The influence of socioeconomic factors on traditional knowledge: A cross scale comparison of palm use in northwestern South America

Ecology and Society

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Paniagua Zambrana, Narel Y ^a   Camara Lerét, Rodrigo ^b   Bussmann, Rainer W ^c   Macía, Manuel J ^b  

^a Herbario Nacional de Bolivia   (Bolivia)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN   (United States)

Author keywords

Arecaceae; Indigenous communities; Livelihood; Quantitative ethnobotany; Traditional ecological knowledge; Tropical rainforests

Indexed keywords

ETHNOBOTANY; INDIGENOUS POPULATION; RAINFOREST; REGIONAL PATTERN; SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS; TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE;

AMAZONIA; ANDES; BOLIVIA; CHOCO; COLOMBIA; ECUADOR; PERU;

ARECACEAE;

EID: 84924413133     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5751/ES-06934-190409     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Alburquerque, U. P., and P. Muniz de Medeiros. 2012. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis applied to ethnobiological research. Ethnobiology and Conservation 1:6.
2. Arnold, J. E. M., and M. Ruiz Pérez. 2001. Can non-timber forest products match tropical forest conservation and development objectives? Ecological Economics 39:437-447. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00236-1
3. Balick, M. J. 1984. Ethnobotany of palms in the neotropics. Advances in Economic Botany 1:923.
4. Balslev, H., T. R. Knudsen, A. Byg, M. Kronborg, and C. Grandez. 2010. Traditional knowledge, use, and management of Aphandra natalia (Arecaceae) in Amazonian Peru. Economic Botany 64(1):55-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12231-009-9105-4
5. Beck, S. G., T. J. Killeen, and E. García. 1993. Vegetación de Bolivia. Pages 6-24 in T. J. Killeen, E. García, and S. G. Beck, editors. Guía de árboles de Bolivia. Herbario Nacional de Bolivia, Missouri Botanical Garden, La Paz, Bolivia.
6. Benz, B. F., J. E. Cevallos, F. M. Santana, J. A. Rosales, and S. M. Graf. 2000. Losing knowledge about plant use in the Sierra de Mazatlan Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Economic Botany 54 (2):183-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02907821
7. Berkes, F., J. Colding, and C. Folke. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10(5): 1251-1262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2
8. Borchsenius, F., H. Borgtoft, and H. Balslev. 1998. Manual to the palms of Ecuador. AUU Reports 37:12-17.
9. Brokamp, G., N. Valderrama, M. Mittelbach, C. A. Grandez, A. S. Barfod, and M. Weigend. 2011. Trade in palm products in northwestern South America. Botanical Review 77(4):571-606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12229-011-9087-7
10. Brosi, B. J., M. J. Balick, R. Wolkow, R. Lee, M. Kostka, W. Raynor, R. Gallen, A. Raynor, P. Raynor, and D. Lee Ling. 2007. Cultural erosion and biodiversity: canoe-making knowledge in Pohnpei, Micronesia. Conservation Biology 21(3):875-879. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00654.x
11. Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush. 1992. Hierarchical linear models. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.
12. Byg, A. 2004. Humans and plants of the rain forest: factors affecting local knowledge and use of plants. Dissertation. Department of Systematic, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
13. Byg, A., and H. Balslev. 2001. Diversity and use of palms in Zahamena, eastern Madagascar. Biodiversity & Conservation 10:951-970. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1016640713643
14. Byg, A., and H. Balslev. 2004. Factors affecting local knowledge of palms in Nangaritza Valley in South-Eastern Ecuador. Journal of Ethnobiology 24(2):255-278.
15. Byg, A., and H. Balslev. 2006. Palms in indigenous and settler communities in southeastern Ecuador: farmers’ perceptions and cultivation practices. Agroforestry Systems 67:147-158. http://dx. doi.org/10.1007/s10457-005-1704-1
16. Byg, A., J. Vormisto, and H. Balslev. 2007. Influence of diversity and road access on palm extraction at landscape scale in SE Ecuador. Biodiversity and Conservation 16:631-642. http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/s10531-005-1342-y
17. Caballero, R. 1995. La Etnobotánica en las comunidades negras e indígenas del delta del rí‛o Patía. Programa de investigación, proyecto bosque de Guandal/PNUD Colombia 89.
18. Cámara-Leret, R., N. Paniagua-Zambrana, H. Balslev, and M. J. Macía. 2014. Ethnobotanical knowledge is vastly underdocumented in northwestern South America. PLoS ONE 9(1): e85794. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085794
19. Cámara-Leret, R., N. Paniagua-Zambrana, and M. J. Macía. 2012. Standard protocol for gathering palm ethnobotanical data and socioeconomic variables across the tropics. Pages 41-72 in B. Ponman and R. W. Bussmann, editors. Medicinal plants and the legacy of Richard E. Schultes. Proceedings of the Botany 2011 Symposium Honoring Richard E Schultes. Graficart, Trujillo, Peru.
20. Campos, M. T., and C. Ehringhaus. 2003. Plant virtues are in the eyes of the beholders: a comparison of known palm uses among indigenous and folk communities of southwestern Amazonia. Economic Botany 57(3):324-344.
21. Cook, F. E. 1995. Economic botany data collection standard. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Surrey, UK.
22. Coomes, O. T. 1996. Income formation among Amazonian peasant households in northeastern Peru: empirical observations and implications for market-oriented conservation. Yearbook, Conference of Latin Americanist Geographers 22:51-64.
23. Coomes, O. T., and B. L. Barham. 1997. Rain forest extraction and conservation in Amazonia. Geographical Journal 163:180-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3060181
24. Figueiredo, G. M., H. F. Leitão-Filho, and A. Begossi. 1993. Ethnobotany of Atlantic forest coastal communities: diversity of plant uses in Gamboa (Itacuruçá Island, Brazil). Human Ecology 21:419-430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00891142
25. Galeano, G. 2000. Forest use at the Pacific coast of Chocó, Colombia: a quantitative approach. Economic Botany 54(3):358-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02864787
26. Galeano, G., and R. Bernal. 2010. Palmas de Colombia: Guía de campo. Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
27. Godoy, R., and M. Contreras. 2001. A comparative study of education and tropical deforestation among lowland Bolivian Amerindians: forest values, environmental externality, and school subsidies. Economic Development and Cultural Change 49:555-574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/452515
28. Godoy, R., V. Reyes-García, J. Broesch, I. C. Fitzpatrick, P. Giovarmini, M. R. M. Rodriguez, N. Jha, T. Huanca, W. R. Leonard, T. W. McDade, S. Tanner, and TAPS Bolivia Study Team. 2009. Long-term (secular) change of ethnobotanical knowledge of useful plants separating cohort and age effects. Journal of Anthropological Research 65(1):51-67.
29. Goldstein, H. 2003. Multilevel statistical models. Third edition. Kendall's Library of Statistics. Arnold, London, UK.
30. Gómez-Baggethun, E., and V. Reyes-García. 2013. Reinterpreting change in traditional ecological knowledge. Human Ecology 41 (4):643-647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9577-9
31. Gray, C. L., R. E. Bilsborrow, J. L. Bremner, and F. Lu. 2008. Indigenous land use in the Ecuadorian Amazon: a cross-cultural and multilevel analysis. Human Ecology 36(1):97-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-007-9141-6
32. Hanazaki, N., J. Y. Tamashiro, H. F. Leitão-Filho, and A. Begossi. 2000. Diversity of plant uses in two Caiçara communities from the Atlantic forest coast, Brazil. Biodiversity & Conservation 9:597-615. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008920301824
33. Heckler, M. 2002. Traditional ethnobotanical knowledge loss and gender among the Piaroa. Pages 532-548 in J. R. Stepp, F. S. Wundham, and R. K. Zarger, editors. Ehtnobiology and biocultural diversity. International Society of Ethnobiology, Athens, Georgia, USA.
34. Henderson, A., G. Galeano, and R. Bernal. 1995. Field guide to the palms of the Americas. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA.
35. Hunn, E. S. 2002. Evidence for the precocious acquisition of plant knowledge by Zapotec children. Pages 604-613 in J. R. Stepp, F. S. Wundham, and R. K. Zarger, editors. Ethnobiology and biocultural diversity. International Society of Ethnobiology, Athens, Georgia, USA.
36. Huntington, H. P. 2000. Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: methods and applications. Ecological Applications 10 (5):1270-1274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1270: UTEKIS]2.0.CO;2
37. Jørgensen, P. M., and S. León-Yánez. 1999. Catalogue of the vascular plants of Ecuador. Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Missouri Botanical Garden 75:11181.
38. Ladio, A. H. 2001. The maintenance of wild edible plant gathering in a Mapuche community of Patagonia. Economic Botany 55 (2):243-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02864562
39. Ladio, A. H., and M. Lozada. 2001. Nontimber forest product use in two human populations from northwest Patagonia: a quantitative approach. Human Ecology 29:367-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1013199103440
40. Ladio, A. H., and M. Lozada. 2004. Patterns of use knowledge of wild edible plants in distinct ecological environments: a case study of a Mapuche community from northwestern Patagonia. Biodiversity & Conservation 13:1153-1173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000018150.79156.50
41. Lawrence, A., O. L. Philipps, A. Ismodes, M. López, S. Rose, D. Wood, and A. J. Farfan. 2005. Local values for harvested forest plants in Madre de Dios, Peru: towards a more contextualised interpretation of quantitative ethnobotanical data. Biodiversity & Conservation 14:45-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-4050-8
42. Luoga, E. J., E. T. F. Witkowski, and K. Balkwill. 2000. Differential utilization and ethnobotany of trees in Kitulanghalo Forest Reserve and surrounding communal lands, eastern Tanzania. Economic Botany 54(3):328-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02864785
43. Macía, M. J. 2004. Multiplicity in palm uses by the Huaorani of Amazonian Ecuador. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 144:149-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2003.00248.x
44. Macía, M. J., P. J. Armesilla, R. Cámara-Leret, N. Paniagua- Zambrana, S. Villalba, H. Balslev, and M. Pardo-de-Santayana. 2011. Palm uses in northwestern South America: a quantitative review. Botanical Review 77(4):462-570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12229-011-9086-8
45. Mackinson, S., and L. Nottestad. 1998. Points of view: combining local and scientific knowledge. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 8(4):481-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008847106984
46. Moerman, D. E., R. W. Pemberton, and D. Kiefer. 1999. A comparative analysis of five medicinal floras. Journal of Ethnobiology 19(1):49-67.
47. Molares, S., and A. Ladio. 2009. Ethnobotanical review of the Mapuche medicinal flora: use patterns on a regional scale. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 122(2):251-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2009.01.003
48. Moraes, M. 2004. Flora de palmeras de Bolivia. Plural Editores, La Paz, Bolivia.
49. Ohmagari K, and F. Berkes 1997. Transmission of indigenous knowledge and bush skills among the western James Bay Cree women of subarctic Canada. Human Ecology 25(2):197-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021922105740
50. Paniagua Zambrana, N. Y., A. Byg, J.-C. Svenning, M. Moraes, C. Grandez, and H. Balslev. 2007. Diversity of palm uses in the western Amazon. Biodiversity and Conservation 16:2771-2787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9218-y
51. Paniagua-Zambrana, N., M. J. Macía, and R. Cámara-Leret. 2010. Toma de datos etnobotánicos de palmeras y variables socioeconómicas en comunidades rurales. Ecología en Bolivia 45 (3):44-68.
52. Phillips, O., and A. H. Gentry. 1993. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany. Economic Botany 47(1):33-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02862204
53. Pintaud, J., G. Galeano, H. Balslev, R. Bernal, F. Borchsenius, E. Ferreira, J. de Granville, K. Mejía, B. Millán, M. Moraes, L. Noblick, F. W. Stauffer, and F. Kahn. 2008. Las palmeras de América del Sur: diversidad, distribución e historia evolutiva. Revista Peruana de Biología 15(1):729.
54. Prance, G. T., W. Balée, B. M. Boom, and R. L. Carneiro. 1987. Quantitative ethnobotany and the case for conservation in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 1:296-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1987.tb00050.x
55. Renner, S. S., H. Balslev, and L. B. Holm-Nielsen. 1990. Flowering plants of Amazonian Ecuador - a checklist. AAU Reports 24:12-41.
56. Reyes-García, V., N. Marti, T. McDade, S. Tanner, and V. Vadez. 2007. Concepts and methods in studies measuring individual ethnobotanical knowledge. Journal of Ethnobiology 27(2):182-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771(2007)27[182:CAMISM]2.0.CO;2
57. Reyes-García, V., T. McDade, V. Vadez, T. Huanca, W. R. Leonard, S. Tanner, and R. Godoy. 2008. Non-market returns to traditional human capital: nutritional status and traditional knowledge in a native Amazonian society. Journal of Development Studies 44: 217-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220380701789901
58. Reyes-García, V., V. Vadez, E. Byron, L. Apaza, W. R. Leonard, E. Perez, and D. Wilkie. 2005. Market economy and the loss of folk knowledge of plant uses: estimates from the Tsimane' of the Bolivian Amazon. Current Anthropology 46(4):651-656. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/432777
59. Saslis-Lagoudakis, C. H., E. M. Williamson, V. Savolainen, and J. A. Hawkins. 2011. Cross-cultural comparison of three medicinal floras and implications for bioprospecting strategies. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 135(2):476-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2011.03.044
60. Scatena, F. N., R. T. Walker, A. K. Oyama Homma, A. J. de Conto, C. A. Palheta Rerreira, R. de Amorim Carvalho, A. C. Paula Neves da Rocha, A. I. Moreira dos Santos, and P. Mourao de Oliveira. 1996. Cropping and fallowing sequences of small farms in the “terra firme” landscape of the Brazilian Amazon: a case study from Santarem, Para. Ecological Economics 18:29-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(95)00055-0
61. Shackeroff, J. M., and L. M. Campbell. 2007. Traditional ecological knowledge in conservation research: problems and prospects for their constructive engagement. Conservation and Society 5(3):343-360.
62. Somnasang, P., and G. Moreno-Black. 2000. Knowing, gathering and eating: knowledge and attitudes about wild food in an Isan village in NE Thailand. Journal of Ethnobiology 20(2):197-216.
63. Stagegaard, J., M. Sørensen, and L. P. Kvist. 2002. Estimations of the importance of plant resources extracted by inhabitants of the Peruvian Amazon food plains. Perspectives in Plant Ecology Evolution and Systematics 5:103-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1078/1433-8319-00026
64. Takasaki, Y., B. L. Barham, and O. T. Coomes. 2001. Amazonian peasants, rain forest use and income generation: the role of wealth and geographical factors. Society and Natural Resources 14:291- 308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920151080237
65. Thiers, B. 2013. Index Herbariorum: a global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium. http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih/.
66. Vandebroek, I. 2010. The dual intracultural and intercultural relationship between medicinal plant knowledge and consensus. Economic Botany 64(4):303-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12231-010-9135-y
67. Wiersum, K. F. 1997. Indigenous exploitation and management of tropical forest resources: an evolutionary continuum in forest- people interactions. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 63:1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(96)01124-3
68. Zarger, R. K. 2002. Acquisition and transmission of subsistence knowledge by Q‘eqchi’ Maya in Belize. Pages 592-603 in J. R. Stepp, F. S. Wyndham, and R. K. Zarger, editors. Ethnobiology and biocultural diversity. International Society of Ethnobiology, Athens, Georgia, USA.
69. Zent, S. 1999. The quandary of conserving ethnoecological knowledge - a Piaroa example. Pages 90-124 in T. L. Gragson and B. G. Blount, editors. Ethnoecology - knowledge, resources, and rights. University of Georgia Press, Athens, Georgia, USA.
70. Zent, S. 2001. Acculturation and ethnobotanical knowledge loss among the Piaroa of Venezuela: demonstration of a quantitative method for the empirical study of TEK change. Pages 190-211 in L. Maffi, editor. On Biocultural diversity: linking language, knowledge, and the environment. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., USA.