Indigenous and Western frameworks reveal bias in the scientific literature on salmon's contributions to social‐ecological systems

Abstract Benefits and values of natural‐origin and hatchery‐origin salmon, the latter representing a key component of salmon management along the west coast of North America, have yet to be described in a way that relies on both Western and Indigenous perspectives. We characterize the social‐ecological roles of anadromous Pacific salmon and trout, as depicted in peer‐reviewed literature, in a systematic review. We identified 155 papers that met our criteria based on a systematic review of 685 published papers found through Web of Science. We used two existing frameworks—Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) and Earth Economics' Sociocultural Framework on the Significance of Salmon for Tribes and First Nations (EEScF)—to review and characterize ecosystem services and values of salmon in general and hatchery‐origin salmon. We found that most of the values described were ecological rather than sociocultural, mapped more onto CICES than EEScF, and did not consider hatchery‐origin salmon. Applying the CICES framework, authors frequently described how salmon provide nutrients and energy to various systems and organisms, regulate freshwater chemistry and have significance for culture or heritage. Some of these benefits had equivalent values within EEScF, although far fewer of the references in the literature addressed attributes of this framework relative to CICES. Within EEScF, the importance of salmon as food was most frequently described, followed by the significance of salmon for Indigenous management systems. Synthesis and applications . We recommend broadening research and management to reflect the multiple perspectives of the value of Pacific salmon to ecosystems, Indigenous peoples and local communities, including the contributions of hatchery‐origin salmon. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.