Social Context
Social context metadata records the peoples and communities connected to an area and the languages spoken there. Where governance metadata describes decision-making systems, this category is about identity, belonging, and territorial relationships.
Fields
| Field | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
ethnicity | Peoples, nations, or communities associated with the area | Cofán, Secoya |
language | Indigenous or local languages spoken | A’ingae |
Why it Matters
Recognition
These two fields let the Atlas identify the Indigenous peoples and communities connected to an area, reflect territorial identities, and preserve naming and linguistic context. For Collective Lands in particular, where identity and governance are inseparable, omitting them would leave the record incomplete.
Representation
Conservation datasets have tended to record spatial boundaries while leaving out the peoples associated with those territories. Including social context improves the visibility of Indigenous and community systems, supports more inclusive representations of conservation, and keeps areas from being treated as purely spatial or administrative units.
Stewardship
Social context is also closely tied to how territories are managed. Governance systems are often rooted in cultural practice, stewardship reflects knowledge systems and traditions, and languages encode place-based ecological knowledge that exists nowhere else.
Relationships
Social context connects to several other parts of the Atlas:
- Governance — many systems are defined by the peoples or communities who hold them
- Collective Lands — identity is central to classification
- Assessments (CASE) — grounded in cultural knowledge and practice
- Provenance — contributors may be linked to specific communities
Within the platform, these fields enrich area descriptions, support filtering and grouping, provide context for assessments and indicators, and help interpret governance systems.
Sensitivity
In practice that means some information will be incomplete or intentionally limited, contributors may choose not to share certain details, and data may be generalized or restricted. The Atlas follows governance protocols and contributor decisions about what is shared rather than pressing for completeness.
In Practice
These fields are usually contributed by local organizations or partners, are often multi-valued (several peoples or languages in one area), and are refined as information improves. They matter most for Collective Lands, but also apply to co-managed and community-linked protected areas.