18 Traditional & Modern Methods of Resource Consumption in different Geographical Regions –(2)

Mr. Dhiren Borisa

Learning Outcomes:

• After completing the chapter, you will be able to –
• Understand the distinction between modern and traditional modes of ecological knowledge.
• Understand the practice of traditional ecological knowledge and modern world-view in different geographical regions viz., plains, plateaus, mountains and island ecosystems.

   INTRODUCTION:

As we discussed earlier, the traditional understanding of resource consumption represents the knowledge, belief systems, worldviews and practices developed out of interactive relationships with immediate environments formed by indigenous, peasant and local communities and shared across generations. In diverse ecosystems and areas with levels of growth, these sets of traditional ecological knowledge have taken varied forms and been affected by numerous global changes worst being the effect on the carrying capacity of earth’s resources. These changes have often led to hybridization of resource management practices between traditional and western science. This represents in many respects continuity in practices and resilience, however at varying degrees with emergent stresses in form of environmental and climatic changes. This can be seen in traditional farming techniques and choice of crops to green revolution technology in heavily populated alluvial plains, to transhumance cultures in hilly areas among tribal communities, sacred groves and mountains as providers of resources that work as community of beings or animistic belief systems. Embedded in local contexts and serving communities at a smaller scale, the traditional pool of knowledge has survived, changed and coevolved, also informed modern modes of sustainable management suggesting ample lessons to learn.

Despite richness of the knowledge created through generations, in the wake of modernity especially since the advent of industrial technology and mass scale of production, there has been tremendous erosion in this pool of knowledge. Several factors have been responsible towards this, including loss of local languages, dominant religions and flattening of animistic and local belief systems, integration of local systems with market, conservational practices leading to loss of access to resources for communities, mechanization of resource management and industrial and globalization processes. However, there remain what Barkel et. al. remark as ‘pockets of sacred memory’. When in 1980’s traditional ecological knowledge surfaced in academic circles, it was already declining through the world. It was believed it would further erode with economic development when the shift from the traditional modes of localized production was replaced by industrial ecology of mass-production and consumption chains. It is in this framework and among regions of fast growth rates that there exist pockets where traditional ecological knowledge are still preserved and practiced. These are the pockets of sacred memory. For example, in Europe and elsewhere where the industrial technology emerged first the traditional modes of farming which were developed through thousands of years of acquired knowledge between society and environment were replaced by mechanization of agricultural practices, there are still places where traditional methods are in practice. In many areas such as North-Western Patagonia where vegetable gardens play significant role in economy, traditional modes of farming work together with construction of green houses that suit well some crop types. Similarly, there are regions where medicinal plants and modern pharmaceutical knowledge coexist and complement each other. For example, indigenous people of Oaxaca in Mexico. There are also communities with animistic traditions retaining their belief systems when converted into other dominant religions.

Berkes (2008) notes there are many levels of analysing traditional ecological knowledge as depicted in figure below. It involves ethno-biology that deals with identification and classification of species, human ecology that includes understanding of ecological processes and their linkages with the environment, and the element of practicing the acquired knowledge. The local component deals with knowledge around species of plants, soil types and landscapes as empirically observed (directly perceived and observed) and having cross-cultural acceptance. The resource management component is based on the understanding of the ecological processes and ways people connect with the environment. Social organization of the community, co-ordination between its members, cooperation and rule making and social meaning making process is part of the social institutions. All the components are part of the frame of the world-view in terms of religion, ethics, and belief systems which inform this value chain.

Figure: Levels of Analysis in traditional Knowledge and Management Systems

Having mentioned earlier that the distinction between the two methods is more of degree rather than starkness and there exist modes of their hybrid practice, the following table still briefly outlines the major lines of divide between the two worldviews. This comes with the caveat that such divisions in form of dualisms rarely exist and one witnesses rather many forms of human- environment relationships that incorporate many traditional and modern societal modes and often work in simultaneity.

    Mountain Ecosystems and Resources

Mountains cover 27 percent of the land surface of the earth. Geographically, mountains play a vital role in influencing the climatic conditions. Apart from that, they are also providers of a vast array of goods and services including the source and supply of freshwater to over half the world’s population. While according to estimates they inhabit 12 percent of the world’s population, mountain resources cater to the direct and indirect needs of some 50 percent world population. They also act as biodiversity hotspots and preserve many species of flora and fauna.

With growing demand for these resources be it land that is scarce in terms of fertile cultivable land and risked of soil erosions, water that is under threat of depletion in wake of climatic changes and human interferences in local ecological systems or dwindling forest covers and threat to the biodiversity; with rising population, mountains exhibit a mix of traditional modes of resource conservation as well as some influences of modern ‘scientific’ ways. These range from animistic belief systems that see life in every component of the environmental system from hills, animal species and trees and thus build environmental practices through mutual respect. Foraging and transhumance cultures that have devised ways of time management and coping mechanisms to seasonal availabilities of food supply for them and their herds. Restraints on harvesting of certain species of plants and animals by considering it taboo and by devising agricultural practices that account for slope characteristics and avoid erosion of soil fertility etc. In the present section, we take few examples from India and the world to highlight these traditional modes of resource consumption and management and changes therein.

Based on religious rules and rituals, Chandra S. Negi (2010) writes about the traditional ecological practices of Uttarakhand Central Himalayas. He expresses the symbiotic relationship between the people and habitats in such regions and measures of resource management that emerge out of them. Some of these measures include restraint of harvesting to regulate pressures on grazing lands by denoting certain areas as sacred pastures. For example, in Vyas valley the bugyals or the pastures of the Hya-Roshe and Put uk-tu near Nalapchhu and Kuti villages respectively have areas designated where only the sacred Yak and the local hybrids of it such as Jhappu and Jomos can graze. Also through the language of taboo killings of certain species of animals such as the fiya or Himalayan Marmot are strictly prohibited. Other measures include protection of certain species and regulating the onset and end of harvesting seasons. Alongside this, there are cyclical grazing practices such as in Chipla Kedar valley and designation of sacred forests called the Se-Rong (Se meaning God and Rong meaning Forest). People do not enter these forests in fear of inciting angers of the residing deities of these forest patches. There are several taboos that guide the management of Se-Rongs. Felling of trees is prohibited except with some restrictive relaxation of resource use such collection of dead twigs etc. There are also some problematic taboos called the segment taboos such as the restriction of access to Pregnant and Menstruating women and lower caste people. While the former is extremely gendered and is defended on the ground that because most of the harvesting of forest is done by women, such restriction reduce stress on the forest patch. The latter bereft certain communities historically marginalised from access to resource use. One of the major livelihood opportunities mountain ecosystems provide is in form of pastoralism. In central Himalayas, pastoralists switch from one pastureland to another before it completely depletes to enhance returns out of grazing animals. There are local institutions and taxation policies that ensure that movement of the local herdsmen from one bugyal to other is practices and there is no excessive stress on the common pool of resources. Similarly, pastoralists move from higher to lower pastures and vice-versa with seasonal changes.

Taboos play a significant role in management practices in traditional based knowledge systems and such cannot be segregated for their social, economic or ecological purposes and mostly work as localised informal institutions. In context of natural resources and their over exploitative usage they have been often used to regulate temporal – daily, weekly or monthly or seasonal restrictions to ensure restraint. Modern modes have often taken shape in form of State instituted conservational practices such as protected areas or national Parks, restrictive usages of resources and prohibitions, and legislation and taxation policies.

Another practice of traditional knowledge is through the practice of ‘Jhum’ cultivation or shifting cultivation practiced by several hill tribes. For example the tribes of Karbi Anglong and North Cachar Hills in Assam or the Murang community in Chittagong Hill Tract region of Southeast Bangladesh. Jhum cultivation builds on a cyclical usage of land ranging from 5-19 years called the Jhum cycle. Certain forest patches are slashed or burned to clear out for cultivation. The fertility of the soil cleared is thus utilized for farming until the cycle ends and productivity starts to decline. It is then new areas are ventured and the current patch left fallow to rejuvenate its fertility. For longest period of history, such practices were ecologically suitable because of limited pressures of population. However, with growing population base and pressure on land, demands for higher rates of agricultural productivity, such traditional practices have become ecological non-viable and environmentally damaging. This has resulted in land degradation, loss of forest cover and habitat, bio-diversity losses, excessive surface run-off, soil erosion, effects on fuel wood and fodder, siltation of water harvesting practices etc. Another example of traditional resource management is the terrace fields and water harvesting methods such as ‘Gul’ practiced in Kumaon hills to supply water to these fields by diverting stream water by digging channels along the contours of the slope. Similar practices exist in Kilimanjaro Region of Tanzania where cultivation ridges called Matuta are constructed along slopes with appropriate irrigation practices to control soil erosion. Local chieftains enforce these practices; however, this has become limited in scale due to growing disinterest among youth and lack of preservation of farming knowledge and invasion of modern schooling and technologies. Other practices include planting of certain tree species identified for their ecological characteristics of water retention, prevention of soil erosion etc. Also, tree plantation was used by the communities to safeguard areas prone to landslides.

Island Ecosystem and Resource use

There are over 100,000 islands in the world of various sizes and shapes covering 3 percent of the total land surface of the earth but carrying 20 percent of the world’s bio-diversity. The size, shape and relative isolation of the islands gives them unique identities at the same time making them fragile and vulnerable. They possess the highest recorded species diversity as well as according to the International Union for Nature and Natural Resources have 45 percent of its species noted in the red list as endangered. The terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems of the islands provide many important resources ranging from fisheries, forestry, agriculture and tourism resources. These resources provision many regulating and cultural services to over 500 million population. People living on islands have traditionally depended marine and coastal resources for food, tool making, industrial processing of many commodities, medicinal values, cheap transportation and as grounds for waste disposal. Island ecosystems possess following characteristics and issues:

There is ‘species poverty’, which means there exist fewer species per unit of area as compared to the mainland.

‘Isolation effect’ of the islands has led them to develop endemism i.e., there are more endemic species found on the islands.

Islands are also relatively more vulnerable to natural disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes and Tsunamis especially the small island territories. Also, the impact of climate change and sea level rise is likely to impact them more adversely.

They is heavy dependence on coastal and marine environments that has led to heavy scale degradation especially in context of increase in population and unsustainable economic development.

Freshwater resources are very limited. Islands are mostly dependent on rainwater and harvesting techniques and most of their freshwater needs are fulfilled by small watersheds.

Issues also arise out of limited mechanisms of waste disposal.

They have small vulnerable economic systems with a very small domestic market.

There are limited means of sustainable consumption and exploitation of natural resources.

Land suitable for agriculture is very limited and is mostly occupied in production of exportable commodities such as sugar, cocoa etc.

Over fishing as part of the commercialization of fishing as against the traditional subsistence has led to mass depletion of fisheries which have traditionally been important source of food and employment opportunities to the inhabitants. This has also led to resource conflicts in many parts of the world.

Island hydrology has been severely modified with destruction of forested watersheds posing concerns around availability of freshwater resources. This has further led to dependence on imported and desalinized water. Freshwater has also become contaminated through pollution conditions and untreated sewage.

Growing population has influenced exploitation of limited land resource through deforestation and urbanization leading to degradation. Many islands today face concerns around erosion of beaches. Such has also led to habitat destruction and bio-diversity losses.

There has been growing dependency of island states on imports to supply food and fuel requirements.

Islands also suffer severe energy constraints on account of their lack of capacity and distance from large scale suppliers of energy. However, islands also possess in form of tides, currents, waves many possibilities in form of non-conventional modes of energy generation.

Aquaculture, agriculture in coastal areas, unregulated urban spread has also adversely affected coastal forests, reefs dunes, mangroves etc.

Given the various issues pertaining to resource consumption raised earlier, Islands through their myths, stories and belief systems have carried forward immense ecological knowledge to deal with them. However, in wake of the increased stress of population and globalization and integration of economies such generational modes of resource consumption have undergone tremendous changes. For instance, 1 in 6 of the plant species of the earth are found on islands. Many island countries such as Indonesia have traditional medicine based on the variety of available flora. An example to which is the Jamu system of herbal medicine which is the oldest practiced form of medicine in Indonesia. Similarly, traditional ecological knowledge is also shared through stories among various communities regarding coastal management. Here, God, Communities and environment are seen in conjunction to each other enabling the islanders to manage the island and its environment from destruction and external invasion through collective planning and regulation. There also exist harvesting restraints on fisheries to protect certain species and through designated fishing areas for effective management of resources. In several island of the South-Pacific, traditional agro-forestry had helped reduce the heightened rates of deforestation by growing of specific trees outside forest areas. Mangroves are being assessed and saved in Philippines through traditional knowledge; and knowledge of medicine based on flora and fauna around the islands has helped people of Marshall Islands to have inexpensive health care. There exist concerns around use of modern agricultural and fishing practices and declining traditional knowledge given that most of it is unrecorded. Many of which is already lost.

Plains and Resource Consumption

Plains constitute 55 percent of the earth’s surface characterized by low-lying land and gentle relief. Most of the plains are depositional in nature formed through fertile alluvial deposits brought down by the rivers, although there are also erosional plains formed through wind action, glacial movements and tectonic events. In terms of resource richness, they stand out in importance due to their extensive soil fertility and potential of agricultural production. This has what has earned plains the reputation as the ‘food baskets of the world’. Plains with their scope in agricultural food supply have also since time immemorial made them highest and densely populated areas of the world. Also making them cradles of civilization and amongst the perennially nucleated regions of the world. Plains also bestow enough irrigation facilities due to flow of perennial rivers in alluvial plains and possibility of construction of roads and railways as modes of transportations along with flourishing cities and urban centres.

Agriculture for longest part of human history has been the mainstay in terms of livelihood opportunity and supplier of food for the inhabitants of the floodplains. Traditional ecological knowledge of the first producers and the mechanisms of farming including choice of crops, domestication of animal species, and development of tools and modes of irrigation still dominate areas of subsistence cultivation as passed down through generations. However, with exponential rise in population and simultaneous increase in the demand for food to satisfy the growing numbers to feed, and since the advent of the industrial age, many of the traditional modes of farming have been replaced by mechanization of farming and utilization of green revolution technology. Simple tools have been replaced by tractors and harvesters, and organic manures and seed technology with fertilizers, pesticides and high yielding and water demanding varieties of seeds. This transitioning in many of the world’s populated regions has led to short term gains but long term loss of fertile land, development of new forms of crop diseases, land degradation and diversion of agricultural land into other purposes such as settlement.

Plateaus and Resources

Eighteen percent of the world’s land surface is in form of flat tablelands. The geological conditions of the plateau regions make them storehouse of mineral resources. Also in comparison to the mountainous regions, it is much easier to extract minerals from the plateaus. Thus, plateaus are also major suppliers of industrial raw materials such as Chotanagpur Plateau supplying Iron ore, coal and manganese, Gold from the mines of the Plateaus of Western Australia and Gold and Diamonds from African Plateaus etc. Waterfalls at the steep edges of the plateaus also supply potential hydel-power. They also act as grazing grounds for rearing animals; and fertile black lava soil in Plateaus formed through volcanic activity provide favourable grounds for sustaining agricultural activities. Apart from this, Plateaus also serve as habitat for a diverse flora and fauna.

Native-Americans of the Colorado Plateau, the Hopi, Zuni and the White Apaches have traditionally managed many species of plants and animals from extinction. However, the scientific community of the conservationists have often treated the ethno-biological knowledge of the communities as hearsay, rumours and stories of superstitions rather than engaging with it for sustainable resource use. Aboriginals of British Columbia have devised practices of management of land and water resources through community participation based on experiences and observations running across generations. These include variable harvesting regimes that seasonal, principle regulating ownership of resources etc. For example an entire tree is never cut unless required for the construction of the canoe, otherwise trees are culturally modified by taking only required bark (say for medicinal purpose) of the tree and letting the rest live. Seasonal nomadism on the grasslands of the Tibetan Plateau is another example in this regard which is under serious threat under China’s introduction of different grassland policy without taking indigenous knowledge into consideration which has helped sustain these grasslands. The new policies have disrupted mobility of the pastoralists and are framed around accusing the nomads of grassland depletion arising out of overgrazing. Thus as a result these nomads have been forcibly removed from these grasslands and made to slaughter and sell their herds.

Summary

Traditional ecological knowledge stemming out of centuries of conservational practices through a symbiotic relationship between humans and environment is likely to enhance resource management and ecological restoration. However, with ‘modern’ science, that distinguishes itself from the indigenous knowledge, and marginalisation of several communities within larger nation states, much of this knowledge is dying with linguistic homogenization and flattening of cultural diversity. Different geographical regions with diverse livelihood possibilities and available resources have historically forged and developed relationships and means of harnessing this resources. Many of these means are deeply entwined with religious rituals and belief systems and ethno-biological information about available plant and animal species in their region, their importance and conservational mechanisms. For instance the scared groves in the mountain ecosystems or association of religious deity with a forest patch has traditionally been an effective modes of imposing harvesting restraint along with establishing a community level management of common pool resources. Similarly Jhum cultivation while stood as an effective mode of farming in past with limited dependent population has now emerged redundant and ecologically non-viable with rise in population and the competitive use of the available scarce land resource. Still, much can be learnt from the indigenous pool of knowledge by synthesising it with modern science rather than nullifying it. The medicinal significance of many plant species found in many island groups cannot be denied and there is much to be exchanged with the modern pharmaceutical science. Blind adoption of modern methods by undermining traditional knowledge has further intensified issues of land degradation, depletion of fisheries and forest and adversely affected the long term ecological and economic growth envisaged in the Brundtland report as “Our Common Future”.

References:

• Berkes, F. (2008). Sacred Ecology: . S.l.: ROUTLEDGE.
• Gomez-Naggethun, E., Corbera, E., & Reyes-Garcia, V. (2013). Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Global Environmental Change: Research Findings and Policy Implications. Ecology and Society, 18(4), 72nd ser.
• Grêt-Regamey, A., Brunner, S. H., & Kienast, F. (2012). Mountain Ecosystem Services: Who Cares? Mountain Research and Development, 32(S1).
• Hassan, R. M., Scholes, R., & Ash, N. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
• Island Ecosystems: Conservations and Sustainable Use Problems and Challenges [Web log post]. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/doc/ref/island/insula-island-en.pdf
• Kangalawe, R. Y., Noe, C., Tungaraza, F. S., Naimani, G., & Mlele, M. (2014). Understanding of Traditional Knowledge and Indigenous Institutions on Sustainable Land Management in Kilimanjaro Region, Tanzania. Open Journal of Soil Science, 04(13), 469-493. doi:10.4236/ojss.2014.413046
• Menzies, C. R. (2006). Traditional ecological knowledge and natural resource management.
• Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
• Nautiyal, S., Rao, K., Kaechele, H., & Zander, P. (2010). Conceptual model development for landscape management in the mountains of the Indian Himalayan region: an approach for sustainable socio-ecological development. Landscape Online.
• Negi, C. S. (2010). Traditional Culture and Biodiversity Conservation: Examples From Uttarakhand, Central Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development, 30(3), 259-265. doi:10.1659/mrd-journal-d-09-00040.1
• Rawat, A. S. (n.d.). Biodiversity conservation in Central Himalaya: a peoples approach. Forest history: international studies on socio-economic and forest ecosystem change.
• Report No.2 of the IUFRO Task Force on Environmental Change., 237-252. doi:10.1079/9780851994192.0237
• Sinha, B., & Mishra, S. (2015). Ecosystem services valuation for enhancing conservation and livelihoods in a sacred landscape of the Indian Himalayas. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 11(2), 156-167.
• Stepp, J. R., Wyndham, F. S., & Zarger, R. K. (2002). Ethnobiology and biocultural diversity: proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Ethnobiology. Athens, GA: International Society of Ethnobiology.
• Tsuji, L. J., & Ho, E. (2002). Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Western Science:
• Search for a Common Ground. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, XXII(2), 327-360. Retrieved from www3.brandonu.ca/cjns/22.2/cjnsv.22no.2_pg327-360.pdf. Turner, N. J., Ignace, M. B., & Ignace, R. (2000). Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Wisdom of Aboriginal Peoples in British Columbia. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1275.
• White, G. F. (1961). The Choice of Use in Resource Management. Natural Resources Journal, 32.