Rural People's Knowledge and Perception of Landscape: A Case Study From the Mexican Pacific Coast

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 759-774

  Campos, Minerva ^a,b   Velázquez, Alejandro ^a   Verdinelli, Gerardo Bocco ^a   Priego Santander, Ángel Guadalupe ^a   McCall, Michael K ^a,c   Boada, Martí ^b  

^a INSTITUTO DE MATEMÁTICAS   (Mexico)

^b INSTITUT DE CIÈNCIA I TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTALS   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

environmental goods and services; farmer's perception; Landscape Perception Unit Type Importance Value Index (LPTIVI); landscape unit; local knowledge

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; PERCEPTION; RURAL POPULATION; SPATIAL COGNITION; TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE;

MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; PACIFIC COAST [MEXICO]; PACIFIC COAST [NORTH AMERICA];

EID: 84862624984     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2011.606458     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Alcorn, J. B. 1995. Ethnobotanical knowledge systems: A resource for meeting rural development goals. In The cultural dimension of development, ed. D. M. Warren, L. J. Slikkerveer, and D. Brokensha, 1-12. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
2. Antrop, M. 2000. Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 77: 17-28.
3. Barrera-Bassols, N., and V. Toledo. 2005. Ethnoecology of the Yucatec Maya: Symbolism, knowledge and management of natural resources. J. Latin Am. Geogr. 4: 9-41.
4. Bell, S. 2001. Landscape pattern, perception and visualization in the visual management of forests. Landscape Urban Plan. 54: 201-211.
5. Berlin, B., D. E. Breedlove, and P. H. Raven. 1974. Principles of Tzeltal plant classification: An introduction to the botanical ethnography of a Mayan-speaking people of Highland Chiapas. New York and London: Academic Press.
6. Bernard, H. 2005. Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Oxford, UK: Altamira Press.
7. Bray, D. B., L. Merino-Pérez, and D. Barry. 2005. The community forests of Mexico: Managing for sustainable landscapes. Austin: University of Texas Press.
8. Brewer, D. 1993. Patterns in the recall of persons in a student community. Social Networks 15: 335-359.
9. Bocco, G. 1991. Traditional knowledge for soil conservation in central Mexico. J. Soil Water Conserv. 46: 346-348.
10. Borgatti, S.1996a. ANTHROPAC 4.0. Natick, MA: Analytical Technologies.
11. Borgatti, S. 1996b. ANTHROPAC 4.0 Reference Manual. Natick, MA: Analytical Technologies.
12. Buijs, A., B. Pedroli, and Y. Luginbuühl. 2006. From hiking through farmland to farming in a leisure landscape: Changing social perceptions of the European landscape. Landscape Ecol. 21: 375-389.
13. Castaneda, H., and J. Stepp. 2007. Ethnoecological importance value (EIV) methodology: Assessing the cultural importance of ecosystems as sources of useful plants for the Guaymi people of Costa Rica. Ethnobot. Res. Appl. 5: 249-257.
14. Chalmers, N., and C. Fabricius. 2007. Expert and generalist local knowledge about land-cover change on South Africa's wild coast: Can local ecological knowledge add value to science? Ecol. Soci. 12 (1): 10. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art10 (accessed 8 January 2009).
15. Da Silva, V., C. Andrade, and U. Albuquerque. 2006. Revising the cultural significance index: The case of the Fulni-ô in Northeastern Brazil. Field Methods 18: 98-108.
16. Daniels, A., K. Paintera, and J. Southworth. 2008. Milpa imprint on the tropical dry forest landscape in Yucatan, Mexico: Remote sensing and field measurement of edge vegetation. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 123: 293-304.
17. Davenport, M., and D. Anderson. 2005. Getting from sense of place to place-based management: An interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Society Nat. Resources 18: 625-641.
18. Davidson-Hunt, I., and F. Berkes. 2003. Learning as you journey: Anishinaabe perception of social-ecological environments and adaptive learning. Conserv. Ecol. 8 (1): 5. http://www.consecol.org/vol8/iss1/art5 (accessed 10 October 2009).
19. De Groot, R., M. Wilson, and R. Boumans. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 41: 393-408.
20. Duvall, C. 2008. Classifying physical geographic features: The case of Maninka farmers in southwestern Mali. Geogr. Ann. Ser. B Hum. Geogr. 90: 327-348.
21. Environmental Systems Research Institute. 2004. ArcGIS 9.0. Redlands, CA: ESRI.
22. Evans, K., W. de. Jong, P. Mir, and P. Cronkleton. 2006. Evaluating and adapting multidisciplinary landscape assessment in forest-dependent communities in the Northern Bolivian Amazon. CIFOR MLA Testing Project Report. Version 2-pub. Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia: CIFOR.
23. Food and Agriculture Organization. 1993. FESLM: An international framework for evaluating sustainable land management. World Resources Report 73. Rome: FAO.
24. Gunderson, K., and A. Watson. 2007. Understanding place meanings on the Bitterroot National Forest, Montana. Society Nat Resources 20: 705-721.
25. Hunn, E. 1977. Tzeltal folk zoology: The classification of discontinuities in nature. New York: Academic Press.
26. Johnson, L. 2000. "A place that's Good"; Gitksan landscape perception and ethnoecology. Hum. Ecol. 28: 301-325.
27. Kaplan, S. 1979. Perception and landscape: Conceptions and misconceptions. In Our national landscape: Applied techniques for analysis and management of the visual resource, ed. G. H. Elsner and R. Smardon, 241-248. General Technical Report PSW-35. Berkeley, CA: USDA Forest Service.
28. Maass, J. M., P. Balvanera, A. Castillo, G. C. Daily, H. A. Mooney, P. Ehrlich, M. Quesada, A. Miranda, V. J. Jaramillo, F. García-Oliva, A. Martínez-Yrizar, H. Cotler, J. López-Blanco, A. Pérez-Jiménez, A. Búrquez, C. Tinoco, G. Ceballos, L. Barraza, R. Ayala, and J. Sarukhán. 2005. Ecosystem services of tropical dry forests: Insights from longterm ecological, and social research on the Pacific Coast of Mexico. Ecol. Soc. 10 (1): 17. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/art17 (accessed 9 January 2009).
29. Martin, G. J. 1995. Ethnobotany: A methods manual. New York: Chapman & Hall.
30. McCall, M. K., and P. Minang. 2005. Assessing participatory-GIS for community-based natural resource management: Claiming community forests in Cameroon. Geogr. J. 171: 340-356.
31. Nazarea, V.2006. Local knowledge and memory in biodiversity conservation. Annu. Rev. Anthropol.35:317-335.
32. Nazarea-Sandoval, V. 1995. Local knowledge and agricultural decision making in the Philippines: Class, gender, and resistance. London: Cornell University Press.
33. Negrete, G., and G. Bocco. 2003. Community-based land use planning: an alternative for participatory planning in the context of Mexican environmental policy [in Spanish]. Gac. Ecol. 68: 9-22.
34. Oudwater, N., and A. Martin. 2003. Methods and issues in exploring local knowledge of soils. Geoderma 111: 387-401.
35. Palmer, J. 2004. Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape Urban Plan. 69: 201-218.
36. Posey, D. 1985. Indigenous management of tropical forest ecosystems: The case of the Kayapó indians of the Brazilian Amazon. Agrofor. Systems 3: 1572-1680.
37. Primdahl, J. 1999. Agricultural landscapes as places of production and for living in: Owner's versus producer's decision making and the implications for planning. Landscape Urban Plan. 46: 143-150.
38. Pulido, J., and G. Bocco. 2003. The traditional farming system of a Mexican indigenous community: The case of Nuevo San Juan Parangaricutiro, Michoacán, Mexico. Geoderma 111: 249-265.
39. Reyes-García, V., N. Marti, T. Mcdade, S. Tanner, and V. Vadez. 2007. Concepts and methods in studies measuring individual ethnobotanical knowledge. J. Ethnobiol. 27: 182-203.
40. Romney, A., and R. D'Andrade. 1964. Cognitive aspects of English kin terms. Special publication, Transcultural Studies in Cognition. Am. Anthropologist 66: 146-170.
41. Roth, R. 2004. Spatial organization of environmental knowledge: Conservation conflicts in the inhabited forest of northern Thailand. Ecol. Soc. 9 (3): 5. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art5 (accessed 9 October 2009).
42. Smith, J. 1993. Using ANTHROPAC 3.5 and a spreadsheet to compute a free-list salience index. Cult. Anthropol. Methods 9: 8-12.
43. Theobald, D., T. Spies, J. Kline, B. Maxwell, N. Hobbs, and V. Dale. 2005. Ecological support for rural land use planning. Ecol. Appl. 15: 1906-1914.
44. Thoms, C. A., and D. R. Betters. 1998. The potential for ecosystem management in Mexicós forest ejidos. For. Ecol. Manage. 103: 149-157.
45. Tress, B., and G. Tress. 2001. Capitalising on multiplicity: A transdisciplinary systems approach to landscape research. Landscape Urban Plan. 57: 143-157.
46. Turner, N. J. 1988. "The importance of a rose": Evaluating the cultural significance of plants in Thompson and Lillooet Interior Salish. Am. Anthropol. 90: 272-290.
47. Valencia-Sandoval, C., D. N. Flanders, and R. Kozak. 2010. Participatory landscape planning and sustainable community development: Methodological observations from a case study in rural Mexico. Landscape Urban Plan. 94: 63-70.
48. Velázquez, A., E. M. Cué-Bär, A. Larrazábal, N. Sosa, J. L. Villaseñor, M. K. McCall, and G. Ibarra-Manríquez. 2009. Building participatory landscape-based conservation alternatives: A case study of Michoacán, Mexico. Appl. Geogr. 29: 513-526.
49. Warren, M. D., J. Slikkerveer, and D. Brokensha. 1995. The cultural dimension of development: Indigenous knowledge systems. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.