Poor convergence between local traditional farmers and conservationists on which species to protect locally

Viktor Ulicsni, Z. Molnár, István Szentirmai, D. Babai
{"title":"Poor convergence between local traditional farmers and conservationists on which species to protect locally","authors":"Viktor Ulicsni, Z. Molnár, István Szentirmai, D. Babai","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\nLocals engaged in traditional farming and possessing traditional ecological knowledge consider certain species worthy of protection, as do official nature conservationists, although the sets of taxa may not be identical. Exploring the relationship between the two sets of taxa could bring many practical benefits, yet the literature on this subject is scarce. For more efficient conservation and better engagement and knowledge co‐production with locals, it is necessary to understand the principles, preferences and worldviews of the two knowledge systems, and the drivers behind the choices of which animal species to protect.\n\nWe examined which animal species traditional farmers and conservationists wish to protect, and why. We also examined whether there is a correlation between the extent of farmers' ecological knowledge and the number of species they regard as needing protection. In the case of the species that conservationists consider most in need of protection, we also enquired how knowledgeable local farmers are about these species. Our research was carried out in two adjacent protected sites in Central Europe along the Slovenian‐Hungarian border. We conducted 20 structured interviews with traditional farmers at each of the two sites (40 altogether), and 23 with local conservationists.\n\nBoth conservationists and local farmers predominantly mentioned the protection of species that do not provide a tangible economic benefit to farmers and that show a declining population trend.\n\nLocal farmers with greater species knowledge did not know significantly more than those with less knowledge about the species to be protected, nor did they list more legally protected species.\n\nThe preliminary assumption of the conservationists was that the locals knew the species and listed the ones to be protected for essentially functional reasons (e.g. usefulness). By contrast, it was found that many more aspects (e.g. population trends, appearance) also had a significant impact.\n\nOnce the boundaries between the two knowledge systems are removed, collaboration between the stakeholder groups can facilitate the protection of natural assets and local communities. We consider it the responsibility of conservationists (together with ethnoecologists and other researchers) to ensure that these preferences are properly understood for the benefit of conservation and local communities.\n\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":508650,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":"29 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"People and Nature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10650","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Locals engaged in traditional farming and possessing traditional ecological knowledge consider certain species worthy of protection, as do official nature conservationists, although the sets of taxa may not be identical. Exploring the relationship between the two sets of taxa could bring many practical benefits, yet the literature on this subject is scarce. For more efficient conservation and better engagement and knowledge co‐production with locals, it is necessary to understand the principles, preferences and worldviews of the two knowledge systems, and the drivers behind the choices of which animal species to protect. We examined which animal species traditional farmers and conservationists wish to protect, and why. We also examined whether there is a correlation between the extent of farmers' ecological knowledge and the number of species they regard as needing protection. In the case of the species that conservationists consider most in need of protection, we also enquired how knowledgeable local farmers are about these species. Our research was carried out in two adjacent protected sites in Central Europe along the Slovenian‐Hungarian border. We conducted 20 structured interviews with traditional farmers at each of the two sites (40 altogether), and 23 with local conservationists. Both conservationists and local farmers predominantly mentioned the protection of species that do not provide a tangible economic benefit to farmers and that show a declining population trend. Local farmers with greater species knowledge did not know significantly more than those with less knowledge about the species to be protected, nor did they list more legally protected species. The preliminary assumption of the conservationists was that the locals knew the species and listed the ones to be protected for essentially functional reasons (e.g. usefulness). By contrast, it was found that many more aspects (e.g. population trends, appearance) also had a significant impact. Once the boundaries between the two knowledge systems are removed, collaboration between the stakeholder groups can facilitate the protection of natural assets and local communities. We consider it the responsibility of conservationists (together with ethnoecologists and other researchers) to ensure that these preferences are properly understood for the benefit of conservation and local communities. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
当地传统农民和保护主义者在当地保护哪些物种的问题上意见不统一
从事传统农业并拥有传统生态知识的当地人认为某些物种值得保护,官方自然保护主义者也是如此,尽管这两组分类群可能并不相同。探索这两组分类群之间的关系会带来很多实际好处,但这方面的文献却很少。为了更有效地保护动物,更好地与当地人合作并共同创造知识,有必要了解这两种知识体系的原则、偏好和世界观,以及选择保护哪些动物物种背后的驱动因素。我们还研究了农民的生态知识水平与他们认为需要保护的物种数量之间是否存在相关性。对于保护主义者认为最需要保护的物种,我们还询问了当地农民对这些物种的了解程度。我们的研究是在中欧斯洛文尼亚-匈牙利边境两个相邻的保护地进行的。我们对两个保护地的传统农民各进行了 20 次结构性访谈(共 40 次),并对当地保护主义者进行了 23 次访谈。保护主义者和当地农民都主要提到了保护那些不能为农民带来实际经济利益且数量呈下降趋势的物种。对物种了解较多的当地农民对需要保护的物种的了解程度并没有明显高于对物种了解较少的农民,他们也没有列出更多的受法律保护的物种。保护主义者的初步假设是,当地人了解物种并列出需要保护的物种主要是出于功能性原因(如有用性)。一旦消除了这两种知识体系之间的界限,利益相关群体之间的合作就能促进对自然资产和当地社区的保护。我们认为,保护工作者(以及民族生态学家和其他研究人员)有责任确保正确理解这些偏好,以利于保护和当地社区的发展。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信