting on E.O. 13895. This letter was used as an example of ”Enacted Knowledge” earlier in 

the PowerPoint presentation.

 Equity Initiatives arising from the E.O. 14008, Jan. 27, 2021: Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home 

and Abroad: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executiveorder-on-tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad/, including:

 30 by 30: https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/report-conserving-and-restoring-america-thebeautiful-2021.pdf

 Justice40: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/07/20/the-path-to-achievingjustice40/