To facilitate place-based processes that foster inclusive conservation it is necessary to collect local/traditional knowledge, views, and values from multiple stakeholders. Some methods to gather such information were used in the Sierra de Guadarrama National Park:

• Oral histories and historical datasets review to reconstruct how past visions and drivers of environmental impact have changed over the last 50 years and inform current and future conservation goals;
• Interviews with local stakeholders on 1) how participation works in the protected area and potential barriers/opportunities for more social engagement, and 2) their visions for park management, the values and knowledge that underpin the visions, and their perceptions of landscape changes and the underlying drivers;
• Face-to-face surveys with residents, including participatory mapping tools (i.e. Maptionnaire) about landscape values and ecological knowledge. Online surveys with local stakeholders to identify changes in their visions, values and perceptions of the landscape after the COVID-19 pandemic; and
• Deliberative processes embedded in a participatory scenario planning exercise that used cognitive and emotional maps to collect collective knowledge of the protected area while capturing intertwined affective relationships.

The systematic monitoring of planted trees that is conducted by HAF and the gathering and registering of data of trees planted, including GPS locations, height, diameter, survival rates, and social benefits. The integrated tree monitoring system, called AKVO, was developed by Ecosia, a German organization which plants trees using revenue generated from their search engine. Trained in the use of this application, the monitoring team disperses throughout the regions, visiting the farmers and monitoring the trees that were planted during the previous planting season. Stored in a shared database, the information collected by the team in collaboration with local nursery caretakers will enhance informed decision-making at all levels of governance and across sectors by filling gaps in knowledge and precedence regarding practical application of resource management. 

Without doubt, stone tidal weirs contribute to marine biodiversity.  In comparison with intertidal zoneswithout stone tidal weir, those with stone tidal weirs have host diverse marine species.

Once stone tidal weirs are abandoned, the less fish is caught.  As the attention of local people shifts to destructive modern fishery,  all aspects connected to cultural diversity would also be disappeared.  In order to maintain coastal communities sustainable, they must not lose their biocultural diversity; stone tidal weirs could be served as an icon of such diversity as well. The UNESCO UNITWIN university network researches and studies how stone tidal weirs in safeguarding biocultural diversity.

The underwater cultural heritage of stone tidal weirs was originally born as a local fishing mechanism. The processes are based on a rich local traditional ecological knowledge, which brought on by members of local coastal communities. Traditionally, local communities used stone tidal weirs twice a month during the spring tide; a custom that has been preventing overfishing by locals. At high tide they sometimes functioned as fishponds. 

The traditional ecological knowledge, for instance, on non-fishing periods, as well as that on fishery-related ritual activities such as beach opening ceremonies, is widely observed at coastal communities but it is rapidly disappearing before being recorded properly by anthropologists or archaeologists. As stone tidal weirs are easily broken by typhoons or high waves, frequent community-led repairing works based on traditional knowledge are absolutely needed. In case stone tidal weirs are abandoned, however, both communal spirit and traditional ecological knowledge would extinct.  

People learn best through meaningful and fun experiences linked to evidence-based information that supports them to take action on plastic waste beach management.

The multidisciplinary approach taken by Connecting Practice, with its use of representatives from both natural and cultural heritage organisations, as well as local and international partners, has highlighted the differences in interpretation and understanding of applicable terminology and concepts. In many situations, seemingly similar concepts have accumulated slightly different meanings depending on their context. The terminology and concepts used in one disciplinary realm have different meanings in others or, conversely, distinct terms or notions in one realm play a similar function in another. The application of multiple vocabularies can lead to confusion and misunderstanding that can hinder mutual use across disciplines.

Establishing a common ground for terminology was identified as being helpful for the integration of concepts and practices to ensure collective use and understanding. In order to address this need, the Commentary on Nature-Culture Keywords emerged as a result of the work done in Connecting Practice. It is a compilation of terms and concepts divided into three clusters (biocultural approaches, resilience and traditional knowledge), with the goal of creating common understanding and collective use to assist future project activities.

“Surfonomics” aims to document surfing’s economic contributions to local and regional economies. Through Surfonomics research, we determine the economic value of a wave and surfing to local communities to help decision makers make better choices to protect their coastal resources and waves.

Using a beach survey of surfers in San Miguel, Ensenada, we were able to quantify that an average tourist spends approximately $111 US dollars a day. As the average surfer spends 10 days per year in the area, it is calculated that a visiting surfer spends $1,151 US dollars a year in Ensenada. 

These figures show that surfing helps drive the local economy of Ensenada and that decision-makers must take into account the importance of the surf zone in terms of coastal management.

The parties of the Laponia Process envisioned to create a new management plan for the property using the values within three areas: the natural environment and its high values; the living Sámi culture and reindeer industry; and the historical heritage arising from previous usage of the land. This participatory management plan is based on a shared understanding of the World Heritage property by all stakeholders involved in the process and the implementation of the plan. Besides the governing institutions (municipalities, county, governmental agencies in charge of heritage conservation), important stakeholders to be considered and integrated in this participatory process are the Sámi villages which are organizations responsible for the reindeer husbandry within a specific area. It is a legal entity and they are organized through village meetings.

The Laponia Process was an approach to dialogue created and developed by a diversity of stakeholders in the Laponian Area World Heritage property. Since Laponia is a large area which consists of several protected areas, to establish a coordinated management system as a whole has been very challenging since its inscription in the World Heritage List. The County Administrative Board of Norbotten and the Sámi communities and municipalities of Jokkmokk and Gällivare started originally to prepare their conservation programs independently. The Laponia Process started by the initiative of the Governor of Norrbotten in 2005 including all stakeholders in a process of dialogue based on a set of common values, which would lead the parties to agree in crucial issues and the terms in which the Laponian Area should be managed. All decisions were determined to be taken by consensus, and new regulations for the national parks and nature reserves were requested. In 2006, the parties signed a common agreement which they sent to the Government, which contained:

• A set of common basic values
• Common intentions for a number of efforts
• The establishment of a temporary Laponia delegation
• Preparations for the start of a World Heritage management group with a Sámi majority on the committee.

In order to promote an operational connectivity between the diverse upriver and downriver sub-basins (zones) of a river basin, including both ecosystems and productive activities, water was chosen as the conductive element; the element to bring the zones and stakeholders together. Modelling of the surface water supply and sediment retention in different zones permitted the identification of provider-recipient-accumulation relationships. Through this, the dynamics between demand for hydrological services (e.g. populations, tourist zones) and those that produce them (mountainous zones with forest cover) could be identified and connected. Based hereon, the different stakeholders were brought together to learn about and exchange on key information on zonal levels of production and services available. This in turn led to the identification of what should be done where and by whom.