Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Information gaps in indigenous and local knowledge for science-policy assessments

Nature Sustainability volume 2, pages 736–741 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The need to understand nature’s contributions to people and across a broad spectrum of cultures and ecosystems is increasingly advocated in science assessments and policy decision-making for sustainability. However, for services such as food and medicine, gaps in existing studies on indigenous and local knowledge may preclude inclusive assessments. Here, using a large database of indigenous and local knowledge about plant services for New Guinea, we show that there are biological and cultural documentation gaps that will exclude many plant services and indigenous groups from assessments that are based solely on published research. Further, we unveil that, like the common property of ‘rarity’ in species assemblages, most plant services exhibit high rarity. Gaps and rarity are probably pervasive in other regions and will affect how plant services are conceptualized, assessed and sustainably managed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Biological documentation gaps about plant services in New Guinea.
Fig. 2: Cultural documentation gaps about plant services in New Guinea.
Fig. 3: Indigenous knowledge network about shared plant services in New Guinea.
Fig. 4: Rarity in plant services.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data of ILK about plant services for New Guinea that was generated and analysed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Language data are available from the Ethnologue (ref. 10), elevation data are available from CGIAR-CSI (ref. 40) and ecoregion data are available from WWF (ref. 41).

References

  1. Convention on Biological Diversity (United Nations,1992); https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf.

  2. Díaz, S. et al. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science 359, 270–272 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Karki, M., Senaratna Sellamuttu, S., Okayasu, S. & Suzuki, W. (eds) The IPBES Regional Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for Asia and the Pacific (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2018).

  4. Shaw, R., Takeuchi, Y., Uy, N. & Sharma, A. Indigenous Knowledge: Disaster Risk Reduction Policy Note (UNISDR Asia and the Pacific, 2009).

  5. Gadgil, M., Ferkes, B. & Folke, C. Indigenous knowledge for biodiversity conservation. Ambio 22, 151–156 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lauer, M. & Aswani, S. Indigenous knowledge and long-term ecological change: detection, interpretation, and responses to changing ecological conditions in Pacific island communities. Environ. Manag. 45, 985–997 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Garnett, S. T. et al. A spatial overview of the global importance of indigenous lands for conservation. Nat. Sustain. 1, 369 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Soberón, J. & Peterson, A. T. Biodiversity governance: a tower of babel of scales and cultures. PLoS Biol. 13, e1002108 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Loh, J. & Harmon, D. A global index of biocultural diversity. Ecol. Indic. 5, 231–241 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Simons, G. F. & Fennig, C. D. (eds) Ethnologue: Languages of the World 21st edn (SIL International, 2018); http://www.ethnologue.com

  11. Cabuy, R. L., Marwa, J., Manusawai, J. & Rahawarin, Y. Y. Non-woody plant species of Papuan island forests, a sustainable source of food for the local communities. Indian J. Tradit. Know. 11, 586–592 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Berkes, F., Colding, J. & Folke, C. Rediscovery of traditional knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol. Appl. 10, 1251–1262 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gorenflo, L. J. et al. Co-occurrence of linguistic and biological diversity in biodiversity hotspots and high wilderness areas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8032–8037 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mittermeier, R. A. et al. Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conserv. Biol. 12, 516–520 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Paijmans, K. New Guinea Vegetation (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in association with the Australian National University Press, 1976).

  16. Raven, P. H., Berlin, B. & Breedlove, D. E. The origins of taxonomy. Science 174, 1210–1213 (1971).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Loh, J. & Harmon, D. Biocultural Diversity: Threatened Species, Endangered Languages (WWF Netherlands, 2014).

  18. Rabinowitz, D. in The Biological Aspects of Rare Plant Conservation (ed. Synge, H.) 205–217 (Wiley, 1981).

  19. Davis, W., Harrison, K. D. & Howell, C. H. (eds) Book of Peoples of the World: A Guide to Cultures (National Geographic Books, 2007).

  20. Cámara-Leret, R. et al. Ethnobotanical knowledge is vastly under-documented in northwestern South America. PLoS ONE 9, e85794 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Teixidor-Toneu, I. et al. An ethnomedicinal survey of a Tashelhit-speaking community in the High Atlas, Morocco. J. Ethnopharmacol. 188, 96–110 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Calvet-Mir, L. et al. The contribution of traditional agroecological knowledge as a digital commons to agroecological transitions: the case of the CONECT-e platform. Sustainability 10, 3214 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dekens, J. Local Knowledge for Disaster Preparedness: A Literature Review (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, 2007).

  24. Gómez‐Baggethun, E. et al. Traditional ecological knowledge trends in the transition to a market economy: empirical study in the Doñana natural areas. Conserv. Biol. 24, 721–729 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rounsevell, M., Fischer, M., Torre-Marin Rando, A. & Mader, A. (eds) The IPBES Regional Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for Europe and Central Asia (Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2018).

  26. People’s Biodiversity Register (National Biodiversity Authority, 2013).

  27. Waldron, A. et al. Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12144–12148 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cámara-Leret, R. et al. Fundamental species traits explain provisioning services of tropical American palms. Nat. Plants 3, 16220 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Howitt, R. Indigenous rights vital to survival. Nat. Sustain. 1, 339–340 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Warburg, O. Beitrage zur kenntnis der papuanischen flora. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 13, 230–455 (1891).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Brummitt R. K., Pando F., Hollis S. & Brummitt N. A. World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions. International Working Group on Taxonomic Databases for Plant Sciences (TDWG) (Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, 2001).

  32. Hide, R. A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part I: Publications 2000–2013 (2014).

  33. Hide, R. A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part II: Publications 1963–1999 (2014).

  34. Hide, R. Supplement 1 to ‘A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part I: Publications 2000–2013 (2015).

  35. Hide, R. Supplement 2 to ‘A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part I: Publications 2000–2013 (2016).

  36. Hide, R. Supplement 3 to ‘A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part I: Publications 2000–2013 (2016).

  37. Hide, R. Supplement 4 to ‘A Preliminary Bibliography of Ethnobotanical Research in West Papua (Indonesia), Part I: Publications 2000–2013 (2017)

  38. Thiers, B. Index Herbariorum: A Global Directory of Public Herbaria and Associated Staff. New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium (New York Botanical Garden, 2018); http://sweetgum.nybg.org/ih/

  39. Cook, F. Economic Botany Data Collection Standard. Prepared for the International Working Group on Taxonomic Databases for Plant Sciences (TDWG) (Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, 1995).

  40. Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 Report No. 169 (International Labour Organisation, 1989); http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C169

  41. Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I., Nelson, A. & Guevara, E. SRTM 90m DEM Digital Elevation Database Version 4 (accessed March 2019); http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org

  42. Olson, D. M. et al. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. Bioscience 51, 933–938 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. R Core Team A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019).

  44. Hijmans, R. et al. raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. R Package version 2.8-19 (2019).

  45. Bivand, R. et al. rgdal: Bindings for the ‘Geospatial’ Data Abstraction Library. R Package version 1.4-3 (2019).

  46. Hijmans, R. Williams, E. & Vennes, C. geosphere: Spherical Trigonometry. R Package version 1.5-7 (2017).

  47. Lewis, M. P. & Simons, G. F. Assessing endangerment: expanding fishman’s GIDS. Rev. Roum. Linguist. 55, 103–120 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., Jacomy, M. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In Proc. 3rd International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media 361–362 (AAAI, 2009); https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/09/paper/view/154

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Frodin and the staff at the Library, Art and Archives Department of Royal Botanic Gardens Kew for assistance in finding references. We extend our gratitude to: L. Green (Royal Botanic Gardens Kew Digital Collections Unit) and S. Arias (Naturalis Biodiversity Center) for assistance with herbarium databases; K. Willis and T. Ulian for support; I. Olivares for reviewing earlier versions of this manuscript; and I. Cámara for assistance with the design-layout of figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Identification & Naming Department, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Richmond, UK

    Rodrigo Cámara-Leret & Zoe Dennehy

  2. University of Sussex, Brighton, UK

    Zoe Dennehy

Authors
  1. Rodrigo Cámara-Leret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zoe Dennehy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.C.-L. conceived the study. Z.D. and R.C.-L. collected data. R.C.-L. analysed the data. R.C.-L. wrote the paper. Both authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodrigo Cámara-Leret.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Fig. 1, Supplementary Tables 1 and 2.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cámara-Leret, R., Dennehy, Z. Information gaps in indigenous and local knowledge for science-policy assessments. Nat Sustain 2, 736–741 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0324-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0324-0

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing