Abstract
This chapter examines the acculturation of individuals to ethnobotanical knowledge in association with the effects of modernization. I examined the effect of modernity, which was measured as a first principal component; the variation in this principal component was tied to the cash economy, demographics, and contacts with Western materials. Complex intervillage differences in knowledge were correlated with modernity, in complex ways, as follows. The differences in knowledge were correlated with modernity when the villages were referenced to the least-modernized village. Contrary to our expectations, this did not occur when villages were referenced to the village with the highest modernity score. These results implicated that modern Western knowledge is easily integrated into the ethnobotanical knowledge system and is related to the loss of diverse botanical knowledge. An increase of Western knowledge may bring a more accurate level of biological knowledge to the villagers, but this new knowledge may not be adaptive to those living in the local environment. Even worse, Western knowledge may be biased in that villagers only gain knowledge related to how they can gain short-term for-profit-related benefits.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
From July to November 2003.
- 2.
From December 2003 to February 2004.
- 3.
Note that at least one of the heads was born in the village, because, customarily, couples from outside the village do not hold rights to use the land and those people are not allowed to settle in the area.
- 4.
All cultural consensus analyses were performed using ANTHROPAC 4.0 (Analytic Technologies).
- 5.
In calculating the modernity score , categorical variables were quantified and then used as variables for principal component analysis. The first eigenvector was defined as the modernity score when the first eigenvector was large and positive to all modernization variables but negative to the distance to the nearest town. The PROC PRINQUAL procedure of SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute, Inc.) was used for quantification of categorical variables.
- 6.
First, the dates of births and marriage (beginning years of the household s) were obtained; official documents of birth and marriage were referred to during the interviews. Additionally, consumer unit (CU) was defined as the sum of each member’s energy requirements based on body weight (Chap. 4); the producer unit (PU) was defined as the number of adults (18 years of age or older) in the household. Every evening, participating households were visited, and all members were asked to report all cash income and its source for 24 h during a 28-day period. Net income was calculated based on the amounts earned and the amounts expended for necessities. Everyday for 14 days, the participating households were visited every 1–2 h from 6 AM to 10 PM, all crop yields brought to the households were measured, and the total energy obtained per day was calculated in MJ (Chap. 4 for detailed methods). During the same period, the garden s cultivated by each household were visited and measured using a tape measure and clinometer.
- 7.
This model is based on a model proposed by Reyes-Garcia et al. (2007).
- 8.
Both significant level of entry (SLE) and significant level of staying (SLS) were fixed at 0.15.
References
Aswani S (1999) Common property models of sea tenure: a case study from the Roviana and Vonavona Lagoons, New Georgia, Solomon Islands. Human Ecology 27(3):417–453
Aswani S (2000) Changing identities: the ethnohistory of Roviana predatory head-hunting. Journal of the Polynesian Society 109(1):39–70
Atran S, Medin D, Ross N, Lynch E, Coley J, Ek’ EU, Vapnarsky V (1999) Folkecology and commons management in the Maya Lowlands. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96(13):7598–7603
Atran S, Medin D, Ross N, Lynch E, Vapnarsky V, Ek’ EU, Coley J, Timura C, Baran M (2002) Folkecology, cultural epidemiology, and the spirit of the commons: a garden experiment in the Maya Lowlands, 1991–2001. Current Anthropology 43(3):421–450
Balick MJ, Cox PA (1996) Plants, people, and culture: the science of ethnobotany. Scientific American Library, New York
Bennett BC, Prance GT (2000) Introduced plants in the indigenous Pharmacopoeia of Northern South America. Economic Botany 54(1):90–102
Benz BF et al (2000) Losing knowledge about plant use in the Sierra de Manantlan biosphere reserve, Mexico. Economic Botany 54(2):183–191
Borgatti SP (1996) ANTHROPAC 4.0. Analytic Technologies, Natick
Boster JS (1986) Exchange of varieties and information between Aguaruna Manioc cultivators. American Anthropologist 88(2):428–436
Caniago I, Siebert Stephen F (1998) Medicinal plant ecology, knowledge and conservation in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Economic Botany 52(3):229–250
Case RJ, Pauli GF, Doel Soejarto D (2005) Factors in maintaining indigenous knowledge among ethnic communities of Manus Island. Economic Botany 59(4):356–365
Dennett G, Connell J (1988) Acculturation and health in the highlands of Papua New Guinea: dissent on diversity, diets, and development. Current Anthropology 29(2):273–299
Hodge AM, Dowse GK, Koki G, Mavo B, Alpers MP, Zimmet PZ (1995) Modernity and obesity in coastal and highland Papua New Guinea. International Journal of Obesity 19(3):154–161
King H, Collins AM (1989) A modernity score for individuals in Melanesian society. Papua New Guinea Medical Journal 32(1):11–22
Lewis WH (2003) Pharmaceutical discoveries based on ethnomedicinal plants: 1985 to 2000 and beyond. Economic Botany 57:126–134
Perz SG (2003) Social determinants and land use correlates of agricultural technology adoption in a forest frontier: a case study in the Brazilian Amazon. Human Ecology 31(1):133–165
Prance GT, Balee W, Boom BM (1987) Quantitative ethnobotany and the case for conservation in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 1(4):296–310
Ragone D, Lorence DH, Flynn T (2001) History of plant introductions to Pohnpei, Micronesia and the role of the Pohnpei agriculture station. Economic Botany 55(2):290–324
Reyes-Garcia V, Godoy R, Vadez V, Apaza L, Byron E, Huanca T, Leonard WR, Pérez E, Wilkie D (2003) Ethnobotanical knowledge shared widely among Tsimane’ Amerindians, Bolivia. Science 299(5613):1707
Reyes-Garcia V, Vadez V, Huanca T, Leonard WR, McDade T (2007) Economic development and local ecological knowledge: a deadlock? Quantitative research from a native Amazonian society. Human Ecology 35(3):371–377
Romanucci-Ross L, Moerman DE, Tancredi LR (1997) The anthropology of medicine: from culture to method. Bergin and Garvey, Westport
Romney AK (1999) Cultural consensus as a statistical model. Current Anthropology 40(S1):93–115
Romney AK, Weller SC, Batchelder WH (1986) Culture as consensus: a theory of culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist 88(2):313–338
Sheppard PJ, Walter R, Nagaoka T (2000) The archaeology of head–hunting in Roviana Lagoon, New Georgia. The Journal of the Polynesian Society 109(1):9–37
Townsend PK (2000) Environmental anthropology: from pigs to policies. Waveland Press, Long Grove
Zent S (2001) Acculturation and ethnobotanical knowledge loss among the Piaroa of Venezuela: demonstration of a quantitative method for the empirical study of traditional ecological knowledge change. In: On biocultural diversity: linking language, knowledge, and the environment. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Furusawa, T. (2016). Changing Ethnobotanical Knowledge. In: Living with Biodiversity in an Island Ecosystem. Ethnobiology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-904-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-904-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-902-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-904-2
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)