Biodiversity conservation, human–animal interactions, and zootherapy in ecological knowledge of Indonesian Healers

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Biology Pub Date : 2024-04-29 DOI:10.1111/cobi.14278
Patricia G. Patrick, Abdul Rahman Singkam
{"title":"Biodiversity conservation, human–animal interactions, and zootherapy in ecological knowledge of Indonesian Healers","authors":"Patricia G. Patrick,&nbsp;Abdul Rahman Singkam","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We examined the entanglement of biodiversity conservation, human–animal interactions, zootherapy, and local beliefs among Sumatran Healers and their local community by completing an ethnography of 43 Indigenous Healers across 8 tribes in Bengkulu Province, Sumatra, Indonesia. Data collection tools were interviews, observations, videos, photographs, and a researcher journal. Of the 43 Healers, 30 used animals and mentioned 62 species. Of the animals identified, the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List lists 34% (<i>n</i> = 21) as endangered, decreasing, or vulnerable, including Sumatran tiger (<i>Panthera tigris sumatrae</i>), Sumatran elephant (<i>Elephas maximus sumatranus</i>), and Sumatran rhinoceros (<i>Dicerorhinus sumatrensis</i>). Of the 30 Healers using animals, 50% (<i>n</i> = 15) practiced healing with at least one endangered, decreasing, or vulnerable animal. We defined 3 personas: Healer self-persona, Healer-imposed persona, and community-imposed persona. A persona represented a group's opinions and sentiments related to Healers killing animals for medicinal purposes. Using an iterative data analysis process, we grouped the data across the 3 personas into 5 themes: ease of killing and preparing animals, emotions related to killing animals, animal value, relationship to religion, and Healers are tricksters. The complexity of merging the identities of Healers and the community within an actor-network embodies the relationality of actions, interactions, and feelings among Healers, between Healers and animals, and between Healers and the community. Conservationists should be cognizant of Healers’ medicinal use of animals, views of human–animal interactions, and zootherapy from all social and emotional perspectives. The data led to defining Indigenous Healer ecological knowledge components of zootherapy, human–animal interactions, and biodiversity conservation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.14278","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined the entanglement of biodiversity conservation, human–animal interactions, zootherapy, and local beliefs among Sumatran Healers and their local community by completing an ethnography of 43 Indigenous Healers across 8 tribes in Bengkulu Province, Sumatra, Indonesia. Data collection tools were interviews, observations, videos, photographs, and a researcher journal. Of the 43 Healers, 30 used animals and mentioned 62 species. Of the animals identified, the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List lists 34% (n = 21) as endangered, decreasing, or vulnerable, including Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus sumatranus), and Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis). Of the 30 Healers using animals, 50% (n = 15) practiced healing with at least one endangered, decreasing, or vulnerable animal. We defined 3 personas: Healer self-persona, Healer-imposed persona, and community-imposed persona. A persona represented a group's opinions and sentiments related to Healers killing animals for medicinal purposes. Using an iterative data analysis process, we grouped the data across the 3 personas into 5 themes: ease of killing and preparing animals, emotions related to killing animals, animal value, relationship to religion, and Healers are tricksters. The complexity of merging the identities of Healers and the community within an actor-network embodies the relationality of actions, interactions, and feelings among Healers, between Healers and animals, and between Healers and the community. Conservationists should be cognizant of Healers’ medicinal use of animals, views of human–animal interactions, and zootherapy from all social and emotional perspectives. The data led to defining Indigenous Healer ecological knowledge components of zootherapy, human–animal interactions, and biodiversity conservation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印度尼西亚医士生态知识中的生物多样性保护、人兽互动和动物疗法
我们通过对印度尼西亚苏门答腊岛明古鲁省 8 个部落的 43 名土著医士进行人种学调查,研究了苏门答腊医士及其当地社区在生物多样性保护、人兽互动、动物疗法和当地信仰之间的纠葛。数据收集工具包括访谈、观察、视频、照片和研究者日志。在 43 位治疗师中,有 30 位使用动物,并提到了 62 种动物。在已确认的动物中,34%(n = 21)被国际自然保护联盟红色名录列为濒危、减少或易危物种,包括苏门答腊虎(Panthera tigris sumatrae)、苏门答腊大象(Elephas maximus sumatranus)和苏门答腊犀牛(Dicerorhinus sumatrensis)。在使用动物的 30 位治疗者中,50%(n = 15)使用至少一种濒危、减少或易受伤害的动物进行治疗。我们定义了三种角色:治疗者自我角色、治疗者强加角色和社区强加角色。一个角色代表了一个群体对治疗师为药用目的杀害动物的看法和情绪。通过反复的数据分析过程,我们将 3 个角色的数据归纳为 5 个主题:杀死和准备动物的难易程度、与杀死动物有关的情绪、动物的价值、与宗教的关系以及神医是骗子。在一个行为者网络中,治疗者和社区的身份合并的复杂性体现了治疗者之间、治疗者和动物之间以及治疗者和社区之间的行为、互动和情感的关联性。保护主义者应从所有社会和情感角度认识到 "痊愈者 "对动物的药用、对人与动物互动的看法以及动物疗法。这些数据有助于界定土著神医在动物疗法、人兽互动和生物多样性保护方面的生态知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
期刊最新文献
Misrepresentation of invasive species in the mass media with images of unrelated organisms Eliciting diverse perspectives to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation Show me the theory: Response to Birdsong et al. (2024) Systematic conservation prioritization with the prioritizr R package Impacts of ecosystem service message framing and dynamic social norms on public support for tropical forest restoration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1