Skip to main content

Traditional use of tropical biodiversity in Melanesia

Uso tradicional de la biodiversidad tropical en Melanesia

  • Chapter
Biodiversity
  • 364 Accesses

Abstract

Do members of traditional cultures live in harmony with their environment and, if so, why? Do they classify the living world and, if so, how do they accomplish this without access to natural science, its libraries and databases? There are a number of misconceptions regarding non-literate societies and their view of and relationship with nature.

Like all animal species, humans have always had an impact on the environment in which they live. Yet, the efficacy of their actions was limited, mainly due to a lack of efficient tools. Much more primary forest has been cut down in New Guinea since the introduction of the steel axe than during the times when areas for cultivation had to be cleared with stone adzes.

It is typical for members of traditional societies to have a very sophisticated system of understanding and classifying nature. At first glance it seems surprising and highly improbable that they use classificatory methods that are very similar to our own Linnéan system. From the perspective of evolutionary biology however, a similarity between the various ways of seeing the living world is not all that unlikely. The human brain looks for structure in a very similar way, regardless of the specific culture. Humans are, by their very nature, “natural scientists,” even when the object of their study is a plant without any direct material, nutritional or religious significance.

On the basis of their intimate knowledge of the living world in their environment, people in Melanesia have a large variety of methods for utilizing biodiversity —and they have even increased biodiversity. Food plants are usually propagated via vegetative seedlings. During the long history of Melanesia and through the curiosity and skill of the Papuan and Austronesian populations a very rich array of edible species (Colocasia esculenta, Dioscorea alata, Ipomoea batatas, Saccharum edule and officinarum, Rungia klossii, Abelmoschus manihot and many others) has been developed which in fact constitutes one of the genetic treasures of our planet.

Animals including fish and other maritime creatures are caught in thoughtful, clever ways that are based on a very precise knowledge of the ecology, biology and behaviour of the respective species. Neolithic horticulture with long fallow periods and mulching techniques has yielded good results. Rather than being mutually exclusive, biodiversity and cultural diversity are natural partners.

Resumen

¿Viven los miembros de las culturas tradicionales en armonía con su entorno y, si es así, por que? ¿Clasifican el mundo en que viven y, si es así, cómo lo hacen sin tener acceso a las ciencias naturales, sus bibliotecas y bases de datos? Existe una serie de conceptos erróneos respecto a las sociedades sin literatura y su visin de y relación con la Naturaleza.

Como todas las especies animales, los humanos siempre han afectado el entorno en el que viven. No obstante, la eficacia de sus acciones era limitada, principalmente debido a la falta de herramientas eficientes. En Nueva Guinea, se han talado muchos más bosques primarios desde la introducción del hacha de acero que durante el periodo en el que las áreas de cultivo tenían que ser despejadas con azuelas de piedra.

Un rasgo característico de los miembros de sociedades tradicionales es tener un sistema muy sofisticado de entender y clasificar la Naturaleza. A simple vista parece sorprendente y muy improbable que empleen métodos clasificatorios muy similares a nuestro propio sistema Linnean. Desde la perspectiva de la biologia evolutiva, sin embargo, no resulta tan improbable una semejanza entre las distintas formas de contemplar el mundo viviente. El cerebro humano busca estructuras de forma muy similar, independientemente de la cultura específica. Los humanos son, por su propia naturaleza, “científicos naturales”, incluso cuando su objeto de estudio es una planta sin ninguna importancia directa a nivel material, nutritivo o religioso. En base a su conocimiento profundo del mundo viviente en su entorno, los habitantes de Melanesia poseen una gran variedad de métodos para utilizar la biodiversidad; incluso han aumentado la biodiversidad. Plantas alimenticias suelen estar propagadas a través de plantas de semillas vegetativas. Durante la larga historia de Melanesia y debido a la curiosidad y habilidad de las poblaciones de Papua y Austronesia se ha desarroi lado un conjunto muy rico de especies comestibles (Colocasia esculenta, Dioscorea alata, Ipomoea batatas, Saccharum edule y officinarum, Rungia klossii, Abelmoschus manihot y muchas otras) que constituye de hecho uno de los tesoros genéticos de nuestro planeta.

Los animales, incluyendo peces y otras criaturas marinas, son capturados mediante métodos cuidadosos e inteligentes basados en un conocimiento muy preciso de la ecología, la biologia y del comportamiento de las respectivas especies. La horticultura neolítica con largos periodos de barbecho y técnicas de mulching han dado buenos resultados. Biodiversidad y diversidad cultural no sólo no se excluyen mutuamente, sino que son socios naturales.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Berlin B (1992) Ethnobotanical Classification. Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin B, Breedlove D, Raven P (1973) General Principles of Classification and Nomenclature in Folk Biology. American Anthropologist 75: 214–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blum JP (1979) Untersuchungen zur Tierwelt im Leben der Eipo im zentralen Bergland von Irian Jaya (West-Neuguinea), Indonesien. Reimer, Berlin Cotton, C. M. (1996) Ethnobotany. Principles and Applications. Wiley & Sons, Chichester etc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiepko P, Schiefenhövel W (1987) Mensch und Pflanze. Ergebnisse ethnotaxonomischer und ethnobotanischer Untersuchungen bei den Eipo, zentrales Bergland von Irian Jaya (West-Neuguinea), Indonesien. Reimer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiepko P, Schultze-Motel W (1981) Floristische und ethnobotanische Untersuchungen im Eipomek-Tal, Irian Jaya (West-Neuguinea), Indonesien. Reimer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen D (1994) Pacific Peoples in a Modern World. In: Burenhult G, Rowley-Conwy P, Schiefenhövel W, Hurst Thomas D, White JP (eds) The Illustrated History of Humankind, Vol. 5, Traditional Peoples Today, Harper & Collins, New York, pp 99–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski B (1922) Argonauts of the Western Pacific. An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski B (1935) Coral Gardens and Their Magic. A Study of the Methods of Tilling the Soil and of Agricultural Rites in the Trobriand Islands. 2 vols. Reynolds, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhövel W (1976) Die Eipo-Leute des Berglands von Indonesisch-Neuguinea. Homo 26,4: 263–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhövel W (1991) Eipo. In: Hays TE (ed) Encyclopedia of World Cultures, Vol. II, Oceania. G. K. Hall & Co, Boston, pp 55–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhövel W (in press) Good Taste and Bad Taste —Preferences and Aversions as Biological Principles. In: Macbeth H (ed) Good Taste and Bad Taste, Berghahn, Oxford etc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhövel W, Prinz A (1984) Ethnomedizin und Ethnopharmakologie —Quellen wichtiger Arzneimittel. In: Czygan FC (ed) Biogene Arzneistoffe. Vieweg, Braunschweig, pp 223–238

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schultes RE, von Reis S (1995) Ethnobotany. Evolution of a Discipline. Chapman & Hall, London etc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schiefenhövel, W. (2001). Traditional use of tropical biodiversity in Melanesia. In: Barthlott, W., Winiger, M., Biedinger, N. (eds) Biodiversity. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06071-1_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06071-1_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-08370-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-06071-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics