Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to document relationships between knowledge of plant use and indicators of modernization in Mexico. The model we are testing envisions increasing loss of plant use knowledge with increasing modernization indicated by loss of indigenous language and acquisition of nontraditional community services such as literacy and quality of housing. As predicted, we demonstrate that empirical knowledge about plant use is both more diverse and more evenly shared by people speaking an indigenous language—the Huastec—than by mestizo and Spanish-speaking indigenous populations in the Sierra de Manantlan. Our analyses also indicate that the adoption of modern community services by eight rural communities in the Sierra de Manantlan of western Mexico has had notable effects eroding traditional knowledge about useful plants in some but not all communities. From this we suggest that even though traditional knowledge about plants probably suffered a decline that accompanied loss of the indigenous language in Manantlan, traditional knowledge may be able to survive the modernization process today where such knowledge has an important role in subsistence.
Résumé
El propósito de este trabajo es documentor las relaciones entre el conocimiento del uso de las plantas y los indicadores de modernizatión en México. Nuestro modelo comprueba que el conocimiento sobre el uso de las plantas se estó perdiendo debido al aumento de la modernizatión, por la pérdida del lenguaje índigena y la adquisición de servicios comunitarios no tradicionales tales como educatión y calidad de vivienda. Como se predijo, nosotros demonstramos que el conocimiento empírico sobre el uso de plantas es más diverso y más compartido en la población indígena que aún conserva su propio lenguajelos Huastecos—que en la población mestizo e indígena que habla españsol en la Sierra de Manantlán. Nuestros análisis también indican que la adoption de servicios comunitarios modernos en ocho localidades rurales de la sierra de Manantlán en el occidente de México han tenido notables efectos erosionando el conocimiento traditional sobre el uso de las plantas en algunas de estas comunidades. Por lo tanto, nosotros sugerimos que aunque el conocimiento traditional sobre el uso de las plantas probablemente está sufriendo una disminución la cual es acompañada con la pérdida del lenguaje indígena en la Sierra de Manantlán, el conocimiento traditional puede ser capaz de sobrevivir al proceso de modernizatión actual donde tal conocimiento juega un importante papel en la subsistencia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature Cited
Alcorn, J. B 1984. Huastec ethnobotany. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Begossi, A. 1996. Use of ecological methods in ethnobotany. Economic Botany 50:280–289.
Benz, B. F., F. Santana, R. Pineda, J. Cevallos, L. Robles, and D. DeNiz. 1994. Characterization of mestizo plant use in the Sierra de Manantlan, Jalisco-Colima, Mexico. Journal of Ethnobiology 14:23–41.
—,J. Cevallos E., E. Muñoz M., and F. Santana M. 1996. Ethnobotany serving society: a case study from the Sierra de Manantlan Biosphere Reserve. SIDA 17(1):1–16.
Bernard, H. R. 1992. Preserving language diversity. Human Organization 51:82–89.
Borgatti, S. P. 1994. Cultural domain theory. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology 4:261–278.
—. 1992. Anthropac 4.0. Methods Guide. Analytic Technologies, Columbia, South Carolina.
Brown, M., and B. Wyckoff-Baird. 1992. Designing integrated conservation and development projects. Washington, D.C., Biodiversity Support Program.
Brush, S. 1993. Indigenous knowledge of biological resources and intellectual property rights: the role of anthropology. American Anthropologist 95:653–686.
Cavalcanti, C. 1991. Government policy and ecological concerns: some lessons from the Brazilian experience. Pages 474–485in Robert Costanza, ed., Ecological economics. Columbia University Press, New York.
Clark, M. E. 1991. Rethinking ecological and economic education: a gestalt shift in ecological economics. Pages 400–415in R. Costanza, ed., Ecological economics. Columbia University Press, New York.
Clay, J. W. 1988. Indigenous peoples and tropical forests. Cultural Survival Report 27. 113 pages. Cultural Survival, Inc., Cambridge, Mass.
DeWalt, B. R 1994. Using indigenous knowledge to improve agriculture and natural resource management. Human Organization 53:123–131.
Foster, G. M 1962. Traditional cultures and the impact of technological change. Harper & Brothers, Publishers, New York.
Godoy, R. 1994. The effects of rural education on the use of the tropical rain forest by the Sumu Indians of Nicaragua: possible pathways, qualitative findings, and policy options. Human Organization 53:233–244.
—,and K. S. Bawa. 1993. The economic value and sustainable harvest of plants and animals from the tropical forest: assumptions, hypotheses and methods. Economic Botany 47:215–219.
Jardel, P. (coord.). 1992. Estrategia para 1a Conservatión de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantlán. Prensa, Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico.
Johns, T., J. O. Kokwaro, and E. K. Kimanani. 1990. Herbal remedies of the Luo of Siaya District, Kenya: establishing quantitative criteria for consensus. Economic Botany 44:369–381.
Laitner-Benz, K., and B. F. Benz. 1992. Las condiciones culturales y ambientales en la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantán en tiempo de la Conquista: una perspectiva de los documentas etnohistóricos secundarios. Estudios del Hombre 1:15–46.
Magurran, A. E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
McNeeley, J. A., K. R. Miller, W. V. Reid, R. A. Mittermeier, and T. B. Werner. 1990. Conserving the world’s biological diversity. IUCN, WRI, CI, WWF-US, the World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Norton, B. 1988. Commodity, amenity, and morality. The limits of quantification in valuing biodiversity. Pages 564–585in E. O. Wilson, ed., Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Phillips, O., and A. H. Gentry. 1993. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypotheses tests with a new quantitative technique. Economic Botany 47:15–32.
Plan Nadonal de Desarrollo (PND) (1994-2000). 1994. Plan Nacional de Desarrollo. Poder Ejecutivo Federal, Mexico, D.F.
Plotkin, M. J. 1988. The outlook for new agricultural and industrial products from the tropics. Pages 106–116in E. O. Wilson, ed., Biodiversity. Washington, D.C, National Academy Press.
—. 1993. Tales of a shamans’s apprentice. Viking, New York.
Redford. K. H., and C. Padoch, eds. 1992. Conservation of Neotropical forests: working from traditional resource use. Columbia University Press, New York.
Rzedowski, J. 1978. Vegetatión de Mexico. Limusa, Mexico, D.F.
Turner, N.J. 1988“The importance of a rose”: evaluating the cultural significance of plants in Thompson and Lilloet Interior Salish. American Anthropologist 90:272–290.
Vázquez G., J. Antonio, Ramón Cuevas G., T. S. Cochrane, H. H. Iltis, F. J. Santana M., and L. Guzmán H. 1995. Flora de Manantlán. Sida, Botanical Miscellany 13.
Williams, N. M., and G. Baines, eds. 1993. Traditional ecological knowledge: wisdom for sustainable development. Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University Canberrra, Australia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Benz, B.F., Cevallos E., J., Santana M., F. et al. Losing knowledge about plant use in the sierra de manantlan biosphere reserve, Mexico. Econ Bot 54, 183–191 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02907821
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02907821