Is monistic taxonomy useful for conservation of biodiversity?

Taxonomic instability arising from pluralism has been difficult to handle for conservationists, as they generally expect from taxonomy a stable nomenclature and species delimitation criteria within a unified species concept. While taxonomic monism, i.e. the search for a unified species concept, can be desirable on theoretical grounds, taxonomic pluralism appears unavoidable on practical or operational grounds. Pluralism, the diversity of views and perspectives about “what and how” to study, is also an intrinsic positive feature of science; thus, it is useful for taxonomic progress. Here, we review relevant insights coming from philosophy of science, taxonomy, biodiversity conservation and socioecological studies to discuss a) what are the objects of conservation of biodiversity, b) links between conservation practice and taxonomy, c) examples showing that taxonomies developed within traditional ecological knowledge systems overlap and complement academic taxonomy and contain relevant biological information for conservation, and d) some consequences of overstating monistic taxonomy in conservation. With a caveat about the risk of overstating pluralistic taxonomy, we underline that developing an intercultural perspective on taxonomies is a necessary step toward understanding different knowledge systems and valuing useful information for effective biodiversity conservation management.