{"title":"Biodiversity conservation, human–animal interactions, and zootherapy in ecological knowledge of Indonesian Healers","authors":"Patricia G. Patrick, 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.
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.