Gendered interpretations of bio-cultural diversity in Eastern Indonesia: Ethnoecology in the transition zone

SEAG Proc. 2001.Ver.1/Page 23 of 27

Gendered interpretations of bio-cultural diversity in Eastern Indonesia:Ethnoecology in the transition zonePresented by Jeanine Pfeiffer at the Northwest Regional Consortium for Southeast Asian StudiesConference: October 27, 2001 – University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada Abstract: If women and men experience bio-cultural diversity differently, how do fe/male perspectives andpractices influence the cohesion and/or fragmentation of their ancestral heritage? As part of a researchproject exploring the synergism between biological and cultural diversity, fieldwork amongst the TadoClan (Kempo Manggarai tribe, southwestern Flores island, East Nusa Tenggara) has incorporated gender-distinct qualitative and quantitative surveys to investigate variation in female and male traditionalecological knowledge (TEK). The research pioneers a multifaceted approach to document and contrastuxorilocal and virilocal ethnobotanical traditions in an indigenous community undergoing rapidintergenerational change. A multi-tiered statistical analysis of a quantitative survey is employed, startingat a relatively coarse scale and proceeding systematically through consecutively finer levels of analysis toa very narrow focus in order to delineate gender differences in ethnobotanical expertise. The quantitativeresults are re-examined using qualitative data to elucidate factors contributing to the persistence and/orerosion of cultural practices and biological resources. The importance of involving indigenous communitymembers as research associates in theoretical and empirical studies to determine proactive conservationstrategies are highlighted throughout the paper. IntroductionSince ancient times, indigenous traditions throughout Southeast Asia have been closely intertwined withnative biodiversity. The widespread nature of secular and sacred customs involving native flora such asrice (Oryza sativa), betelnut (Areca catechu) and betel leaf or fruit (Piper betle), the palms (Arecaceae)and the bamboos (Poaceae) is one of the defining features of Southeast Asian culture, united highlydiverse ethnicities scattered across the region (Piper, 1993, Rooney, 1993). Native plants and animalshave featured so prominently in traditional foods, handicrafts, pharmacopoeias, rituals and narratives thatsome researchers have proposed an intrinsic link between the maintenance of biological diversity andcultural diversity (Nietschmann, 1992), and the coining of a new term, bio-cultural diversity (ETC Intl.,1999). An increasing number of researchers in the fields of agriculture, anthropology, ecology,environmental studies, ethnobotany and ethnozoology are highlighting the expertise of indigenousecologists as a critical component of collaborative biodiversity conservation efforts (Bulmer and Healey,1993, Martin, 1995, van Veldhuizen et al., 1997, Gragson and Blount, 1999, Nazarea, 1999, Huntington,2000, Robertson et al., 2000). Indigenous communities in Indonesia are also recognized for their in situand ex situ conservation of native biodiversity as evidenced by their maintenance of highly diversehousehold and forest gardens (Michon, 1983, Pinedo-Vasquez and Paddoch, 1996) and agroforestrysystems (Michon et al., 1986, Aumeeruddy 1995, Michon et al., 2000). Researchers investigatingagricultural biodiversity amongst indigenous communities have recognized the role of native peoples inmaintaining ancient crop lines, known as heirloom varieties, or landraces (Nazarea, 1998, Ramprasad,1999). An estimated ninety percent of the 80,000 rice accessions at the International Rice ResearchInstitute (IRRI) are derived, in whole, or in part, from the heirloom collections of Asian farmers (Goodell,1982). Women in particular have been shown to play an essential role in maintaining local germplasmcollections, including rice, beans, and grains (Sperling, 1992, Setyawati, 1997, Tsegaye, 1997). Female and male knowledge regarding native biodiversity in Indonesia is gender-differentiated due to avariety of influences, including traditional gender divisions of labor, cultural norms and taboos, and routesof knowledge diffusion. Some of the earliest ecological experts in Indonesia were the women and mendepicted along with native species including mango trees (Mangifera spp.), lontar palms (Borassusflabellifer) and coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) on ninth century A.D. bas-relief panels surrounding theBorobudor Temple in Central Java (Budianta, 1996). One of the more well-known modern examples ofnative ethnobotanical expertise in Indonesia is that of the jamu, or herbal medicine, seller. The proto-typical image of a jamu seller is that of a beautiful young women in traditional lace kebaya top and batiksarong, purveying jars of home-made tonics nestled in a woven basket strapped to her back along thestreets and alleyways of urban Javanese neighborhoods. In practice, however, both men and womenprepare and distribute jamu, although their knowledge and marketing of jamu often is distinguished alonggender lines. Women tend to specialize in freshly prepared tonics, which they sell during the earlier partof the day. Male street vendors hawk packets of dried and powdered jamu sold from roadside stalls that

III

LEGEND

P

rimaryresidence

Secondaryresidence

Fieldhut

Householdg

III

typical image of a jamu seller is that of a beautiful young women in traditional lace kebaya top and batiksarong, purveying jars of home-made tonics nestled in a woven basket strapped to her back along thestreets and alleyways of urban Javanese neighborhoods. In practice, however, both men and womenprepare and distribute jamu, although their knowledge and marketing of jamu often is distinguished alonggender lines. Women tend to specialize in freshly prepared tonics, which they sell during the earlier partof the day. Male street vendors hawk packets of dried and powdered jamu sold from roadside stalls thattend to open in the late afternoon and often stay open throughout the night (Schoch, 1985). Both femaleand male street vendors are familiar with a wide range of ailments, including conditions associated withtheir own and opposite gender (e.g., health issues known delicately as “female complaints” or “maleproblems”), but women are more frequently engaged in midwifery and massage. This gender-based division of medicinal knowledge and practice has also been witnessed in rural areas. Astudy of indigenous medical knowledge on the island of Siberut (100 km off the west coast of Sumatra)documented both women and men acting as traditional healers, but the occupation of recognized medicalspecialist positions (e.g., as kerei [highly trained shaman], siagai-laggek [a trained healer withoutreligious connotations], or sirua-mata [a type of medium]) by one gender and/or the other variedgeographically. In South Siberut, only male kerei exist. In North Siberut, women and men were employedas kerei, but the sirua-mata were usually women (Ave and Sunito 1990). A medical anthropology studyamongst the Kenyak Dayak of East Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo) found that women were commonlyacknowledged to have vaster knowledge of healing plants than men, and that “…men are more familiarwith plants used to treat serious wounds, in rituals and as fish poisons, and with primary forest species …women are more familiar with treatments of common ailments such as stomach ache and fevers, and havea broader knowledge of the secondary forest and cultivated species … Division of labor seems to accountfor this difference, with men more frequently venturing into the primary forest to hunt and women stayingcloser to the village to tend the ladang (rice fields)” (Gollin, 1997:139). If we assume that women and men experience bio-cultural diversity differently, how do female and maleperspectives and practices influence the cohesion and/or fragmentation of a community’s biological andcultural ancestral heritage? How do women and men differ in their understanding of their native taxa andtraditions? How is the human and plant ecology changing from one generation to the next? Some of thekey questions to ask in beginning to distinguish separate areas of female and male influence inbiodiversity knowledge, access, use, management and conservation include: (i) who holds the knowledgeof different plant and animals, their uses, value and meaning for the community? (ii) Who determinesaccess to that knowledge? (iii) Who gathers or hunts the wild species? (iv) Who harvests the cultivatedspecies? (v) Who prepares/processes biodiversity products [e.g., wild-collected foods, medicines,hallucinogens, handicrafts]? (vi) Who markets biodiversity products? (vii) What are the cultural/religioustaboos, along gender lines, for access to or use of the biodiversity? (viii) Who saves seeds, replants,restocks, breeds? This paper demonstrates the importance of gender-differentiated research by reviewing the empiricalresults of fieldwork investigating four consecutive, interlocking layers of ethnobotanical knowledge. First, I will examine gender distinctions in plant knowledge in relation to different groups of plant types– in this case, plants grouped into different growth forms (trees versus vines) and habitats (cultivatedareas versus wild areas). Next I compare female and male ethnobotanical knowledge for individual planttaxa within the larger group of native edible fruit species. In the succeeding analysis I delineate genderdistinctions in indigenous knowledge for different ethnobotanical uses of a subset of individual plant taxa.Finally I consider differences in male and female involvement in, and responsibility for, ethnobotanicalactivities involving a suite of native plants. The research siteThe gender-differentiated ethnobotanical research results reported here are derived from a collaborativeresearch venture between the Tado clan [an indigenous community on Flores Island, Eastern Indonesia],the Ethnobotanical Conservation Organization for Southeast Asia (ECO-SEA), and the University ofCalifornia at Davis. The research adheres to the tenets of the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity(UNEP-CBD 1994) and the 1995 Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of the Heritage ofIndigenous Peoples (UNEP-WGIP 1995), and is based on a cooperative agreement developed between theresearch partners. The data presented in this paper was collected in cooperation with a team of Tadoresearch associates and peer-reviewed by Tado community members (including the Tado Council ofElders), who also serve as editorial advisors, data analysts and primary informants. The research site is located on Flores Island, the largest island within East Nusa Tenggara province,located immediately to the east of Komodo Island, north of Timor Island and south of the Moluccas(Maluku). The Tado clan reside in two villages in the southwest corner of Flores Island, approximately anhour and a half from the port city of Labuan Bajo. The Tado speak Kempo Manggarai, one ofapproximately fifty linguistic groups indigenous to the western third of the island (Verheijen 1967, Erb1999). Tado ancestral lands cover at least 100 square kilometers, at 100 – 500 meters above sea level, and

holdgarden

Ricefield

Cashewplantation

Grassland/savannah

Teak/cand

located immediately to the east of Komodo Island, north of Timor Island and south of the Moluccas(Maluku). The Tado clan reside in two villages in the southwest corner of Flores Island, approximately anhour and a half from the port city of Labuan Bajo. The Tado speak Kempo Manggarai, one ofapproximately fifty linguistic groups indigenous to the western third of the island (Verheijen 1967, Erb1999). Tado ancestral lands cover at least 100 square kilometers, at 100 – 500 meters above sea level, andcontain a range of natural and cultivated ecosystems including extensive savannahs, dryland monsoonforest, thermal springs, irrigated rice paddy, upland swidden, dense agroforests and sub-montane, semi-evergreen forests. The Tado are the thirteenth generation descendants of Sulawesi immigrants fleeingMakassarese religious persecution who settled on Flores Island during the era of the Bima sultanate. The Tado have a rich heritage of ethnobotanical traditions, a portion of which have been documented bythe research project in a series of iterative discussions with community members in the twelve Tadomukang, or settlements. Interviews investigating the nutritional, utilitarian, medicinal, social, ceremonial,magical and narrative uses of native plants have yielded a trilingual database of over 600 uses of sometwo hundred plant types. One set of ethnobotanical uses in particular fits well within this account ofgendered interpretations of biocultural diversity: the story of how the wol plant – known as the Javanolive tree or Sterculia foetida, is uniquely important to the Tado. The wol tree has ceremonial importancein the death rituals of the Tado, both the entire tree in situ, and its reproductive parts in concert withanother native plant type, lembur (Cassia sp.). An enormous wol tree at the highland crossroads linkingthe oldest Tado settlements is a sacred site where funeral processions pause before continuing on toancestral burial grounds in the nearly abandoned hilltop settlement of Tado, from whence the Tado derivetheir clan name. When unmarried community members die, one part of the funeral rites is to place a seedfrom the wol plant into the burial shroud of young unmarried men, to replace the partner they never had,or a pod from the lembur plant into the burial shroud of young women. The wol pod is dehiscent, splittinginto two circular halves at maturity, whereas the lembur pod is long, thin and slightly curving. Theimportance of the morphological characteristics of the different fruit pods – i.e. their shape and sexualconnotations – were made patently clear by community members when recounting this particulartradition. Sexual imagery is also ascribed to the betel nut, or areca nut, as the two matching halves of a newly splitnut (pinang muda) are used as a metaphor for a well-matched couple. In Malaysia, pieces of areca nut arethrown during the seventh month of pregnancy to predict the sex of the unborn child. The number ofpieces lying “face up” suggest a girl or boy child (Rooney, 1993:33). A similar ritual involving the fruit ofa different palm – the coconut (Cocos nucifera) – is practiced by the Tado in the wau wae matrimonialceremony. Two halves of a split coconut husk are repeatedly thrown over the heads of newlywedskneeling in a local river or stream. The position in which the tossed husks land [face up or face down] issaid to predict the sex of the couple’s future offspring. Yet not all gender distinctions in Tadoethnobotanical knowledge and traditions are this obvious or stereotypical, as will be demonstrated by thedata analysis to follow. Gender-Differentiated Access to Biodiversity at the Ecosystem LevelWomen and men of the Tado differ in their knowledge of plants pertaining to different habitats in directrelation to the level of exposure they have had to certain ecosystems over their lifespan. The Tado are“wife-takers,” meaning Tado men traditionally seek wives from outside their clan; or from carefullydelineated familial groups from within the clan (anak rona) which are known to have descended fromexternal blood lines. Women who marry into the Tado clan originate from neighboring villages orsubdistricts, or from other Manggarai communities up to a hundred kilometers distant. Depending onwhere the incoming wives’ home villages were located (e.g., coastal versus inland, low elevation versushigh elevation, lower rainfall areas versus higher rainfall areas), Tado brides will have had exposure toecosystem types – and the plant assemblages typical of those ecosystems – which are the same as, ordifferent from, ecosystems types contained within the Tado ancestral lands. In addition, these womenmay or may not speak Kempo Manggarai, but most likely will speak another dialect within the largerManggarai linguistic group. The traditional incorporation of women from external communities into theTado lineage not only contributes to diversifying the Tado gene pool (thus avoiding the dangers associatedwith inbreeding), but also contributes to diversifying the pool of knowledge resident within thecommunity. The differing cultural and ecological backgrounds of incoming wives (i.e., uxorilocaltraditions) can affect the diversity of local ethnobotanical knowledge (i.e., virilocal traditions) within theTado clan in four ways: (i) the wives may introduce entirely new ethnobotanical traditions [previouslyunknown to the Tado] which are added to existing Tado ethnobotanical practices; (ii) the wives mayrevive rare or endangered traditions which have been neglected by the Tado but are more commonlypracticed in the bride’s homeland; (iii) the wives may help maintain Tado traditions by adopting existingTado ethnobotanical practices; and/or (iv) the wives may replace Tado traditions with alternativeethnobotanical practices. Examples of female-imported ethnobotanical knowledge include medicinal and nutritional traditionsassociated with montane, or high elevation flora. A number of Tado wives come from “tana hawa/cus”

/candlenutagroforest

Riparianarea/marsh

Secondarydrylandforest

S

Tado ethnobotanical practices; and/or (iv) the wives may replace Tado traditions with alternativeethnobotanical practices. Examples of female-imported ethnobotanical knowledge include medicinal and nutritional traditionsassociated with montane, or high elevation flora. A number of Tado wives come from “tana hawa/cus”[cold regions] highland villages, some from communities located less than 20 km from Tado lands but ataltitudes high enough to contain significantly different subsets of native flora. Highland plant taxarecognized and used primarily by women include the vine wase karot baranua, a member of Vitaceae(Cissus sp.?) used to treat internal hemorrhaging and toothache, and to excise demonic influences.Women who grew up in highland areas are also familiar with a number of wild fruit plants otherwiseunknown to Tado, including the shrub conco (Rubus sp.), remeng (species unknown) and saga (speciesunknown), all of which have medicinal uses in addition to their use as edible fruit (1). The degree to which an incoming wife can actively maintain her own ethnobotanical knowledge withinthe Tado community will be limited to the number of plants she can identify as useful (thus potentiallylimiting the subset of plants she retains an active interest in), and her access to those plants. Thus, even ifa woman marrying into the Tado clan has been exposed to an identical set of the plants found in the Tadolands, her level of familiarity with those same plants and their ethnobotanical uses will partially dependon how quickly she is able to positively match the identity of those plants with those she knew prior toarriving in Tado. Her continued use of those plants will depend on her range of movement throughdifferent ecosystems containing those plants. Men of the Tado clan, who have resided on Tado ancestrallands all their lives, and are more free-ranging than women, are not as subject to the linguistic or accessissues experienced by their wives. If we roughly divide plants into habitat generalists (those plants more broadly dispersed across differenthabitats), and habitat specialists (plants tending to associate more narrowly with certain habitats), then wecould hypothesize that women who have come into the Tado community from other geographical areaswould be more familiar with more widely dispersed plants (habitat generalists) than with plants locallyspecific to Tado lands (habitat specialists). More broadly dispersed plants tend to be the “weedier”species, such as herbs, vines, ferns and invasive annual species: and indeed, adult women in Tado tendedto know more about these plant types. Less broadly dispersed plants include woody species, such as largetrees, palms and lianas. Our statistical results demonstrate that men tend to know more about woodyspecies (refer to Table 2 in a later section). Studies of wild-harvesting practices amongst indigenouspeoples in other parts of the world have also documented a greater tendency for women to focus on leafygreens [vegetables] or “weedy” plants (Wachiira 1987, Wilson 1989), and in fact one of our statisticallysignificant results described later in the paper focuses on the use of a native plant as a leafy vegetable. The story does not end here, however. Additional factors contribute to a gendered division of knowledge,resulting in distinct patterns of female and male ethnobotanical expertise for different plant types. Menand women in Tado have different patterns of ecosystem exposure, that is, they frequent differentecosystems within the Tado ancestral landscape with varying degrees of intensity. In this paper I willrefer to the areas of economic activity within ecosystems accessed and/or managed by Tado residents asspatial activity zones [SAZs] (2). A spatial activity zone is defined as the physical area within which agiven individual undertakes social, cultural and economic activities. Within a typical Tado household,women and men participate equally in managing a diverse agricultural portfolio and several homesteads(i.e. primary and secondary residences) across a range of ecosystem types, but as demonstrated in Figure1, men have a far wider area of ecosystem visitation, and thus a different set of spatial activity zones(refer to the area within the dotted line) than women (refer to the area within the bolded line). Differingsocial and cultural roles and responsibilities for women and men also define the extent of an individual’sSAZ. In Figure 1, female and male spatial activity zones are depicted at the macro-scale (lines delimiting theSAZs). For example, within most Tado households both sexes manage livestock, but the type of livestockmanaged is gender-differentiated. Women are more likely to concentrate on the care and feeding oflivestock housed within the homestead (such as pigs and chicken), whereas men are the ones primarilyresponsible for monitoring the feeding of free-ranging water buffalo. The difference in these managementduties translate into differential exposure to certain ecosystems (refer to Figure 1) in the sense that womenand men tend to spend more time in one subset of ecosystems than another. Women will gather bananatrunks for feeding the pigs from homestead gardens or field margins, whereas men will hike further into dryland and lower montane forests in search of their buffalo.

Figure 1: Stylized Depiction of Gender-Differentiated Spatial Activity Zones [SAZs]:(Female SAZ = Solid Line, Male SAZ = Dotted Line)

Relating to the Major Ecosystems Accessed and Managed by a Typical Tado Household

rest

Submontaneforest

Stream/waterway

Figure 1: Stylized Depiction of Gender-Differentiated Spatial Activity Zones [SAZs]:(Female SAZ = Solid Line, Male SAZ = Dotted Line)

Relating to the Major Ecosystems Accessed and Managed by a Typical Tado Household

Both women and men harvest a wide range of wild native plants and animals to contribute to householdsubsistence, but the particular types of edible biodiversity products collected can differ greatly. The Tadohunt deer, birds, rodents, frogs, crawfish and freshwater fish. Senior Tado residents have identified ediblewild-collected products from over one hundred and fifty plant types: including tubers, bamboo shoots,gingers, legumes, fern fronds, palm pith and forest fungi. Tado women are Dioscoraceae (wild yam)experts, and regularly harvest up to eight different types of wild yam that tend to grow in dryland andlower montane forests. In their frequent treks to local waterways to bathe, do laundry and collect waterfor household use, women will gather wild foods such as saung pepak, the fleshy fronds of theAcrostichum aureum fern. Men are primarily responsible for hunting wild animals, a task which takes them increasingly further fromhome as hunting pressure in the region has greatly diminished wild animal stocks in recent history.During their treks into more heavily forested areas, men will collect the nggédé – the tuber of the aroidAmorphophallus campulatus, or wild mushrooms (hum) during the rainy season. Spatial activity zones can also be depicted on a micro-scale, e.g. at the level of a given household orhomestead. In the household garden (kebun pekarangan), women and men may be responsible fordifferent plants, especially if there are gender differences in the ethnobotanical knowledge regarding thoseplants. For example, women are more likely to cultivate plants used frequently in cooking or as homeremedies, such as the gingers (Zingiberaceae) and semi-domesticated tubers (Dioscoraceae), whereas themen maintain the plots of housing materials such as bamboo. As noted earlier, gendered division of laborcan also result in men and women having different areas of ethnobotanical expertise, i.e., they are familiarwith different plant products used in different parts of the household. These distinctions will be exploredmore thoroughly in the analytical section of the paper (refer to Table 4). Men and women are also frequently responsible for managing distinct temporal components of thehousehold agricultural portfolio – thus occupying different temporal activity zones (TAZs). For example,women may be primarily responsible for weeding the rice paddies (an activity which occurs during thewet season or the period of vegetative growth for the rice crop), and given the seasonal nature of plantlifecycles, they might come in contact with certain moisture-dependent plants growing concurrently withthe young rice during the wet season (such as saung senduk, a swamp plant [Limnocharis flava] withedible leaves) which disappear from the paddies during the dry, or harvesting season. Field Survey MethodsThe quantitative results discussed in this paper were collected by the research team using a survey matrixwhich examined both the range of ethnobotanical knowledge women and men had for a group of ninety-five ethnobotanically useful native edible fruit taxa (3), and the frequency with which they used thosedifferent plant taxa for food, animal feed, medicinal, utilitarian, environmental, social/ceremonial,

Field Survey MethodsThe quantitative results discussed in this paper were collected by the research team using a survey matrixwhich examined both the range of ethnobotanical knowledge women and men had for a group of ninety-five ethnobotanically useful native edible fruit taxa (3), and the frequency with which they used thosedifferent plant taxa for food, animal feed, medicinal, utilitarian, environmental, social/ceremonial,magical and other uses. In the months prior to this quantitative survey, an extensive qualitative survey ofthe range of potential uses for each of the ninety-five plant taxa had been completed, allowing us to groupthe uses categorically on the quantitative survey. To ensure an egalitarian, gender balanced approach inour work we incorporated women and men equally as study informants, involved female and maleresearch associates in data collection and analysis, and conducted gender-differentiated qualitative andquantitative surveys and data analysis. The categories employed on the quantitative survey were: food use (edible by humans), feed use (edibleby livestock), medicinal use (employed to treat human or livestock illness), utilitarian use (employed astools in the household or field), social/ceremonial use (employed in secular or sacred rituals andmeetings) and other uses (as toys, etc.). Women and men in each randomly selected household wereinterviewed separately, and asked (a) if they were familiar with plant taxon x; (b) if they knew any usesfor plant taxa x; and (c) in what ways they used plant taxa x; and (d) how frequently they engaged in eachtype of use for plant taxon x. If the informant claimed unfamiliarity with a given plant taxon, then thepersons’ answers were coded “zero” across all use categories for that plant taxon. For plants familiar tothe respondents, a use frequency score (0 – 3) was recorded for each of the six use categories: “0”meaning never used, “1” for used once or twice in their lifetime, i.e. used a long time ago but not since,“2” for “sometimes” used, and “3” for frequent use. We summed the totals for male and female responsesfor all uses categories of the entire group of taxa, for each of the ninety-five plant taxa across all usecategories, and for separate use categories pertaining to individual taxa. The exercise also collected dataon female and male age, literacy, fluency in the national language (Bahasa Indonesia), ecosystemexposure (the range of unmanaged ecosystems frequented by the informants) and overall householdsocio-economic welfare. A sample line from the data collection form is shown below:

Table 1: Sample data set from the quantitative ethnobotanical data collection survey

FoodUse

FeedUse

MedicinalUse

UtilitarianUse

Social/Ceremonial

OtherUses

∑ Total Score

F M F M F M F M F M F M F M ( ∑ F + ∑ M )3 3 1 1 2 2 2 0 1 1 0 2 10 10 20

In the sample data set presented in Table 1, we can see that both the female informant (columns denotedwith the heading “F”) and the male informant (columns denoted with the heading “M”) used the planttaxa frequently for food, sometimes for medicine, and very infrequently for animal feed andsocial/ceremonial uses. The female informant was aware of a utilitarian use not cited by the maleinformant, just as the male informant noted an “other” use not listed by the female. This sample data setdemonstrates two key findings from our fieldwork: (1) generally, women and men had similar totalethnobotanical knowledge scores for the plant taxa surveyed (refer to Figure 2); and (2) women and menpossessed gender-differentiated knowledge about specific ethnobotanical uses for the plant taxa surveyed.In the following section, I present a multi-tiered statistical analysis, starting at a relatively coarse scale (acomparison of all informant responses for all plant taxa across all use categories) and proceedingsystematically through consecutively finer levels of analysis to a very narrow scale (a focus on thedifference in female and male responses within one use category for a single plant taxon). Statistical Analysis of Gender Differences in Ethnobotanical KnowledgeThe results reported in this section are derived from interviews conducted during August – October 2000by eight Tado research associates. A randomized, stratified sample of ninety-three households drawnproportionally from the 12 Tado mukang were involved in the survey, and represent households ofvarying socioeconomic status and geographical locations who manage a wide diversity of agriculturalportfolios. Adult women and men, often but not always considered “heads of household” wereinterviewed separately and their answers tabulated on matrixed survey sheets. Each informant wasquestioned about their familiarity with, and use of, ninety-five native edible fruit taxa.

Analyzing the quantitative data at the coarsest scale - overall knowledge for all ninety-five native fruitplant taxa - our initial results appeared relatively homogenous, as evidenced by the similar distribution ofmale and female ethnobotanical knowledge scores in the scatter plot in Figure 2. At first these resultsseemed counterintuitive: we expected that women would score higher on the survey, as femaleresponsibility for household health should result in higher women’s knowledge scores based on theirfamiliarity with nutritional and medicinal uses of native edible fruit taxa. This proved not to be the case,as can be seen in the separate histograms for male and female knowledge scores shown in Figures 3 and 4(below). Men had higher overall knowledge scores (ranging from 123 to 640), which are demonstrated inthe frequency distribution in Figure 3, showing the frequency bars for male scores to be clumped higherin the score range than those for women in Figure 4 (whose scores ranged from 85 to 547). Why did mentend to score higher on this survey, overall, than women? To answer this question we need to analyze the historical, ecological and anthropological context of theethnobotanical knowledge being analyzed. In the first place, it is important to recognize that native ediblefruit [plant] taxa historically have a wide range of uses – their use as edible fruit [food] is only one type ofuse, and given the limited fruiting season of many native rainforest species, not necessarily the primaryuse. For example, the genus Mangifera – mangoes – is consistently listed as one of the most importantplants to the Tado, not for its fruit per se, but due to the frequent use of mango bark pharmaceutically bythe women and mango timber by the men. As we noted in the previous section, if men were able to comeup with one more use type than the women, they scored higher on the survey. Secondly, the majority ofthe plants we surveyed were woody species distributed mainly in heavily forested ecosystems, includingthe submontane areas. Referring back to Figure 1, we see that men tend to have greater exposure toforested ecosystems, and thus more exposure to the plant types we chose to include on the survey. Duringthe qualitative data collection phase, a number of women in the community noted that they were not veryfamiliar with the native edible fruit species we were asking about, but if we questioned them about other,more herbaceous species they would have much more to say on the subject.

A third reason for higher male scores on the quantitative survey involved the structure of the datacollection exercise, i.e. the valuation and categorization of the responses. Across each of the six usecategories, the maximum possible value for each category was the same, whether or not there existeddifferent uses within each of the categories. For example, women may know six different ways of usingbanana leaves for preparing and packaging foods, but the maximum score for the “household utilitarianuse” category remains the same: three (3). Men also cite frequent use of banana leaves for foodpreparation, so they received an equivalent score of three (3) for that category. If men then went on tonote a separate use type, such as employing pieces of banana trunk to carry home freshwater frogs caughton a hunting trip, then they received “extra credit” for that response (i.e. a separate value for that responsewas recorded in the “other use” category), increasing their score above their female counterparts.

Gender Differences in Ethnobotanical Knowledge Concerning Different Uses of the Same PlantThe analysis detailed above lays the stage for the next layer of differentiation in our analysis: thedifference in female versus male informant response totals for individual plant taxa. In this case, theresponse value would range from 0 – 18, as the maximal possible score of 18 points would be obtained ifa given plant taxa was used frequently (score=3) in all six use categories. Table 2 summarizes thestatistical results for a group of eight representative plant taxa that will be covered briefly in the casestudies described below. Sometimes we found highly significant differences (p<.001) between men andwomen for different plant taxa (cf. the first two plant taxa listed in Table 2), other times we found similaraverage knowledge scores but still substantial differences (p<.05) between men and women (cf. thesecond two plant taxa listed); while for some taxa we found no significant difference at all – i.e. men andwomen had almost identical responses for all six use categories (cf. the latter half of the plant taxa listed).In the case of still other taxa we initially found no significant difference (i.e. a two-tailed t test across allsix use categoies), but when we probed further we found differences in male and female knowledge forcertain use categories (cf. the last two plant taxa listed). The following paragraphs detail our findings for the eight plant taxa listed in Table 2. One of our highestsignificant difference scores (p < .001) was for ajo, or Entada phaseoloides, a leguminous liana (knownas the “tarzan” vine due to its thick, ropey vines and extensive growth, often reaching across a series oftrees in the forest canopy growing in relatively undisturbed submontane ecosystems. One of the ajo podscollected for our herbarium specimens was pulled from a liana growing some ten meters off the groundby Yohannes Jadi, a woodsmen from a nearby settlement. Yohannes’ profession provides the clue as towhy men had higher knowledge scores for this plant: men are more frequently exposed to ajo, as they areprimarily responsible for hunting wild fauna and collecting timber, they spend more time in the dense,submontane forest which serves as the primary habitat for this locally rare plant. Men knew ajo as anemergency food source (the leaves are boiled) and as a medicinal treatment for water buffalo.

Table 2: Gender Differences in Ethnobotanical Knowledge for Eight Plant TaxaScientific plant name Common plant name Male mean score

(n = 93)Female mean

score(n = 93)

Statisticalsignificance

Entada phaseoloides tarzan vine 3.538 1.892 p < .001

Corypha utan gebang palm 5.935 3.989 p < .001

Arenga pinnata sugar (aren) palm 8.226 6.570 p < .05

Artocarpus heterophyllus jackfruit 9.011 7.957 p < .05

Areca catechu betelnut palm 8.376 7.720 NS

Musa spp. common banana 8.366 8.340 NS

Ficus septica wild fig 2.333 2.032 NS

Mucuna pruriens cow-itch plant 3.419 3.720 NS

Note: Possible scores ranged from zero (0), indicating no knowledge of any uses for the plant taxon inquestion, to a maximum of eighteen (18), indicating knowledge of ethnobotanical uses for theplant taxon across six different use categories.The significance scores are based on a two-tailed t test assuming equal variance.

Males had a wider range of ethnobotanical knowledge regarding the Corypha utan (cowang in KempoManggarai), or the gebang palm as the utilitarian uses of cowang fronds have traditionally been linked toactivities performed by men. The gebang palm grows primarily in lowland monsoon forest, and was onceso abundant on Tado lands that one settlement area is still known by its moniker, “cowang.” Widespread

Males had a wider range of ethnobotanical knowledge regarding the Corypha utan (cowang in KempoManggarai), or the gebang palm as the utilitarian uses of cowang fronds have traditionally been linked toactivities performed by men. The gebang palm grows primarily in lowland monsoon forest, and was onceso abundant on Tado lands that one settlement area is still known by its moniker, “cowang.” Widespreadclearing of lowland monsoon forests, combined with unsustainable harvesting of the remaining trees (thefronds are so heavily harvested the palms never manage to reach reproductive maturity) has resulted inthe gebang palm becoming locally endangered on Tado lands. Cowang fronds have been historicallywoven to make containers used for long distance trips: two-sided baskets for carrying chickens to market,packages for roasting fish caught enroute, or rice bins for hauling grain to the port city of Labuan Bajo. As recently as the past decade, this was a several-day overland trip undertaken by men originating frominland communities such as the Tado, who piled their trade items onto the backs of family-owned waterbuffalo, and walked the 40-50 km to Labuan Bajo, descending steadily over a series of gently rolling hills.The recently-completed, paved trans-Flores “highway” (actually a poorly maintained, two-land road)dividing Tado lands was only completed in the mid-1990s and is now served intermittently by long-distance buses and trucks, enabling vehicular transport of market goods. The sugar, or aren palm (Arenga pinnata) grows in lower montane seasonal forest, and is commonlyknown by the same name as its palm wine product, tuak. The aren palm is locally rare within Tado due toloss of habitat and loss of its traditional use in ceremonies (it is frequently replaced by beer). Just as beeraficionados would score higher on ethnobotanical knowledge tests for the uses of certain grains, men hadhigher ethnobotanical knowledge scores for the aren palm , which is tapped for palm wine and drunk bothfresh (tuak) and distilled (sopi). Tado women drink palm wine too, and are adept at boiling down the sapto produce palm sugar, but it is the men who gather it, ferment it, distill it, and distribute it (4). One of our analytical surprises showed up in the scores for nangga or jackfruit (Artocarpusheterophyllus), which is one of the most common foods in Tado - the immature fruits are frequentlycooked as a vegetable dish. Why did men have higher average knowledge scores (p < .05) for this plantdespite women’s responsibility for preparing jackfruit-based dishes? Because men more frequently notedtheir use of jackfruit wood for construction , thus adding one point to their score (within a distinct usecategory) and increasing their total points. Although at first glance it may seem that women are more frequent users of betelnut (wene) – the fruit ofAreca catechu (the betelnut palm), men chew it just as frequently, especially when it is served to them (bywomen) as part of traditional rituals. Both men and women had very similar scores for this plant taxon.The same was true for a native banana, muku wokok. In this case, the banana was used so commonly byeveryone that male and female scores were virtually identical: thus no statistically significant differencewas found in our two-tailed t tests, either across all six use categories, or within individual use categories. Our analysis of the last pair of ethnobotanically important plant taxa listed in Table 2 (Ficus sp. andMucuna pruriens) initially yielded no significant statistical difference in female and male knowledgescores summed across all use categories. When we re-analyzed the data at a finer scale, i.e. female andmale mean knowledge scores within each of the use categories, we found two cases of significantdifference (p < .05), noted in Table 3.

Table 3: Gender differences in ethnobotanical knowledge for different uses of the same plant Ficus sp. Mucuna pruriens

Use Category Male meanscore

Female meanscore

Male meanscore

Female meanscore

Food 0.323 0.344 2.301 * 2.559 *

Animal feed 0.161 0.054 0.140 0.043

Medicine 1.258 1.301 0.032 0.075

Utilitarian 0.194 0.161 0.409 0.473

Social/Ceremonial None None 0.183 0.129

Other 0.398 * 0.1720 * 0.355 0.462

(*) Indicates a statistically significant difference at the p <.05 level for a two-tailed t test.Note: Possible scores ranged from zero (0), indicating no knowledge or use, to a maximum of

three (3), signifying frequent use. In the case of kilit, a type of fig – or Ficus sp., men more frequently cited an “other” use – most likely the

(*) Indicates a statistically significant difference at the p <.05 level for a two-tailed t test.Note: Possible scores ranged from zero (0), indicating no knowledge or use, to a maximum of

three (3), signifying frequent use. In the case of kilit, a type of fig – or Ficus sp., men more frequently cited an “other” use – most likely thefact that kilit wood is used to make a tool for striking the aren palm flower stem (the peduncle of theinflorescence, to be precise) when tapping tuak. For kundung, a spreading vine (Mucuna pruriens) knownas the “cow itch plant,” the difference lay in women citing its nutritional use more frequently than men. Gender divisions of labor for different ethnobotanical activitiesThe statistical results reported in the section above represent our fourth layer of ethnobotanical knowledgedistinctions – that within different use categories, such as nutritional, medicinal, utilitarian uses, womenand men are primarily responsible for different activities. This gendered division of labor means that menand women come into contact more frequently with different sets of plants – or even different plant parts.Table 4 lists a selection of ethnobotanical activities for which men and women possess both different andcomplimentary ethnobotanical knowledge. Women are the principle weavers of mats from pandan fronds,and the collectors of wild-harvested foods. Men, as mentioned earlier, are responsible for the productionand distribution of alcoholic beverages such as the distilled [aren] palm wine known as sopi. Men are alsoprimarily responsible for constructing thatch huts, thus they are more familiar with members of Poaceae[the grass family], including the tropical weed Imperata cylindrica (alang-alang) woven into thatchpanels, and different types of bamboo employed in house frames, walls, floors and entry ladders. Bothmen and women weave bamboo baskets: men construct large (2 meter high by 1 meter wide) rice storagebaskets, whereas women are the primary weavers of two-toned carrying baskets known as roto tulis. Bothsexes are also familiar with each other’s craft, and assist with preparing the materials. This is also true formedicinal plant use, as evidenced by husband-wife teams of natureopathic herbalists: in one householdthe husband, Andreas Ambe, specializes in complaints of the “liver,” while the wife, Helena Hawi, ismore familiar with midwifery and women’s ailments. When the couple was interviewed, theydemonstrated both overlapping and distinct areas of ethnobotanical knowledge. Thus both sexes play animportant role in conserving ethnobotanical traditions, and in conserving the native plants on which thosetraditions are based.Table 4: Gender-differentiated Ethnobotanical Knowledge within the Tado Community

CONSERVED TRADITIONS PRIMARY

RESPONSIBLE

PARTY

NATIVE TAXA

INVOLVED

PLANT PART(S) USED

Woven pandan mats Pandanus spp.Ceiba pentandraCaesalpinia sappan

pandan frondskapok fibers (stuffing)sappanwood bark (dye)

Midwifery Mangifera spp.Momordica charantiaMusaceae

mango barkbitter cucumber leavesbanana trunks

Wild-harvested foods - plants Acrostichum aureumChampereia manillensisDioscorea spp.Gigantochloa spp.

fern frondstree leaveswild yam tubersbamboo shoots

Honey collecting Schleichera oleosaSterculia foetida

Ceylon oak treeJavan olive tree

Woven bamboo baskets -small

Gigantochloa spp.Grewia spp.Pandanus spp.Ricinis communis

bamboo stemvine stempandan fronds (inner lining)castor oil latex

Woven bamboo baskets -large

Dendrocalamus asper bamboo stems

Woven palm frond baskets Corypha utan gebang palm fronds

Livestock management - feed Artocarpus heterophyllusFicus spp.MusaceaeMangifera spp.

jackfruit leaves (feed)fig leaves (feed)banana trunks (feed)mango bark (medicine)

Livestock management – buffalo Entada phaseoloides “tarzan” liana vine

Livestock management - feedFicus spp.MusaceaeMangifera spp.

jackfruit leaves (feed)fig leaves (feed)banana trunks (feed)mango bark (medicine)

Livestock management – buffalo herding

Entada phaseoloidesFicus spp.

“tarzan” liana vine(cordage)fig vine (cordage)

Palm wine tapping anddistilling

Arenga pinnataBorassus flabelliferMomordicacharantia

aren [sugar] palm saplontar palm sapbitter cucumber fruit(additive)

Thatch hut construction Imperata cylindricaDendrocalamusasperTectonis grandis

alang-alang grass stems(roof)bamboo stems (frame,walls)teak wood (beams)

Hunting wild animals Artocarpus elasticusSchleichera oleosa

Artocarpus latex (trap)Ceylon oak bark (poison)

The Importance of Applying Gender-Differentiated Research to Bio-Cultural DiversityConservationAlthough the importance of gender awareness in research and conservation programs is increasing, alarge proportion of field projects still fail to incorporate women and men equally in their project designand implementation (Loudiyi and Meares, 1993). Recognizing gender distinctions in conservationprograms is critical, as the ultimate success of a given project may hinge on whether or not we havemanaged to pay equal attention to both female and male perspectives and expertise. As our data haveshown, gendered differences in household responsibilities result in different spatial and temporal activityzones for women and men, which in turn lead to distinct fe/male areas of ethnobotanical knowledge. AsElizabeth Reichel has demonstrated in her work on indigenous cosmologies, gender-based knowledgesystems (GBKS) “encompass gender-specific spatio-temporal referents … and supervisory functions forthe conservation of particular biodiversity domains and cultural dynamics” (1999:82). The maintenanceof ethnobotanical knowledge is crucial to conserving native biodiversity, as unfamiliar or unused plantsare more likely to be lost than plants actively used and managed by local communities. Concomitantly themaintenance of native biodiversity is crucial to conserving ethnobotanical knowledge (the basis ofcultural diversity), as the loss of ethnobotanically important plants accelerates the loss of culturaltraditions based on those plants. The erosion of traditional ethnobotanical practices amongst the Tado is not a straightforward process, andthe conservation of the Tado’s bio-cultural heritage requires the long-term involvement of both womenand men to protect threatened plant taxa and cultural traditions. At least one Citrus sp. (ndiru celang) andone wild member of Musaceae (muku pampong) appear to have gone locally extinct, due to a combinationof low reproductive capacity and habitat loss. In contrast, populations of coconut palms, candlenut, teakand cashew have increased in both dryland and lower montane ecosystems, in part due to plantingschemes encouraged by government agricultural extension programs. Despite playing an active role inthe ex situ and in situ conservation or loss of native plant taxa, most plant population management by theTado in the past has not been a “conscious” act in the sense of having a community-wide policy on theuse or management of native species. Ignorance of the conservation status of indigenous culturaltraditions and species may prove to be the most serious threat to the maintenance of native bio-culturaldiversity by Tado communities. Of the many factors impulsing the loss of Tado cultural traditions, one of the strongest is the ongoingpressure to integrate into modern Indonesian or “world-class” society: the most highly respectedindividuals interacting with the Tado (priests, government officials, visiting expatriate consultants) prefer“Western” lifestyles, including nonindigenous foods – baked breads and cakes, highly polished rice,temperate vegetables and fruits. As an increasing number of Tado households make the transition to moremodern culinary practices, wild-collected foods and associated cooking methods are considered “masakanlama”: old-time recipes which are rarely prepared. Intergenerational data collection sessions wherefemale Tado research associates transcribe traditional recipes recounted by senior women have revealedjust how rapidly this area of ethnobotanical knowledge is being lost: many of the younger womenwitnessing the interviews were unfamiliar with the culinary traditions cited by their aunts andgrandmothers. Traditional foods, often associated with times of crop failure or a more “primitive” erahave become déclassé in Tado households eager to prove their modernity. Yet discussions of old-fashioned foods and cooking styles have led to a renewed interest in Tado cultural heritage by both elder

female Tado research associates transcribe traditional recipes recounted by senior women have revealedjust how rapidly this area of ethnobotanical knowledge is being lost: many of the younger womenwitnessing the interviews were unfamiliar with the culinary traditions cited by their aunts andgrandmothers. Traditional foods, often associated with times of crop failure or a more “primitive” erahave become déclassé in Tado households eager to prove their modernity. Yet discussions of old-fashioned foods and cooking styles have led to a renewed interest in Tado cultural heritage by both elderand younger generations, and a growing recognition that conserving such traditions requires an active,shared commitment. As the guardians of food crop diversity – both cultivated and wild-harvested – the Tado have maintainedgermplasm collections of at least twenty heirloom varieties of upland rainfed rice [mavo] identified byelders in the more remote settlements. During interviews aimed at documenting the traits of thesetraditional varieties, although the men were able to list the names of the traditional rice types, the womenwere more adept at describing the physical characteristics of the rice grains. Their ability to notedifferences in color, texture, size, shape, seed coat thickness, ease of hulling and gluten content are due tothe sexual division of labor where women spend more time processing, storing and cooking the grains. Ofthe twenty varieties recounted, only one-fourth are still planted with some regularity, and one variety(mavo iko/motang) has disappeared from the area. The Tado Cultural Ecology Conservation Project, inaugurated by ECO-SEA and the Tado Council ofElders in 1999, aims to reverse the decline of native bio-cultural diversity on Tado lands by supporting theTado in developing a conservation plan for the most threatened ethnobotanically useful native plant taxaand related cultural traditions. The Tado have begun to conserve their cultural traditions by documentingtheir ancestral history and genealogy, transcribing traditional stories and songs, and photo-documentingtraditional cultural practices. Over twenty Tado research associates have been trained in data collectionand processing, and the associates have established a herbarium, an ethnobotanical museum, andinterpretive displays in the Tado Community Research and Training Center. By presenting their results atinternational symposia, the Tado have begun to gain widespread recognition of their conservation efforts,and by publishing their research results “in-house” and distributing the copies throughout the Tadosettlements, local enthusiasm and support for the project has increased. The Tado are the ultimate arbitersof their bio-cultural future, and for the first time in their clan’s history, the women and men of Tado aretaking a more proactive stance towards valuing and protecting their heritage. Notes

In order to provide generic and specific epithets for the plant taxa noted in this paper, we rely onherbarium specimens collected in the field and positively identified by a recognized expert, or onprevious plant identification work completed in the area by J.A.J. Verheijen or E. Schmutz. Incertain cases where respondents have identified an ethnobotanically important plant but we areunable to obtain a herbarium specimen and there is no listing of the plant’s common name in theworks of Verheijen or Schmutz, we indicate this by noting “species unknown” following theKempo Manggarai name for the plant.Dr. Janet Momsen, of the Human and Community Development Department of the University ofCalifornia at Davis, suggested the use of this term.The term “ethnobotanically useful native plant taxa” as used here is defined as native Malesian(pertaining to the region encompassing the Indonesian archipelago, Peninsular and BorneoMalaysia, Brunei Darussalam, Singapore, The Philippines and Papua New Guinea), plant taxa(identified to the family, genus or species level) used in whole or in part, figuratively or literally,by humans.The male-based production and distribution of alcoholic beverages in Tado is in contrast to manyAfrican or Latin American societies, where the women are more often responsible for makingalcoholic products such as sorghum beer (East Africa) or fermented corn beer (chicha). In WestAfrica, although women market [coconut] palm wine, men are responsible for collecting anddelivering the palm sap.

Acknowledgements The research presented in this paper was conducted under the auspices of the Indonesian Institute ofSciences (LIPI) and the Tado Community Research and Training Center (Pusat Penelitian danPendidikan Masyarakat Tado). Fieldwork was funded by the U.S. Fulbright Commission, the DavisBotanical Society and the Ethnobotanical Conservation Organization for South East Asia. The TadoCommunity and Council of Elders provided moral, advisory and logistical support for the research,without which the research would not have been possible. Data for this particular study was collected byAgus Angkol, Sisilia Dun, Henderikus Eddy, Kanisius Jehabu, Aloysius Sta Belamo, Fatima Syariah,Yeremias Uril and Adolfus Wanggur. Rachel Nelson completed the quantitative data entry. The author is

1.

2.

3.

4.

Botanical Society and the Ethnobotanical Conservation Organization for South East Asia. The TadoCommunity and Council of Elders provided moral, advisory and logistical support for the research,without which the research would not have been possible. Data for this particular study was collected byAgus Angkol, Sisilia Dun, Henderikus Eddy, Kanisius Jehabu, Aloysius Sta Belamo, Fatima Syariah,Yeremias Uril and Adolfus Wanggur. Rachel Nelson completed the quantitative data entry. The author isgrateful for support provided by the Consortium for Women’s Research, University of California at Davis,enabling the presentation of this body of work at the University of Victoria conference. The text benefitedfrom the editorial comments of Janet Momsen and Helen Lansdowne. The author claims soleresponsibility for the analytical conclusions expressed in the text, and for any remaining errors. References Aumeeruddy, Y (1995) ‘Perceiving and managing natural resources in Kerinci, Sumatra’, 31(1) Nature &Resources 32.

Ave, W and Sunito, S (1990) Medicinal Plants of Siberut. Switzerland: WWF International.

Budianta, E (1996) Rumah Kebun Sederhana. Jakarta: PT Pustaka Pembangunana Swadaya Nusantara.

Bulmer, R and C Healey (1993) ‘Field Methods in Ethnozoology’, in NM Williams and G Baines (eds),Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Wisdom for Sustainable Development. Canberra: Australian NationalUniversity.

Erb, M (1999) The Manggaraians. Singapore: Times Editions.

ETC International. 1999. Compas Newsletter for Endogenous Development: Bio-cultural Diversity.Compas - ETC Ecoculture, Leusden, The Netherlands).

Gollin, LX (1997) ‘Taban Kenyah: A Preliminary Look at the Healing Plants and Paradigms of theKenyah Dayak People of Kayan Mentarang’, in KW Sorenson and B Morris (eds), People and Plants ofKayan Mentarang. Jakarta: WWF Indonesia Program.

Goodell, G (1982) Communication from Farmer to Scientist. Unpublished manuscript.

Gragson, TL and Blount, BG (1999) Ethnoecology: Knowledge, Resources and Rights. Athens: TheUniversity of Georgia Press.

Huntington, HP (2000) ‘Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Science: Methods and Applications’,10 (5) Ecological Applications 1270.

Loudiyi, D and Meares, A (1993) Women in Conservation: Tools for Analysis and A Framework forAction. Washington DC: IUCN Conservation Services Division, Social Policy Service.

Martin, G (1995) Ethnobotany: A Methods Manual. London: Chapman & Hall.

Michon, G (1983) “Village Forest Gardens in West Java’, in P Huxley (ed), Plant Research andAgroforestry. Nairobi: ICRAF.Michon, G, Mary, F and Bompard, J (1986) ‘Multistoried Agroforestry Garden Systems in West Sumatra,Indonesia’, 4 Agroforestry Systems 315.

Michon, G, de Foresta, H, Kusworo, and Levang, P (2000) ‘The Damar Agroforests of Krui, Indonesia:Justice for Forest Farmers’, in C Zerner (ed), People, Plants and Justice; The Politics of NatureConservation. New York: Columbia University Press.

Nazarea, VD (1998) Cultural Memory and Biodiversity. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Nazarea, VD (ed) (1999) Ethnoecology: Situated Knowledge/Located Lives. Tucson: University ofArizona Press.

Nietschmann, BQ (1992) ‘The Interdependence of Biological and Cultural Diversity’, Center for WorldIndigenous Studies Occasional Paper 21.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M and Paddoch, C (1996) ‘Managing Forest Remnants and Forest Gardens in Peru andIndonesia’, in J.Schelhas and R Greenberg (eds), Forest Patches in Tropical Landscapes. Washington DC:Island Press.

Piper, JM (1993) Rice in South-East Asia Cultures and Landscapes. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford UniversityPress.

Ramprasad, V (1999) ‘Women and Biodiversity Conservation’ in COMPAS Newsletter No. 2. Leusden:Compas/ETC Ecoculture.

Reichel, ED (1999) “Gender-based knowledge systems in the eco-politics of the Yukuna and Tanimuka ofNorthwest Amazon, Colombia’, in DA Posey (ed), Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity. London:Intermediate Technology.

Ramprasad, V (1999) ‘Women and Biodiversity Conservation’ in COMPAS Newsletter No. 2. Leusden:Compas/ETC Ecoculture.

Reichel, ED (1999) “Gender-based knowledge systems in the eco-politics of the Yukuna and Tanimuka ofNorthwest Amazon, Colombia’, in DA Posey (ed), Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity. London:Intermediate Technology.

Robertson, M, Nichols, P, Horwitz, P, Bradby, K and MacKintosh, D (2000) ‘Environmental narrativesand the need for multiple perspectives to restore degraded landscapes in Australia’, 6 Ecosystem Health119.

Rooney, DF (1993) Betel Chewing Traditions in South-East Asia. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford UniversityPress.

Schoch, LN (1985) Kaki Lima and Street Hawkers in Indonesia. Jakarta: PT. Indira.

Setyawati, I (1997) ‘Knowledge and Use of Rice Varieties in Apau Ping’, in KW Sorenson and B Morris(eds), People and Plants of Kayan Mentarang. Jakarta: WWF Indonesia Program.

Sperling, L (1992) ‘Farmer Participation and the Development of Bean Varieties in Rwanda’, in JLMoock and RE Rhoades (eds), Diversity, Farmer Knowledge and Sustainability. Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press.

Tsegaye, B (1997) ‘The Significance of Biodiversity for Sustaining Agricultural Production and Role ofWomen in the Traditional Sector: The Ethiopian Experience’, in 62 Agriculture, Ecosystems andEnvironment 215.

UNEP-CBD (1994) Convention on Biological Diversity. Text and Annexes. Geneva: UNEP InterimSecretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity.

UNEP-WGIP (1995) Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of the Heritage of Indigenous Peoples.E/CN.4/Sub.2/1995/26.

van Veldhuizen, L, Waters-Bayer, A, Ramirez, R, Johnson, DA and Thompson, J (eds.) (1997) Farmers’Research in Practices: Lessons from the Field. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Verheijen, JAJ (1967) Kamus Manggarai I: Manggarai-Indonesia. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

Wachiira, KK (ed) (1987) Women’s Use of Off-Farm and Boundary Lands: Agroforestry Potentials.Nairobi: ICRAF.

Wilson, KB (1989) ‘The Ecology of Wild Resource Use for Food by Rural Southern Africans: Why ItRemains So Important.’ Paper presented to the conference: The Destruction of the Environment and theFuture of Life in the Middle East and Africa, 14-17 July 1989, Swansea, United Kingdom.