Amerindian and Afro-American Perceptions of Their Traditional Knowledge in the Chocó Biodiversity Hotspot
The
Chocó biodiversity hotspot is one of the most biodiverse and threatened
regions on earth, yet the traditional knowledge (TK) of its inhabitants
about biodiversity remains little studied. The Intergovernmental
Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) aims to
integrate different knowledge systems, including scientific and TK, to
assess the state of the planet’s biodiversity. We documented the TK of
three ethnic groups: Afro-Colombians (n = 86 participants), Amerindian
Emberá (n = 88), and Tsa’chila (n = 52), focusing on their perceptions
about (i) the most important palms, (ii) current vs.
past uses, (iii) and TK transmission. We found 46 useful palm species
and 520 different uses of palms. The species that were most important in
local people’s views also had high use value, based on a commonly used
quantitative index in ethnobotany. Although construction was the most
commonly mentioned use category, palm materials were absent in
Afro-Colombian and Tsa’chila homes, and were being increasingly replaced
in Emberá homes. In all three cultures, it was generally believed that
TK was not being transmitted to the younger generations. In aggregate,
the current perceptions of decreasing transmission of TK, decreasing use
of forests, and intergenerational differences in perceptions in the
Chocó could accelerate the erosion of TK. Therefore, this could
ultimately limit the contribution of Amerindian and Afro-Colombian TK to
IPBES’s goals of assessing on-the-ground changes in biodiversity.
Key Words
Cultural change ecosystem services indigenous peoples palms local knowledge plant valuation quantitative ethnobotany local perceptions
Percepciones Amerindias y Afro-Americanas de su conocimiento tradicional en el punto caliente de biodiversidad del Chocó
El
punto caliente de biodiversidad del Chocó es una de las regiones más
biodiversas y amenazadas de la Tierra, sin embargo el conocimiento
tradicional (CT) de sus habitantes sobre la biodiversidad está poco
estudiado. La Plataforma Intergubernamental sobre Biodiversidad y
Servicios de los Ecosistemas (IPBES ) tiene como objetivo integrar los
diferentes sistemas de conocimiento, incluidos los conocimientos
científicos y tradicionales, para evaluar el estado de la biodiversidad
del planeta. Documentamos el CT de tres grupos étnicos: los
Afro-Colombianos (n = 86 participantes), Amerindios Emberá (n = 88), y
Tsa'chila (n = 52), enfocándonos en sus percepciones sobre (i) las
palmeras más importantes, (ii) los usos actuales vs.
pasados, (iii) y la transmisión del CT. Encontramos 46 especies de
palmeras útiles y 520 usos diferentes. Las especies que fueron más
importantes según las poblaciones locales también tuvieron un valor de
uso alto, en base a un índice cuantitativo de uso común en etnobotánica.
Aunque construcción fue la categoría de uso más comúnmente mencionada,
no se encontraron materiales de palmeras en los hogares Afro-Colombianos
y Tsa'chila, y en los hogares Emberá se estaban remplazando cada vez
más. En las tres culturas se tuvo la percepción general de que el CT no
se está transmitiendo a las generaciones más jóvenes. Además, la
percepción actual de disminución en la transmisión del CT, el menor uso
de los bosques y las diferencias en las percepciones intergeneracionales
en el Chocó podrían acelerar la erosión del CT. Por lo tanto, todo ello
podría limitar la contribución del CT de los Amerindios y
Afro-Colombianos a los objetivos de IPBES para evaluar los cambios
locales en la biodiversidad.
Introduction
The
Chocó hotspot extends from Mesoamerica to northwestern South America
and is one of the most biodiverse and threatened regions on Earth. In
addition to its ~11,000 vascular plant species, of which 25% are
endemic, this hotspot houses a substantial fraction of the earth’s
undiscovered species (Joppa et al. 2011).
Only one-quarter of its original vegetation remains, and the
infrastructure development forecasted for the coming years threatens the
region’s biocultural diversity (Saenz et al. 2013). Protected areas are poorly represented (Forero-Medina and Joppa 2010; Sarkar et al. 2008; Sierra et al. 2002), and many habitats show levels of protection of only 1–5% (Forero-Medina and Joppa 2010).
The vast lands collectively titled to Amerindian and Afro-American
groups represent a unique conservation opportunity to counteract the
forecasted threats. In Colombia, Amerindian reserves and territories
collectively owned by Afro-Americans cover >6 million hectares, or
50% of Colombia’s Pacific region (Forero-Medina and Joppa 2010).
In Ecuador these lands are smaller, and the recognition of Amerindian
and Afro-American territories has been minor (Riascos et al. 2008).
The integration of traditional knowledge (TK) in conservation assessments is increasing globally (Huntington 2011; Thaman et al. 2013).
Platforms like the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services (IPBES) aim to support the establishment of
participatory mechanisms to facilitate linkages between indigenous and
local communities and scientists (Díaz et al. 2015; UNEP 2012).
Traditional knowledge, according to the IPBES, refers to “knowledge and
know-how accumulated by regional, indigenous or local communities over
generations that guide human societies in their interactions with their
environment” (UNEP 2012,
p. 18). The IPBES recognizes and considers that TK systems can
complement science-based models to reinforce the delivery of the IPBES’s
objectives of assessing the state of the planet’s biodiversity, its
ecosystems, and the essential services they provide to society (IPBES 2014; UNEP 2012).
The importance of TK to the conservation and sustainable use of
ecosystems was acknowledged in the IPBES’s Operating Principles, as well
as in Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity and Aichi
Biodiversity Target 18 (UNEP 2012).
The TK of Chocó inhabitants remains vastly underdocumented (Cámara-Leret et al. 2014a; Macía et al. 2011),
limiting the possibility of including TK in one of the four functions
of the IPBES: to produce assessments of the state of the planet’s
biodiversity (UNEP 2012). Cross-cultural studies in the Chocó that have been based on interviews with local people include Barfod and Kvist (1996),
who registered 931 species used by the Amerindian Tsa’chila, Chachi,
and Awá of Ecuador. In coastal Ecuador, Cerón and collaborators
documented the ethnobotanical knowledge of Afro-Ecuadoreans (Cerón 2001), Awá (Cerón and Montalvo 2002), Tsa’chila (Cerón et al. 2004), and mestizos (Cerón 1993, 2002; Cerón et al. 2004). In Colombia, Galeano (2000)
in a quantitative study of trees >5 cm dbh in 1.8 hectares of
rainforest showed that 18 Afro-Colombian participants knew 208 useful
species. Recent comparative studies on palm ethnobotanical knowledge
have shown that (i) Afro-Americans know nearly as much as Amerindians
(Cámara-Leret et al. 2014b),
and (ii) that formal education has a significant negative association
to TK, that age has a positive significant association to TK, and that
men that participated in the study are generally more knowledgeable than
women (Paniagua-Zambrana et al. 2014).
Here,
we investigate how Amerindian and Afro-American perceptions about palms
in the Chocó compare with quantifying use reports. Palms (Arecaceae)
are an excellent model group for contrasting local views and
quantitative methods because palms are the most useful plant family in
tropical America (Macía et al. 2011). The subsistence needs of thousands of tropical forest dwellers are met by palms (e.g., Balslev 2011; Balslev et al. 2008; Barfod and Balslev 1988; Macía 2004), and many different palm uses and useful palm species have been documented in this region (Barfod and Balslev 1988; Barfod and Kvist 1996; Cámara-Leret et al. 2014a, b; Macía et al. 2011).
Moreover, the Chocó palms have been intensively studied and their
well-resolved taxonomy faciliates rapid field inventories (Borchsenius
et al. 1998; Galeano and Bernal 2010).
Specifically,
we test three hypotheses. First, we assess whether local perceptions
within the social group are congruent with those of researchers
regarding the most important palm species. Our hypothesis here was that
people would attribute greater importance to species with many uses than
to those with few uses (Phillips and Gentry 1993).
Second, we assess whether participants’ responses about palm uses are
congruent with present-day practices. We focused on palms used in
construction because many construction uses require destructive harvest
of individual plants, and the potential for unsustainable practices is
high, e.g., when harvesting palm leaves for thatch (Flores and Ashton 2000).
Our hypothesis was that participants’ responses about construction uses
reflect current practices. Third, we assess the perceptions of
different age groups on whether TK is being transmitted between
generations or not. Our hypothesis was that most people perceive that TK
is not being transmitted, because our sites are exposed to the
influence of markets, and access to markets and services often lead to
lower TK transmission (Reyes-García et al. 2013).
We also hypothesized that in more remote communities perceptions about
knowledge transmission would be more optimistic than in less remote
communities (Byg and Balslev 2001b).
Methods
Study Area
The
Chocó extends over 1,500 km from Panama through the coastal plains of
Colombia and Ecuador to northwestern Peru, encompassing 274,538 km2 (Conservation International 2014).
Our study sites in Colombia included one Afro-American locality and one
Emberá locality, and in Ecuador one Tsa’chila locality (Fig. 1).
In the Chocó department of Colombia, Afro-Colombians represent the
dominant group with 286,000 individuals (0.7% of Colombia’s population
in 2005), and the Emberá are the largest Amerindian group with about
80,000 individuals (0.2%) (DANE 2007). In Ecuador, the Tsa’chila represent the dominant Amerindian group, with 2,500 individuals in seven settlements (Rivera 2013), representing 0.01% of Ecuador’s population in 2010.
Fig. 1
Map
of the study area in the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó and examples of
the people living there: (A) Afro-Colombian, (B) Emberá, and (C)
Tsa’chila.
We
studied the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Pervel consisting of
1,500 inhabitants and located 30 km south of Quibdó, the capital of the
Chocó department (Table 1).
This community has a health post, primary school, electricity, and more
than 10 shops. Most inhabitants earn a living from gold mining, wage
labor, commerce, agriculture, and fishing. The most common forest type
surrounding Puerto Pervel is tropical rainforest affected by logging.
Table 1
The five communities studied in the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó.
Community
Puerto Pervel
Aguacate
Villanueva
Chigüilpe
Peripa
Total
Ethnicity
Afro-Colombian
Emberá
Emberá
Tsa'chila
Tsa'chila
Population
~1500
312
199
130
130
Access
Road
Fluvial
Fluvial
Road
Road
Distance to markets (hours)
Close (2)
Remote (24)
Remote (24)
Close (0.5)
Close (0.5)
Average plot size (ha) (±SD)
0.44 ± 0.74
0.94 ± 1.17
0.91 ± 0.87
3.63 ± 4.61
6.89 ± 3.99
No. informants
86
44
44
33
19
226
No. expert informants
7
5
3
2
1
18
No. general informants
79
39
41
31
18
208
Speaking Spanish (%)
100
82
100
100
100
Speaking indigenous language (%)
0
98
48
100
100
Completed primary school (%)
52
9
11
73
56
Completed secondary school (%)
11
2
2
12
22
No. men
47
24
18
17
7
113
No. women
39
20
26
16
12
113
Age (years)
18–30
18
16
16
7
4
61
31–40
14
10
13
8
5
50
41–50
19
9
5
5
5
43
51–60
16
7
7
8
0
38
>60
19
2
3
5
5
34
Our Emberá study site, the Resguardo Indígena Emberá Río Purricha,
is accessible by river from Pizarro, the capital of Bajo Baudó
municipality. In the northern sector of the indigenous reserve we
visited the community of Aguacate, and three hours downriver in the
southern sector we visited Villanueva (Table 1).
Both communities have a primary school, but lack health posts and
electricity. In Aguacate, 98% of participants spoke Emberá and 82% spoke
Spanish. Villanueva appears to be more acculturated: 48% of
participants spoke Emberá and 93% spoke Spanish, and this community has
several shops and a bakery. Classroom education levels in both
communities are very low (Table 1).
Of all participant groups studied, the Emberá are the least involved in
market activities. They maintain a subsistence livelihood based on
agriculture, hunting, and fishing, and trade of products derived from
the wild with Afro-Colombians. The most common forest type surrounding
both Emberá communities is tropical rainforest not affected by
industrial logging.
The Tsa’chila study
communities of Chuigüilpe and Peripa are accessible by road, have a
health post, primary school, and electricity. All participants spoke
Tsafiqui and Spanish (Table 1).
The Tsa’chila subsistence and livelihood depends on agriculture (69% of
active population), traditional medicine (10%), crafts (7%), wage labor
(7%), ethno-tourism (6%), and as shop-keepers (1%) (Rivera 2013).
Both Tsa’chila communities have facilities to showcase Tsa’chila
material culture, music, and dance to tourists. Both communities are
surrounded by small patches of logged tropical rainforests, but mostly
by industrial plantations.
Data Sampling
From
November 2010 to December 2011, we interviewed 226 participants about
their TK of palm uses and their perceptions about TK transmission using a
standardized protocol (Cámara-Leret et al. 2012; Paniagua-Zambrana et al. 2010).
Data were collected with two types of participants: 1–7 experts (n =
18) and 18–79 general participants (n = 208) in each community (Table 1).
Experts were selected by consensus during a meeting of community
members. In Puerto Pervel, with a population exceeding 1,000
inhabitants, experts were recruited by asking several general
participants to recommend their most knowledgeable peers. Experts were
mostly men (83%) and over 40 years old (78%). We performed walks in the
field with each expert to identify all palm species growing in the
surrounding forest, register their vernacular names, and document their
uses. Palm species were identified in the field using Galeano and Bernal
(2010) and Borchsenius et al. (1998),
and specimens were collected when our field identifications needed
confirmation. Voucher specimens were deposited in the herbaria of AAU,
CHOCO, COL, and QCA (acronyms according to Thiers [2015]).
Once experts were interviewed, we used the list of compiled vernacular
names, images of palms in the field, and images in Galeano and Bernal (2010)
as the basis for interviews with general participants. We selected
general participants in a stratified manner to have a representative
sample of gender (women 50%, men 50%) and age classes (18–30 years
[27%], 31–40 [22%], 41–50 [19%], 51–60 [17%], >60 [15%]). We
conducted structured interviews to gather personal data (age, gender,
education, ethnicity) and household data (house construction materials)
of all participants. Depending on the number of palm species and palm
uses known by each participant, interviews with experts lasted between
half to a whole day, and interviews with general participants lasted
between 30 minutes to 2 hours. Interviews were conducted in Spanish or
with the help of a local interpreter in the Emberá communities.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed at the species level, with the exception of Bactris gasipaes Kunth for which we differentiated the wild var. chichagui from the cultivated var. gasipaes.
Palm use reports were classified into one of 10 use categories and
subcategories following the Economic Botany Data Collection Standard
(Cook 1995), with modifications proposed by Macía et al. (2011).
Use categories included Animal Food, Construction, Cultural,
Environmental, Fuel, Human Food, Medicinal and Veterinary, Toxic,
Utensils and Tools, and Other Uses (including uses not classifiable
within the previous categories, mainly indirect use of palms such as the
use of beetle larvae that develop in rotting trunks). We defined each
“palm use” following Macía et al. (2011) as the use of a palm part from a given species associated to a use category and subcategory.
To
determine which species were most important in the local knowledge
systems, we asked each participant the following questions: Which palm
species is the most important for you? What is it that makes this
species so important to you? We collated answers from all respondents
anonymously within each group, and from this list we ranked species by
their frequency of citations. When participants reported more than one
species, we included all reports in the final sum. To determine which
species were most important according to the quantitative indices that
are commonly used in ethnobotany, we computed the use value (UV) for
each species (Phillips and Gentry 1993), with the simplification proposed by Rossato et al. (1999) as:
UVs=∑Ui/N
(1)
where Ui is the number of uses mentioned by each participant i, and N is the total number of participants interviewed in the ethnic group.
To
determine if the uses for construction mentioned in the interviews were
also being practiced, we inspected, with permission of the owners, the
households of participants in each community. We recorded whether the
type of construction materials used for floors, frames, walls, and roof
in the homes were of palms or commercial materials, and we identified in situ
the used palm species. We summed all answers for each house part and
calculated the overall percentage of each registered material for each
community.
To evaluate local perceptions
of the transmission of TK, we asked each participant the following
questions: Is knowledge about plants being transmitted from the older to
the younger generations in the community? Why is this so? We collated
answers from all participants within each group, and analyzed them
separately for each age group in each community. To assess if
participants’ perceptions match current trends in TK, we determined how
TK was distributed across different individuals in the three participant
groups. We performed a Kruskal-Wallis analysis to test for significant
differences in the number of palm species and palm uses cited by
different age classes, men and women, and between general and expert
participants. All statistical analyses were conducted in R 3.1.3 (R
Development Core Team 2015).
Ethics Statement
Approval
for this study was granted by the Committee for Ethical Research of the
Autonomous University of Madrid (#48-922; PI Manuel J. Macía). Before
initiating in situ data collection,
we obtained oral informed consent at the community level and then from
the participant prior to each interview. Participants were made aware of
their right to discontinue the interviews at any time and that all of
the information provided would be anonymized.
Results
A total of 520 different palm uses from 46 species were recorded in the 226 interviews (Table 2).
The Emberá knew more useful palm species than the other groups, and
together with Afro-Colombians they mentioned more palm uses than the
Tsa’chila, although the number of interviews was also lower for the
Tsa’chila. In contrast, the Tsa’chila of Chigüilpe knew more palm uses
per species than the other groups, but these differences were not
statistically significant. The use categories Human Food, Utensils and
Tools, Cultural, and Construction generally had the highest numbers of
palm uses among all communities and groups.
Table 2
Number
of useful palm species, total number of uses, mean number of uses per
species, and number of uses in ten ethnobotanical categories in the five
study communities in the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó.
No. uses per use category
Country/Community
No. useful species
No. palm uses
Mean no. uses per species (±SD)
Animal food
Construction
Cultural
Environmental
Fuel
Human food
Medicinal & veterinary
Toxic
Utensils & tools
Other uses
Colombia
Puerto Pervel
29
232
8.0 ± 4.7
3
49
26
15
1
51
22
2
60
3
Aguacate
35
233
6.7 ± 4.8
6
37
38
4
7
71
14
0
51
5
Villanueva
30
189
6.3 ± 3.8
7
39
22
2
4
66
11
0
35
3
Ecuador
Chigüilpe
20
176
8.8 ± 5.9
2
30
35
4
3
39
17
0
29
17
Peripa
17
104
6.1 ± 5.1
0
19
25
1
1
32
8
0
8
10
Total
46
520
11.3 ± 8.8
11
82
93
18
11
117
60
2
106
20
For
all ethnic groups, six to seven of the ten species identified as most
important by the participants coincided with the 10 species having the
highest Use Value Index, although species’ ranks differed between the
lists (Table 3).
For Afro-Colombians, the most important species was used for human
food, whereas for the Emberá and Tsa’chila, the most important species
were largely employed for construction purposes.
Table 3
The
10 most important palm species for (A) Afro-Colombian, (B) Emberá, and
(C) Tsa’chila participants, according to local views and quantitative
methods in the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó. UV: use value.
A. AFRO-COLOMBIAN VIEWS
A. QUANTITATIVE METHODS
Rank
Species
No. participants
Explanation of importance
Rank
Species
UV
1
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
30
Human food
1
Manicaria saccifera Gaertn.
3.9
2
Cocos nucifera L.
22
Human food
2
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
3.5
3
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
16
Human food
3
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
3.3
4
Socratea exorrhiza (Mart.) H. Wendl.
6
Construction
4
Oenocarpus minor Mart.
3.3
5
All are important
6
-
5
Euterpe oleracea Mart.
3.3
6
Mauritiella macroclada (Burret) Burret
5
Construction
6
Attalea allenii H.E. Moore
2.9
7
Elaeis guineensis Jacq.
5
Human food
7
Cocos nucifera L.
2.3
8
Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Cook & Doyle) Burret
3
Construction
8
Mauritiella macroclada (Burret) Burret
2.1
9
Welfia regia H. Wendl.
2
Thatch; Utensils and tools
9
Socratea exorrhiza (Mart.) H. Wendl.
2.1
10
Manicaria saccifera Gaertn.
2
Thatch
10
Bactris coloniata L.H. Bailey
2
B. EMBERÁ VIEWS
B. QUANTITATIVE METHODS
Rank
Species
No. participants
Explanation of importance
Rank
Species
UV
1
Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.
60
Construction
1
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
4.4
2
Welfia regia H. Wendl.
7
Thatch
2
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
4
3
Socratea exorrhiza (Mart.) H. Wendl.
7
Construction
3
Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.
3.9
4
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
5
Human food
4
Astrocaryum standleyanum L.H. Bailey
3.8
5
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
5
Human food
5
Welfia regia H. Wendl.
3.7
6
Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Cook & Doyle) Burret
4
Construction
6
Oenocarpus minor Mart.
3.5
7
Oenocarpus minor Mart.
3
Construction
7
Cocos nucifera L.
2.6
8
Bactris coloniata L.H. Bailey
1
Hunting tools
8
Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Cook & Doyle) Burret
2.4
9
Cocos nuccifera L.
1
Food
9
Attalea allenii H.E. Moore
2.3
10
All are important
1
-
10
Phytelephas macrocarpa Ruiz & Pav.
2.2
C. TSA'CHILA VIEWS
C. QUANTITATIVE METHODS
Rank
Species
No. participants
Explanation of importance
Rank
Species
UV
1
Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.
41
Construction; many uses
1
Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.
7.3
2
Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Cook & Doyle) Burret
17
Construction; many uses
2
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
7
3
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
6
Many uses; medicinal
3
Phytelephas aequatorialis Spruce
4.6
4
All are important
5
All are important
4
Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Cook & Doyle) Burret
4.3
5
Elaeis guineensis Jacq.
1
Human food
5
Attalea colenda (O.F. Cook) Balslev & A.J. Hend.
3.8
6
Attalea colenda (O.F. Cook) Balslev & A.J. Hend.
1
Medicinal
6
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
2.9
7
Phytelephas aequatorialis Spruce
1
Utensils and tools
7
Bactris gasipaes var. chichagui (H. Karst.) A.J. Hend.
2.6
8
-
-
-
8
Wettinia equalis (O.F. Cook & Doyle) R Bernal
2.5
9
-
-
-
9
Cocos nucifera L.
2.5
10
-
-
-
10
Astrocaryum standleyanum L.H. Bailey
2.3
In
Afro-Colombian and Tsa’chila communities, the palms mentioned as most
useful for construction purposes were generally not being used any more
(Table 4).
In contrast, the more remote Emberá communities generally did use palm
materials cited in interviews. For instance, the split stems of Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav. were the most commonly used for floors, and those of Socratea exorrhiza
(Mart.) H. Wendl. for walls. For roofing, however, tin has
progressively replaced palm materials in the Emberá community of
Villanueva (97% of households), whereas in Aguacate 42% of the
households still use Welfia regia H. Wendl. leaves for thatching. In all communities except Aguacate, the use of palms in frames was negligible.
Table 4
Construction materials used in households within the five study communities in the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó.
Community
Current construction materials (% households interviewed)
Floors
Frame
Walls
Roof
Puerto Pervel
Cement (91), wood (9)
Cement (91), wood (9)
Cement (91), wood (9)
Tin (100)
Aguacate
Iri del (96), wood (4)
Wood (85), Oen min (12), Wet qui (3)
Soc exo (50), open* (42), wood (8)
Tin (58), Wel reg (42)
Villanueva
Iri del (98), wood (2)
Wood (97), Iri del (3)
Soc exo (83), Iri del (7), wood (7), open* (3)
Tin (97), Wel reg (3)
Chigüilpe
Cement (87), soil (9), wood (4)
Cement (83), bamboo (13), Wet qui (4)
Cement (83), bamboo (13), wood (4)
Tin (97), fern (3)
Peripa
Cement (91), soil (9)
Cement (91), wood (9)
Cement (91), bamboo (9)
Tin (91), fern (9)
Abbreviated palm species: Iri del: Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.; Oen min: Oenocarpus minor Mart.; Soc exo: Socratea exorrhiza (Mart.) H. Wendl.; Wel reg: Welfia regia H. Wendl.; Wet qui: Wettinia quinaria (O.F. Coook & Doyle) Burret; *Traditional Emberá houses lack walls (open).
Overall, most participants thought that TK was not being transmitted from the older to the younger generations (Fig. 2).
This view was most pronounced among Afro-Colombians, with an average
among age classes of 85% believing there is a lack of knowledge
transmission. Opinions of poor knowledge transmission were similar
across Emberá age classes, with a mean of 61% of respondents having that
opinion. The Tsa’chila had the lowest overall values but the highest
variation between generations, and 40% of Tsa’chila individuals aged
41–50 and 25% aged 51–60 believed that TK was not being passed on.
Fig. 2
The
percentage of Afro-Colombian, Emberá, and Tsa'chila participants from
five generations that reported a lack of transmission of TK.
Within each participant group, we found that the overall ethnobotanical knowledge differed among communities (Table 5),
and that the TK of individuals varied in relation to at least one of
the analyzed socio-demographic factors (age, gender, expertise) (Fig. 3). Among Afro-Colombians, participants’ age significantly explained differences in the number of useful species (χ2 = 36.33, p <0.001) and palm uses cited (χ2 = 21.35, p <0.001) (Fig. 3A-B).
Older individuals (>60 years) knew more palm species and palm uses
than participants aged 18–30 (p <0.001), and more palm species than
those aged 31–40 years (p <0.04), but just as many species as
participants aged 41–60 years. Men knew on average more species than
women (χ2 = 19.77, p <0.001) and more palm uses (χ2 = 6.16, p = 0.013). Afro-Colombian experts knew more palm species than general participants (χ2 = 4.83, p = 0.03), but the number of palm uses was similar in both groups.
Table 5
Ethnobotanical knowledge of palms in the five study communities of the Colombian and Ecuadorean Chocó.
Species
Puerto Pervel
Aguacate
Villanueva
Chigüilpe
Peripa
Ammandra decasperma O.F. Cook
Co, Cu, Hu, Ut
-
-
-
-
Asterogyne martiana (H. Wendl.) H. Wendl. ex Hemsl.
Co, En, Hu, Me, Ut
An, Co, Fu, Hu, Ut
Co, Hu
-
-
Astrocaryum chambira Burret
Cu, Ut
-
-
-
-
Astrocaryum standleyanum L.H. Bailey
An, Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ut
An, Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Me, Ut
An, Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ot
Attalea allenii H.E. Moore
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Me, Ot
-
-
Attalea butyracea (Mutis ex L.f.) Wess. Boer
Cu
-
-
-
-
Attalea colenda (O.F. Cook) Balslev & A.J. Hend.
-
-
-
An, Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ot
Attalea cuatrecasana (Dugand) A.J. Hend., Galeano & R. Bernal
Cu, Hu
Cu, Hu
Co, Cu, Hu
Bactris barronis L.H. Bailey
-
Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
An, Co, Hu, Me, Ut
-
-
Bactris coloniata L.H. Bailey
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ut
Hu, Me, Ut
Hu, Ut
-
-
Bactris coloradonis L.H. Bailey
-
Hu, Me, Ut
Hu, Ut
-
-
Bactris gasipaes var. chichagui (H. Karst.) A.J. Hend.
-
Hu
-
Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Cu, Hu, Ot
Bactris gasipaes Kunth var. gasipaes
An, Co, Cu, En, Hu, Me, Ut
An, Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
An, Co, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Cu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Bactris chocoensis R. Bernal, Galeano, Copete & Cámara-Leret
Co, Hu, Ut
-
-
-
-
Bactris maraja Mart.
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ut
Hu, Me, Ut
Hu
-
-
Bactris setulosa H. Karst
-
Co, Hu, Ut
Co, Hu, Ut
An, Cu, Hu, Ot, Ut
Hu
Chamaedorea pinnatifrons (Jacq.) Oerst.
-
Hu, Ut
-
-
-
Chelyocarpus dianeurus (Burret) H.E. Moore
Co, Ut
-
-
-
-
Cocos nucifera L.
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ut
Cu, Fu, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ut
Cu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Hu
Desmoncus cirrhifer A.H. Gentry & Zardini
Co, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, Ut
Co, Hu, Ut
-
-
Dictyocaryum lamarckianum (Mart.) H. Wendl.
-
-
-
Co, Ot
Co
Elaeis oleifera (Kunth) Cortés
Cu, Hu, Me
-
Hu
-
-
Elaeis guineensis Jacq.
An, Co, Cu, En, Hu
-
-
Hu, Ot
Hu, Ot
Euterpe oleracea Mart.
Co, En, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ut
Co, Hu
-
Euterpe precatoria Mart.
Co, En, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Hu
-
-
-
Geonoma calyptrogynoidea Burret
-
Co, Hu
Co, Hu
-
-
Geonoma cuneata H. Wendl. ex Spruce
Co, Cu, Ut
Co, Hu
Co
Co, En, Ut
Cu
Geonoma deversa (Poit.) Kunth
-
Co, Ut
Co, Ut
-
-
Geonoma triandra (Burret) Wess. Boer
.
.
Me, Ut
-
-
Iriartea deltoidea Ruiz & Pav.
Co, En, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Fu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, En, Fu, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Manicaria saccifera Gaertn.
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ut
-
-
Mauritia flexuosa L.f.
Co, Hu, Ot
-
-
-
-
Mauritiella macroclada (Burret) Burret
Co, En, Ut
Co, En, Ut
Co
-
-
Oenocarpus bataua Mart.
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Fu, Hu
Co, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ot
Oenocarpus minor Mart.
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Me, Ut
Co, Cu, Fu, Hu, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ut
Co, Hu, Ot, Ut
-
Pholidostachys dactyloides H.E. Moore
-
Co, Me
-
-
-
Phytelephas aequatorialis Spruce
-
-
-
Co, Cu, En, Hu, Me, Ot, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me, Ot
Phytelephas macrocarpa Ruiz & Pav.
Co, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Ut
Co, Cu, Hu, Me
-
-
Prestoea decurrens (H. Wendl. ex Burret) H.E. Moore
Influence
of socio-demographic factors (age, gender, expertise) on the TK of
Afro-Colombian (A-B), Emberá (C-D), and Tsa’chila (E-F) participants.
The knowledge of the Emberá was also determined by age and expertise, but not by gender (Fig. 3C-D). Age classes differed only in their TK of palm uses (χ2
= 15.31, p = 0.004). Although young participants aged 18–30 knew
significantly fewer uses than individuals aged 51–60 (p = 0.007), they
knew just as many uses as the remaining age classes, including that of
the oldest participants aged over 60. Experts knew more useful palm
species (χ2 = 18.33, p <0.001) and more palm uses (χ2 = 20.88, p <0.001) than general participants.
Among the Tsa’chila, age and gender, but not expertise, were the main drivers of knowledge differences (Fig. 3E-F). The youngest individuals aged 18–30 knew significantly fewer palm species (χ2 = 34.38, p <0.001) and palm uses (χ2
= 20.45, p <0.001) than the older age classes. Individuals aged
>60 knew more palm species than all other age classes, and more palm
uses than those aged 18–30. Men knew significantly more palm uses than
women (χ2 = 20.88, p <0.001).
Discussion
Overall,
we found that the palm species that were important in the view of local
people also ranked high in our quantitative analysis based on the Use
Value Index, suggesting that quantitative methods can adequately
approximate local views about the overall importance of plants in a site
(Phillips and Gentry 1993).
Given the different order in ranks between qualitative and quantitative
results, our first hypothesis that people would attribute greater
importance to species with many uses than those with few uses was not
supported. For example, Cocos nucifera L. was the second-most important palm for Afro-Colombians despite this species being ranked seventh in Use Value. Similarly, Iriartea deltoidea was by far the most important palm for the Emberá but its Use Value was lower than Oenocarpus bataua Mart. and Bactris gasipaes var. gasipaes.
Other studies have also shown that the importance that local people
attribute to species is not necessarily linked to materialistic
usefulness or actual frequency of use (Byg and Balslev 2001a, b).
Thus, when selecting which species to prioritize for conservation and
management actions, the use of ranking exercises will more closely
approximate local views than the Use Value, which emphasizes species that provide many uses compared to others with a few but highly important uses (Reyes-García et al. 2006).
Our
second hypothesis, that participants’ responses about construction uses
reflect current practices, was only supported in the Emberá
communities. Although construction was among the most important uses for
all three ethnic groups, it was obvious that palms are no longer used
for construction in the Afro-Colombian and Tsa’chila communities, which
are both closer to cities and have greater access to markets and
services than the Emberá communities. Similar discrepancies between the
actual use of palms and the answers given in interviews have been
documented for palm-based construction practices in Madagascar (Byg and
Balslev 2001b), and for wild food consumption in the Americas (Ladio and Lozada 2004).
These findings highlight the need of distinguishing between past and
present uses in interviews, especially in studies interested in
determining the actual impact of local communities on their surrounding
plant communities (Kvist et al. 1995).
Accounting for changes in use over time would furthermore allow a
qualitative understanding of TK erosion that is rarely studied (but see
Brosi et al. 2007).
The tendency to replace palm construction materials, even in the remote
Emberá sites, resembles the situation in remote communities within
other hotspots such as Madagascar (Byg and Balslev 2001a).
Further research is needed to assess whether replacement tendencies of
palm materials with materials acquired in markets could ultimately lead
to erosion of certain cultural practices. On the other hand, in the case
of construction, replacement tendencies could have positive long-term
conservation effects for palm populations by reducing harvest pressure.
Most
participants in all three ethnic groups generally agreed that TK was no
longer being transmitted between generations, lending support to our
third hypothesis. We also found that overall perceptions in the more
remote communities (e.g., Emberá) were not necessarily more optimistic
than perceptions in less remote communities (e.g., Tsa’chila).
Abandonment of TK relates to new socioeconomic conditions under which
most groups often look toward new forms of knowledge and young members
of traditional societies seek new opportunities away from the forests.
Even remote Chocó communities may desire to enter the market economy
(Theodossopoulos 2010),
and at any given time, their resource-use strategies respond to the
relative value of alternative activities and local and external demands
for commodities (Sierra 1999).
An average of 60% of Tsa’chila participants aged 41–60 maintained that
transmission of TK still takes place. We observed that these views were
related to increased intergenerational interaction that is the result of
strong commitment of parents to teach their children about traditional
culture, and also by ethno-tourism, which promotes exchange of TK. This
exchange may be especially important in relation to the plant materials
selected for making utensils and tools, personal adornment, and for
healing, all of which are important elements in ethno-tourism. There are
similar situations elsewhere where communities that engage in
year-round indigenous tourism have revitalized their traditions
(Theodossopoulos 2010). Further, each Tsa’chila community maintains a pone
or shaman who, despite increasing acculturation of villagers, remains
central to Tsa’chila everyday life and is responsible not just for
healing, but is also linked closely to Tsa’chila spirituality and
worldviews (Rivera 2013).
Traditional healers were also present in Emberá and Afro-Colombian
sites, but were few in comparison to Tsa’chila healers, and were less
involved in commercial activities or ethno-tourism.
Age,
gender, and expertise were all important factors explaining individual
differences in TK in the Chocó. Our finding that TK was generally
positively associated with age is in accordance with previous studies
(Luoga et al. 2000; Phillips and Gentry 1993; Voeks and Leony 2004; Zent 2009).
As we would expect under a situation of gradual acquisition of
knowledge, TK generally increased progressively across age groups. One
exception, however, was the case of the remote Emberá communities where
the number of palm species was remarkably similar across age groups. One
possible explanation could be that knowledge of species is accumulated
at an early age, whereas knowledge about uses develops over longer
periods. Additionally, the similarity in number of palm uses between the
oldest and the youngest Emberá individuals, which was in turn lower
than that of intermediate-aged individuals, could reflect acquisition of
new knowledge across cultural groups as has also been observed in
Amazonia (Campos and Ehringhaus 2003).
Intermediate-aged Emberá individuals often travel downriver to exchange
goods and in doing so, the likelihood of observing and learning about
other ways of using palms from Afro-Colombians increases.
Gender-differentiated
livelihood roles were common in all study sites, but a comparatively
greater time spent in forests by Emberá women than women of other groups
explains why they knew just as many palm uses and palm species as men.
Time spent in forests has been shown to affect TK levels (Zent 2009),
and at the Emberá sites, both men and women generally work in the local
fields on a daily basis. It is also common for families to leave for
several days to tend distant fields. It is plausible that during these
periods women can exchange knowledge about forest plants with men. The
similarity in TK between Emberá men and women differs with findings from
a study on medicinal TK of Panamanian Emberá, where TK could be
separated into three groups, including medicinal plants of common use,
medicinal plants used by women only, and specialized plants known to
medicine men (Potvin and Barrios 2004).
This illustrates that medicinal knowledge is more partitioned than
general knowledge about palms. Although Tsa’chila and Afro-Colombian
women also participate in agricultural work, they spend a great portion
of their time in households taking care of children and in domestic
chores, which would explain their differences in palm TK with men.
Expertise
was a determinant factor in the TK levels of Emberá and
Afro-Colombians. Our Emberá experts were locally esteemed hunters that
spend more time in forests. Afro-American experts were generally older
men who have relied more on forests than the younger generations. A lack
of differences between experts and general participants within the
Tsa’chila shows that, unlike medicinal knowledge that is generally
regarded as being higher in Tsa’chila shamans (Barfod and Kvist 1996), knowledge levels about palms are more similar across both participant groups.
In
conclusion, our assessment evidences strong perceptions of poor
knowledge transmission, decreasing use of forests, and intergenerational
differences in perceptions and knowledge in the three study sites of
the Chocó. Our results do not show a definitive pattern in factors
affecting levels of TK because TK varies considerably across age,
gender, and expertise. Accordingly, an adequate documentation of TK will
require working with experts (Cartaxo et al. 2010; Davis and Wagner 2003) but also with general participants. Furthermore, recommendations to stratify age and gender groups (Reyes-García et al. 2007)
should be taken into account in order to gather the full gamut of TK.
Our sample of 226 participants may be insufficient to generalize our
findings across the Chocó, so better coverage in all ethnic groups in
both countries is needed for a complete view of the overall state of TK
across the hotspot. Still, if these conditions persist in our study
sites and markets continue to encroach, the TK of Amerindian and
Afro-American communities may eventually shift toward practices attuned
to market demands, and as a result much TK may be lost. Our case study
is not isolated, but adds to mounting evidence of cultural erosion among
indigenous societies in other biodiversity hotspots, including erosion
of plant use knowledge in Mesoamerica (Benz et al. 2000), of canoe-making knowledge in Polynesia-Micronesia (Brosi et al. 2007) and of food plant knowledge in Sundaland (Sujarwo et al. 2014). Although IPBES’s aims are laudable, they also face many challenges at local levels (Soberón and Townsend 2015).
For instance, IPBES assumes that TK can be tapped to fill gaps, but
does not clarify which criteria and protocols will be used to select
indigenous and local communities. This is crucial because TK abandonment
is taking place in various degrees across communities as highlighted by
the Amerindian and Afro-American perceptions documented in this study,
but also because TK may not be held equally across communities of even
the same ethnicity (Table 5, Cámara-Leret et al. 2014c).
Acknowledgments
We
thank all study participants and the herbarium staff from the
Universidad Nacional de Colombia in Bogotá, the Universidad Tecnológica
del Chocó, and the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. We thank
Anders Barfod, Rodrigo Bernal, Roberto Carrillo, Lucía de la Torre,
Gloria Galeano, Eva Ledezma, Alicia Mena, Hugo Navarrete, Narel
Paniagua, and Renato Valencia for their support and valuable
discussions. This study is part of the PALMS
project funded by European Union, 7th Framework Programme (contract no.
212631), and also supported by the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
travel grants program and a GSST fellowship of Aarhus University (to
RCL). The authors declare that they have no competing interests. RCL and
MJM designed the study. RCL, JCC, and MSG performed the field survey.
RCL and MJM analyzed the data. RCL, MJM, and HB wrote the manuscript.
All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
