Hubbry Logo
EthnobotanyEthnobotanyMain
Open search
Ethnobotany
Community hub
Ethnobotany
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany
Ethnobotany
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Ethnobotanist Richard Evans Schultes at work in the Amazon in the 1940s

Ethnobotany is an interdisciplinary field at the interface of natural and social sciences that studies the relationships between humans and plants.[1][2] It focuses on traditional knowledge of how plants are used, managed, and perceived in human societies.[3][4] Ethnobotany integrates knowledge from botany, anthropology, ecology, and chemistry to study plant-related customs across cultures. Researchers in this field document and analyze how different societies use local flora for various purposes, including medicine, food, religious use, intoxicants, building materials, fuels and clothing.[5] Richard Evans Schultes, often referred to as the "father of ethnobotany",[6] provided an early definition of the discipline:

Ethnobotany simply means investigating plants used by primitive societies in various parts of the world.[7]

Since Schultes' time, ethnobotany has evolved from primarily documenting traditional plant knowledge to applying this information in modern contexts, particularly in pharmaceutical development.[8] The field now addresses complex issues such as intellectual property rights and equitable benefit-sharing arrangements arising from the use of traditional knowledge.[8]

History

[edit]
Plants have been widely used by Native American healers, such as this Ojibwa man.

The idea of ethnobotany was first proposed by the early 20th century botanist John William Harshberger.[9] While Harshberger did perform ethnobotanical research extensively, including in areas such as North Africa, Mexico, Scandinavia, and Pennsylvania,[9] it was not until Richard Evans Schultes began his trips into the Amazon that ethnobotany became a more well known science.[10] However, the practice of ethnobotany is thought to have much earlier origins in the first century AD when a Greek physician by the name of Pedanius Dioscorides wrote an extensive botanical text detailing the medical and culinary properties of "over 600 mediterranean plants" named De Materia Medica.[5] Historians note that Dioscorides wrote about traveling often throughout the Roman empire, including regions such as "Greece, Crete, Egypt, and Petra",[11] and in doing so obtained substantial knowledge about the local plants and their useful properties. European botanical knowledge drastically expanded once the New World was discovered due to ethnobotany. This expansion in knowledge can primarily be attributed to the substantial influx of new plants from the Americas, including crops such as potatoes, peanuts, avocados, and tomatoes.[12] The French explorer Jacques Cartier learned a cure for scurvy (a tea made from the needles of a coniferous tree, likely spruce) from a local Iroquois tribe.[13]

Medieval and Renaissance

[edit]

During the medieval period, ethnobotanical studies were often conducted in connection with monasticism. However, most botanical knowledge was kept in gardens, such as physic gardens attached to hospitals and religious buildings. It was thought of in practical use terms for culinary and medical purposes and the ethnographic element was not studied as a modern anthropologist might approach ethnobotany today.[14]

Age of Reason

[edit]

In 1732, Carl Linnaeus carried out a research expedition in Scandinavia asking the Sami people about their ethnological usage of plants.[15]

The Age of Enlightenment saw a rise in economic botanical exploration. Alexander von Humboldt collected data from the New World, and James Cook's voyages brought back collections and information on plants from the South Pacific.[16] At this time major botanical gardens were started, for instance the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew in 1759. The directors of the gardens sent out gardener-botanist explorers to care for and collect plants to add to their collections.

As the 18th century became the 19th, ethnobotany saw expeditions undertaken with more colonial aims rather than trade economics such as that of Lewis and Clarke which recorded both plants and the peoples encountered use of them. Edward Palmer collected material culture artifacts and botanical specimens from people in the North American West (Great Basin) and Mexico from the 1860s to the 1890s. Through all of this research, the field of "aboriginal botany" was established—the study of all forms of the vegetable world which aboriginal peoples use for food, medicine, textiles, ornaments and more.[17]

Development and application in modern science

[edit]

The first individual to study the emic perspective of the plant world was a German physician working in Sarajevo at the end of the 19th century: Leopold Glück. His published work on traditional medical uses of plants done by rural people in Bosnia (1896) has to be considered the first modern ethnobotanical work.[18]

Other scholars analyzed uses of plants under an indigenous/local perspective in the 20th century: Matilda Coxe Stevenson, Zuni plants (1915); Frank Cushing, Zuni foods (1920); Keewaydinoquay Peschel, Anishinaabe fungi (1998), and the team approach of Wilfred Robbins, John Peabody Harrington, and Barbara Freire-Marreco, Tewa pueblo plants (1916).

In the beginning, ethnobotanical specimens and studies were not very reliable and sometimes not helpful. This is because the botanists and the anthropologists did not always collaborate in their work. The botanists focused on identifying species and how the plants were used instead of concentrating upon how plants fit into people's lives. On the other hand, anthropologists were interested in the cultural role of plants and treated other scientific aspects superficially. In the early 20th century, botanists and anthropologists better collaborated and the collection of reliable, detailed cross-disciplinary data began.

Beginning in the 20th century, the field of ethnobotany experienced a shift from the raw compilation of data to a greater methodological and conceptual reorientation. This is also the beginning of academic ethnobotany. The so-called "father" of this discipline is Richard Evans Schultes, even though he did not actually coin the term "ethnobotany". Today the field of ethnobotany requires a variety of skills: botanical training for the identification and preservation of plant specimens; anthropological training to understand the cultural concepts around the perception of plants; linguistic training, at least enough to transcribe local terms and understand native morphology, syntax, and semantics.

Mark Plotkin, who studied at Harvard University, the Yale School of Forestry and Tufts University, has contributed a number of books on ethnobotany. He completed a handbook for the Tirio people of Suriname detailing their medicinal plants; Tales of a Shaman's Apprentice (1994); The Shaman's Apprentice, a children's book with Lynne Cherry (1998); and Medicine Quest: In Search of Nature's Healing Secrets (2000).

Plotkin was interviewed in 1998 by South American Explorer magazine, just after the release of Tales of a Shaman's Apprentice and the IMAX movie Amazonia. In the book, he stated that he saw wisdom in both traditional and Western forms of medicine:

No medical system has all the answers—no shaman that I've worked with has the equivalent of a polio vaccine and no dermatologist that I've been to could cure a fungal infection as effectively (and inexpensively) as some of my Amazonian mentors. It shouldn't be the doctor versus the witch doctor. It should be the best aspects of all medical systems (ayurvedic, herbalism, homeopathic, and so on) combined in a way which makes health care more effective and more affordable for all.[19]

A great deal of information about the traditional uses of plants is still intact with tribal peoples.[20] But the native healers are often reluctant to accurately share their knowledge to outsiders. Schultes actually apprenticed himself to an Amazonian shaman, which involves a long-term commitment and genuine relationship. In Wind in the Blood: Mayan Healing & Chinese Medicine by Garcia et al. the visiting acupuncturists were able to access levels of Mayan medicine that anthropologists could not because they had something to share in exchange. Cherokee medicine priest David Winston describes how his uncle would invent nonsense to satisfy visiting anthropologists.[21]

Another scholar, James W. Herrick, who studied under ethnologist William N. Fenton, in his work Iroquois Medical Ethnobotany (1995) with Dean R. Snow (editor), professor of Anthropology at Penn State, explains that understanding herbal medicines in traditional Iroquois cultures is rooted in a strong and ancient cosmological belief system.[22] Their work provides perceptions and conceptions of illness and imbalances which can manifest in physical forms from benign maladies to serious diseases. It also includes a large compilation of Herrick's field work from numerous Iroquois authorities of over 450 names, uses, and preparations of plants for various ailments. Traditional Iroquois practitioners had (and have) a sophisticated perspective on the plant world that contrast strikingly with that of modern medical science.[23]

Researcher Cassandra Quave at Emory University has used ethnobotany to address the problems that arise from antibiotic resistance. Quave notes that the advantage of medical ethnobotany over Western medicine rests in the difference in mechanism. For example, elmleaf blackberry extract focuses instead on the prevention of bacterial collaboration as opposed to directly exterminating them.[24]

Issues

[edit]

Many instances of gender bias have occurred in ethnobotany, creating the risk of drawing erroneous conclusions. Anthropologists would often consult with primarily men. In Las Pavas, a small farming community in Panama, anthropologists drew conclusions about the entire community's use of plant from their conversations and lessons with mostly men. They consulted with 40 families, but the women only participated rarely in interviews and never joined them in the field. Due to the division of labor, the knowledge of wild plants for food, medicine, and fibers, among others, was left out of the picture, resulting in a distorted view of which plants were actually important to them.[25][26]

Ethnobotanists have also assumed that ownership of a resource means familiarity with that resource. In some societies women are excluded from owning land, while being the ones who work it. Inaccurate data can come from interviewing only the owners.[27]

Other issues include ethical concerns regarding interactions with indigenous populations, and the International Society of Ethnobiology has created a code of ethics to guide researchers.[28]

Scientific journals

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Ethnobotany

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Ethnobotany is the interdisciplinary study of reciprocal relationships between human societies and , encompassing of plant uses for sustenance, healing, materials, and cultural practices across diverse environments and historical contexts. The term was coined in 1895 by American botanist John William Harshberger to describe the direct interactions between peoples and vegetation in their native habitats. This field integrates , , , and to document empirical observations of plant utility, often revealing bioactive compounds validated through subsequent scientific testing. Ethnobotany's empirical contributions include identifying plant-derived pharmaceuticals, such as those from species used in indigenous pharmacopeias, where phylogenetic analyses have shown traditional medicinal claims predict pharmacological activity more reliably than random screening. Pioneering work by figures like in the mid-20th century documented Amazonian plant uses, influencing modern conservation and efforts grounded in verifiable indigenous applications. However, the discipline faces controversies, particularly in , where extraction of for commercial ends has sparked debates over intellectual property rights, equitable benefit-sharing, and accusations of exploitation without compensation to source communities. These tensions underscore the need for rigorous, transparent methodologies that prioritize causal validation of uses over unverified lore, while preserving rapidly eroding cultural data amid and habitat loss.

Definition and Scope

Core Principles and Relationships

Ethnobotany investigates the observable, utilitarian relationships between human populations and plant species, encompassing applications in sustenance, therapeutics, construction materials, and ritualistic contexts grounded in documented traditional practices. These interactions arise from systematic human engagement with flora, where plant utility stems from inherent biochemical attributes rather than symbolic attributions alone. Central to this discipline is distinguishing emic viewpoints—indigenous categorizations and ascribed meanings of plants—from etic analyses that employ botanical taxonomy and pharmacological assays to validate efficacy. Causal mechanisms underpin these human-plant dynamics, with selection pressures driven by plants' secondary metabolites, such as alkaloids and terpenoids, that elicit physiological responses in humans, favoring retention of effective through generations. Statistical evaluations of reveal non-random selectivity, where utilized exceed availability proportions, indicating deliberate empirical discernment over chance. This selectivity reflects adaptive processes where bioactive compounds correlate with reported uses, enabling beyond correlative . Empirical trial-and-error exemplifies foundational reasoning in ethnobotany, as prehistoric societies iteratively tested wild , domesticating those yielding desirable traits like enhanced yield or palatability via selective . For instance, rapid mutation rates in candidate accelerated this process by shortening experimentation cycles, prioritizing verifiable outcomes such as reduced bitterness or increased seed size over untested narratives. Such mechanisms underscore ethnobotany's commitment to data-derived insights, eschewing unsubstantiated cultural embellishments in favor of reproducible human-plant interdependencies.

Cultural and Scientific Dimensions

Ethnobotany examines the interplay between human societies and plants, encompassing indigenous, folk, and historical knowledge of plant nomenclature, utilities, and ecological roles across diverse cultures. This cultural dimension records traditional practices derived from generations of empirical observation, such as plant selection for sustenance, , and ceremonies, without inherent scientific corroboration. Such documentation preserves adaptive strategies shaped by environmental pressures, yet requires scrutiny to differentiate anecdotal lore from reproducible outcomes. In its scientific facet, ethnobotany employs botanical , anthropological fieldwork, and ecological modeling to validate cultural claims through testable hypotheses and quantitative . This rigor ensures claims of efficacy or management practices align with causal mechanisms, such as interactions or sustainable harvesting impacts, rather than uncritical acceptance of tradition. By integrating these disciplines, ethnobotany elucidates how human behaviors adapt to distributions in varied ecosystems, including systems that enhance resilience. Ethnobotany diverges from , which centers on isolating and analyzing bioactive compounds from plants for therapeutic potential, often independent of cultural contexts. Whereas prioritizes chemical extraction and bioassays, ethnobotany foregrounds the sociocultural frameworks informing plant selection and use. Similarly, it contrasts with archaeobotany, which infers prehistoric human-plant relations from fossilized remains and artifacts, whereas ethnobotany targets contemporary or recent living traditions amenable to direct elicitation and observation. Illustrating global ethnobotanical diversity, over 530 medicinal species across 118 families have been verified in traditional uses in , , underscoring region-specific adaptations to tropical for health maintenance. These patterns reveal human ingenuity in managing resources amid ecological variability, from selective in resource-scarce habitats to diversified utilization in biodiverse hotspots, informed by cumulative cultural experimentation rather than randomized trial.

Historical Development

Ancient and Pre-Modern Foundations

The foundations of ethnobotanical knowledge trace back to ancient empirical observations of plant uses, particularly in the Mediterranean region. Pedanius Dioscorides, a Greek physician serving in the around 50–70 CE, compiled , a five-volume cataloging approximately 600 , minerals, and animal products with descriptions of their preparation, properties, and therapeutic applications derived from firsthand testing and reports. This work emphasized practical efficacy over theoretical speculation, influencing pharmacological practices for centuries by prioritizing observable effects such as opium's analgesic properties and colchicum's use against . Medieval Islamic scholars advanced these traditions through systematic compilation and experimentation, building on Greek texts while incorporating regional . (1197–1248), an Andalusian botanist and pharmacist, authored Kitab al-Jami li-mufradat al-adwiya wa-l-aghdhiya (Compendium on Simple Drugs and Foods), an alphabetical pharmacopeia detailing over 1,400 plants, foods, and drugs, drawn from more than 160 earlier sources and his own observations of habitats and medicinal utilities in and the . In , agronomic texts from the 10th to 15th centuries, such as those by Ibn Bassal and Abū l-Khayr al-Ishbīlī, documented practical plant domestication techniques, including irrigation methods and varietal selection for food, , and medicinal yields, reflecting empirical adaptations to Iberian environments rather than rote spiritual attributions. These works preserved and expanded knowledge of plant-human interactions, often crediting field-tested outcomes from diverse cultural inputs. Pre-modern non-Western traditions similarly relied on accumulated empirical records of plant and utility, though written documentation varied. In ancient , texts like the Bencao Jing (circa 1st–2nd century CE) listed hundreds of plants with noted effects from trial-and-error, such as ginseng's tonic properties, influencing sustained herbal practices. Indigenous groups worldwide, including Native American tribes, developed practical adaptations like the Ojibwe use of specific barks and roots for , evidenced through oral traditions corroborated by archaeological plant residues, though colonial expeditions from the 15th–18th centuries often extracted such knowledge without reciprocal acknowledgment, prioritizing European economic gains over indigenous causal insights into ecological dependencies. This era's records highlight continuity in human reliance on verifiable plant responses, setting the stage for later systematic study while underscoring uncredited empirical foundations in colonized regions.

19th-Century Origins and Early Pioneers

The term "ethnobotany" was coined in 1895 by American botanist John William Harshberger to denote the systematic study of plants used by primitive and , aiming to document their direct relations with vegetation for purposes of plant geography, , and . Harshberger's 1896 publication, "The Purpose of Ethnobotany," outlined this as a structured field distinct from mere botanical cataloging, emphasizing empirical collection of cultural plant uses alongside specimens to trace human influence on flora distribution. Edward Palmer (1831–1911), a self-taught British-American collector, exemplified early ethnobotanical practice through his extensive fieldwork in the and from the onward, gathering over 100,000 plant specimens tied to indigenous preparation methods and uses among tribes such as the Seri and Pima. Palmer's approach prioritized verifiable data, including detailed notes on native harvesting techniques and applications for food, medicine, and tools, which he supplied to institutions like the Smithsonian, laying groundwork for linking with cultural documentation without unsubstantiated claims of efficacy. In Europe, German physician Leopold Glück conducted pioneering emic studies of plant knowledge among Bosnian Muslim and Christian communities in Sarajevo during the late 1880s and 1890s, publishing on folk medicinal uses in 1896 and emphasizing insider perspectives on plant selection and rituals. Glück's work, based on direct interviews and observation under Austro-Hungarian administration, represented an early shift toward culturally contextualized botany in the Balkans, focusing on empirical records of species like Teucrium montanum for treatments rather than pharmacological validation. Colonial botany in the further propelled ethnobotanical inquiry through expeditions documenting flora, where European naturalists recorded indigenous American plant uses alongside taxonomic descriptions to support imperial economic goals like for agriculture. These efforts, evident in collections from and the , integrated native knowledge of species such as for quinine extraction, prioritizing preserved specimens with usage notes over anecdotal lore to enable reproducible scientific scrutiny.

20th-Century Institutionalization and Expansion

Following , ethnobotany experienced significant institutional growth, exemplified by the extensive fieldwork of in the from the 1940s through the 1960s. Schultes documented indigenous knowledge of hallucinogenic plants, including those containing alkaloids such as in ayahuasca preparations, establishing empirical links between traditional uses and bioactive compounds that influenced the psychedelic research era. His expeditions, supported by fellowships like the Guggenheim Foundation, amassed over 30,000 preserved plant specimens and emphasized direct observation of causal relationships in plant-human interactions, prioritizing verifiable indigenous practices over anecdotal reports. The formalization of ethnobotany as an advanced with the founding of the Society for in 1959, which aimed to promote interdisciplinary research on uses across cultures and economies. This facilitated annual meetings, publications, and collaborations, shifting the field from descriptive ethnographies toward structured empirical studies. Concurrently, quantitative methods emerged to evaluate , such as fidelity levels measuring the specificity of species to particular ailments, enabling more rigorous assessments of traditional knowledge's reliability against pharmacological validation. Global expansion occurred through international initiatives, extending ethnobotanical surveys to and , often tied to post-colonial development and programs. By the 1970s, surveys integrated conservation priorities, demonstrating causal connections between indigenous plant management—such as selective harvesting and —and sustained , informing policies that preserved ecosystems reliant on traditional stewardship. These efforts highlighted empirical data on how cultural practices mitigated , contrasting with purely ecological models by incorporating human agency in biodiversity outcomes.

Methods and Techniques

Fieldwork and Data Collection

Fieldwork in ethnobotany primarily involves direct engagement with knowledgeable informants from specific cultural groups to document plant uses through replicable empirical methods. Core techniques include semi-structured interviews, which allow flexibility while guiding discussions on plant nomenclature, preparation, and applications, often conducted with elders or healers selected via . entails accompanying informants during daily activities, such as or harvesting, to observe contextual uses firsthand and minimize . Voucher specimen collection accompanies these interactions, where informants identify in , and researchers press and label samples for taxonomic verification, ensuring linkage to verifiable botanical records. Specialized tools enhance precision: free-listing prompts informants to enumerate within a domain, such as medicinal , revealing salience and cultural categories without researcher . Walk-along transects involve guided walks through habitats, where informants demonstrate uses and locations, capturing spatial and ecological that static interviews might overlook. Validity relies on , cross-verifying claims across multiple informants, methods, and sources to filter outliers and confirm consensus uses, as single accounts risk idiosyncrasy or fabrication. targets diverse populations, contrasting rural indigenous groups with urban migrants to assess knowledge retention and adaptation. Ethical protocols mandate from informants and communities, documented verbally or in writing, with assurances of data anonymity and benefit-sharing per international standards like the ISE Code of Ethics. Plant identification follows deposition of vouchers in herbaria, cross-referenced with taxonomic experts or databases for scientific , preventing errors from vernacular names alone.

Analytical Approaches and Validation

Quantitative indices in ethnobotany quantify the reliability and cultural salience of reported plant uses from informant data. The (UV) measures the breadth of a plant's utility by dividing the total number of uses cited for a by the number of s mentioning it, yielding values from 0 to the maximum possible uses per informant; higher UVs indicate versatile species in local pharmacopeias. The Informant Consensus Factor (ICF), formulated as (number of use citations for an ailment minus number of used for that ailment) divided by (number of use citations minus number of ), ranges from 0 (no consensus) to 1 (perfect agreement), with empirical studies reporting values up to 0.955 for categories like digestive disorders, signaling potential pharmacological leads warranting further scrutiny. These metrics transform qualitative field reports into comparable statistics but require caution against conflating consensus with , as high ICFs may reflect shared cultural biases rather than causal mechanisms. Qualitative coding complements quantification by thematically analyzing narratives on plant preparation, ritual contexts, and symbolic roles, preserving nuances lost in numerical aggregation. For instance, ethnographic transcripts are coded for recurring motifs like dosage proxies or contraindications, enabling comparisons of depth without reducing it to use frequencies. This approach underscores cultural but subordinates it to empirical testing, as unvalidated lore risks perpetuating inefficacy. Validation prioritizes falsification through laboratory and clinical protocols to test traditional claims against null hypotheses of no effect. profiling employs techniques like (HPLC) and to isolate bioactive constituents, such as or alkaloids, correlating them with reported bioactivities; for example, analysis of confirmed withanolides as adaptogens, bridging Ayurvedic uses with pharmacological evidence. In vitro assays screen extracts for or activity, followed by rodent models to assess and , with positive leads advancing to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) against placebos or standards. A landmark case is from , derived from Chinese ethnobotanical leads and validated via extraction and trials in 1972, demonstrating antimalarial efficacy surpassing in speed and potency. Distinct from systematic botany's emphasis on morphological and phylogenetic , ethnobotanical analysis integrates human-derived data yet demands causal realism via reproducible experiments, rejecting anecdotal consensus as sufficient proof. Reviews critique overreliance on untested traditions, advocating Popperian falsification to debunk placebo-driven or coincidental successes, as many high-UV plants fail bioassays despite agreement. This rigor filters viable candidates for while exposing cultural knowledge gaps, ensuring outcomes reflect biochemical realities over inherited beliefs.

Applications and Impacts

Medicinal and Pharmacological Uses

Ethnobotany contributes to by identifying plant species traditionally used for therapeutic purposes, providing targeted leads for empirical validation rather than indiscriminate screening. Traditional knowledge from indigenous groups has directed attention to specific taxa, enabling isolation of bioactive compounds with proven efficacy after rigorous testing. For instance, , derived from the bark of species used by Andean Quechua peoples to treat fevers associated with , was introduced to in the 1630s and later isolated in , confirming its antimalarial properties through clinical observation and chemical analysis. Modern examples illustrate how ethnobotanical cues accelerate when subjected to pharmacological scrutiny. The Madagascar periwinkle (), employed in for , yielded vinblastine and upon bioassay-guided fractionation in the 1950s-1960s; these alkaloids proved effective against and Hodgkin's lymphoma, with approved by the FDA in 1963 after demonstrating tumor regression in animal models and human trials. Similarly, phylogenetic patterns observed in ethnobotanical data reveal that congeneric plants often share medicinal due to conserved secondary metabolites, as evidenced by a 2023 cross-cultural analysis showing taxonomically related used for analogous indications, which informs predictive modeling for novel candidates. Despite these successes, the transition from traditional use to approved pharmaceuticals remains inefficient, with fewer than 1% of ethnobotanically guided leads advancing to marketable drugs, underscoring the necessity of empirical validation over deference to anecdotal reports. This low yield stems from factors such as variable plant chemistry, placebo effects in traditional contexts, and the polypharmacology of crude extracts, which often fail standardized assays. Ethnobotany thus serves as a hypothesis-generating tool, prioritizing compounds like those in Artemisia annua—where Chinese folk use for malaria prompted artemisinin's isolation in 1972 and subsequent WHO endorsement in 2006 for artemisinin-based therapies—only after causal mechanisms are established through controlled studies. Such approaches have yielded approximately 25% of modern small-molecule drugs from natural products, with ethnobotanical origins enhancing initial hit rates in bioassays compared to random collection.

Agricultural, Food, and Material Applications

Indigenous peoples in the Andes domesticated Solanum tuberosum from wild progenitors through millennia of selective breeding, yielding over 4,000 landrace varieties adapted to varied altitudes and soils, which mitigated famine risks via genetic diversity and heterogeneous planting strategies. This ethnobotanical practice prioritized traits like tuber dormancy and pest resistance over uniform high yield, enabling stable production in marginal environments where monocultures fail. Empirical assessments confirm these varieties' superior buffering against biotic stresses, such as late blight, compared to early uniform introductions, though overall caloric output per hectare remains lower than optimized modern cultivars. Traditional crop landraces, preserved through ethnobotanical knowledge, exhibit enhanced resilience to and degradation versus many hybrid varieties, which prioritize yield under irrigated, fertilized conditions but falter in variable climates—evidenced by field trials showing landrace stability in rainfed systems yielding 20-50% less under stress but avoiding total loss. Such adaptations stem from polygenic traits selected for local contingencies, not centralized breeding goals, underscoring causal trade-offs: diversity fosters robustness but constrains scalability, countering narratives that idealize pre-industrial without acknowledging empirical yield gaps documented in comparative agronomic data. Ethnobotanical material applications harness plant structures for durable goods, as with bast fibers from species like Urtica dioica (stinging nettle) or Agave spp., processed into cords and textiles exhibiting tensile strengths exceeding 50 MPa, suitable for ropes enduring mechanical wear in arid or temperate settings. Dye extraction from roots and bark, such as Rubia tinctorum (madder) for alizarin reds, yields colorfast pigments verified stable against light and washing through accelerated aging tests, integrating into fibers without synthetic mordants in many indigenous protocols. Urban ethnobotany reveals adaptive foraging of wild edibles like Amelanchier spp. (serviceberry) and Morus spp. (mulberry), supplying up to 10-20% of daily micronutrients for participants in studies from , where accessibility and safety criteria drive site selection amid concrete landscapes. These practices sustain in low-income areas, with caloric densities from foraged fruits rivaling cultivated alternatives under constraints, though scalability limits their role to supplementary rather than primary nutrition.

Conservation and Resource Management

Ethnobotanical surveys identify keystone species through intensive use patterns that signal ecological importance, as communities often prioritize plants central to habitat structure and biodiversity. The concept of cultural keystone species (CKS) frames plants or fungi with outsized roles in both cultural identity and ecosystem function, such as western red cedar (Thuja plicata) among Pacific Northwest indigenous groups, where harvesting and management practices historically maintained forest mosaics. Use-value indices from ethnobotanical data, quantifying citation frequency and versatility, correlate with species vulnerability, enabling prioritization for conservation over less-utilized taxa. Traditional practices derived from ethnobotanical knowledge, such as controlled burning, yield measurable ecological benefits when evaluated against baseline data from fire-suppressed landscapes. In California's long-unburned forests, reintroduction of indigenous-style cultural burns increased native leguminous plant cover by up to 25% and diversity, restoring disturbance-adapted habitats suppressed since European settlement in the . Similarly, in the , ethnobotanical documentation links fire stewardship to promotion of culturally valued species like camas (Camassia quamash), with archaeobotanical evidence confirming sustained mosaic habitats from pre-colonial eras. These outcomes underscore causal links between human-mediated fire regimes and resilience, contrasting with uniform suppression policies that elevate fuel loads and intensity. Ethnobotanical data informs protected area designations by mapping high-use zones indicative of hotspots, integrating local knowledge with ecological surveys for targeted interventions. In the , indigenous plant use reports guided delineation of reserve boundaries, protecting over 500 species in areas where traditional patterns overlapped with endemism centers, as documented in 2017 assessments. Such approaches outperform purely biophysical criteria in some cases, as use decline metrics reveal rarity before censuses; for example, reduced harvesting of wild yams in Australian indigenous contexts signals habitat degradation, prompting preemptive zoning. Quantitative threat assessments leverage ethnobotanical fidelity levels—measuring plant-disease specificity—and harvest pressure indices to forecast declines, with use-value drops correlating to in 30-40% of documented cases across . In Ethiopia's Yeki , 2024 surveys found 15% of cited threatened by agricultural expansion, quantified via informant consensus and relative importance scores below sustainable thresholds. Globally, extinction risk hovers at 39%, with ethnobotanical signals amplifying IUCN metrics by highlighting culturally driven pressures absent in standard evaluations. Sustainable resource management favors market-based incentives over rigid regulations, as commercial wild generates income streams—averaging $5,000-10,000 annually per community in some U.S. cases—that motivate without depleting stocks when paired with yield monitoring. In bamboo ( spp.) systems, guidelines from 2021 emphasize participatory quotas and value-added processing to sustain yields, outperforming bans that foster black markets and poaching. Ethnobotanical validation critiques overly precautionary taboos, which may undervalue renewable species; data-driven models, incorporating growth rates, sustain populations better than static cultural prohibitions, as evidenced by stable devil's claw (Harpagophytum procumbens) yields under Namibian community quotas since 2000.

Modern Developments

Integration with Biotechnology and Drug Discovery

Ethnobotanical knowledge directs biotechnology efforts by prioritizing plant species and extracts with documented traditional uses, thereby streamlining high-throughput screening processes in drug discovery. In high-throughput assays, automation tests thousands of ethnobotanical-derived samples against biological targets, increasing hit rates compared to random screening; for instance, plants indicated for similar ailments in indigenous pharmacopeias exhibit higher bioactive predictability. A 2023 cross-cultural analysis of over 12,000 medicinal plant records revealed that congeneric species—those within the same genus—share therapeutic applications at rates exceeding random expectation, enabling biotech pipelines to focus on taxonomically related leads for novel compound isolation. Machine learning algorithms further integrate ethnobotanical data by modeling patterns in traditional uses alongside profiles to forecast bioactivity, such as antiplasmodial potential. These models, trained on databases compiling indigenous knowledge and chemical assays, outperform purely chemical-based predictions by incorporating ecological and cultural variables. repositories like Dr. Duke's Phytochemical and Ethnobotanical Databases aggregate such data, supporting where computational simulations test virtual libraries of plant-derived molecules against drug targets before wet-lab validation. A prominent case is , isolated in 1972 from based on ancient Chinese texts describing wormwood decoctions for fevers akin to symptoms. This ethnobotanical cue facilitated extraction and semisynthetic derivatives, culminating in artemisinin-based combination therapies that reduced global deaths by over 50% from 2000 to 2015 through industrial scaling. advanced production via in heterologous hosts like and optimized A. annua cultivars, yielding up to 2% artemisinin content—far surpassing wild —and demonstrating how private-sector incentives, including patents on engineered strains, accelerated commercialization without relying on communal benefit-sharing mandates. Such outcomes underscore causal links between ethnobotanical prioritization and verifiable therapeutic gains, as empirical validation through randomized trials confirms efficacy independently of origin narratives. A 2024 review of ethnobotanical studies in , , compiled data from multiple sources documenting over 500 medicinal plant species, with 530 species identified for treating ailments such as gastrointestinal disorders and infections, and being the most frequently cited. In urban contexts, a 2025 survey in anthropogenically disturbed areas of , , recorded 138 plant species from 54 families used for ethnomedicinal purposes by local communities, revealing adaptations of to urban environments despite access to modern medicine. Quantitative ethnobotany has advanced through assessments of homegarden systems, which support by integrating multipurpose for , , and ecological services; for instance, a 2023 study in rural areas quantified plant diversity in homegardens, showing contributions to household security via like fruit trees and herbs. Similarly, 2025 research on homegarden vascular emphasized conservation practices, documenting uses and management strategies that enhance and livelihood resilience in ethnic communities. Global trends indicate a surge in open-access documentation, with Ethnobotany Research and Applications releasing Volume 32 in 2025, including articles on medicinal plant trends and in traditional remedies, reflecting empirical expansions in data collection amid climate pressures. These efforts link to practical outcomes, such as identifying climate-adapted species for , though validation remains tied to field-verified use reports rather than untested paradigms.

Controversies and Criticisms

Bioprospecting, Biopiracy, and Economic Exploitation

involves the systematic exploration of biological resources, including plants identified through ethnobotanical knowledge, for commercially valuable genetic or biochemical compounds, often leading to pharmaceutical development or other applications. This process incentivizes by allowing protections on novel discoveries derived from such materials. In contrast, biopiracy refers to the unauthorized appropriation of or genetic resources without fair compensation or consent, typically exemplified by claims on applications of indigenous uses, such as the 1994 U.S. by W.R. Grace on a neem (Azadirachta indica) seed extract for fungal control, which built on longstanding Indian practices but was revoked in 2000 following legal challenges over . Empirical analysis reveals the rarity of blockbuster drugs emerging directly from ethnobotanical leads in modern pipelines, with historical successes like from Pacific yew bark representing exceptions rather than norms, as most contemporary high-revenue pharmaceuticals stem from synthetic chemistry or targeted screening rather than validation. Proponents of emphasize its role in fostering innovation through property rights, arguing that incentives are essential for the high-risk, capital-intensive R&D required to transform raw biological leads into viable products, ultimately enabling voluntary benefit-sharing agreements that support conservation. The Costa Rican National Institute (INBio) model exemplifies this, with a 1991 agreement with Merck providing $1 million in upfront fees for sample access, plus potential royalties (estimated at 1-3% on net sales), which funded habitat protection covering over 1% of the country's land despite no major commercial products materializing. Critics, often from advocacy groups, contend that such arrangements enable exploitation by multinational firms, prioritizing profits over equitable returns to source communities, yet evidence for systemic abuse remains limited, as most disputed s involve refinements on public-domain knowledge rather than wholesale theft, and rates in challenges underscore the self-correcting nature of patent systems. Data on benefit-sharing outcomes indicate low success rates in generating substantial royalties, with fewer than 1% of deals yielding commercial products and average returns to provider countries hovering below 0.5% of eventual revenues when successes occur, as seen in the INBio-Merck case where upfront payments far outpaced royalties. This underscores the causal efficiency of voluntary, contract-based mechanisms over rigid international mandates like those under the , which can deter investment by increasing transaction costs and uncertainty without proportionally enhancing local benefits. Prioritizing clear property rights thus aligns incentives for discovery while allowing negotiated sharing, avoiding unsubstantiated demands for equity that could stifle overall and long-term value creation from ethnobotanical resources.

Ethical Issues in Cultural Knowledge Use

Critics of non-indigenous adoption of ethnobotanical practices have raised concerns over cultural appropriation, particularly in the ritualistic use of plants like white sage for smudging, a smoke-cleansing tradition originating among certain Native American groups. In 2022, commentators highlighted how widespread commercialization and casual use by outsiders commodifies sacred elements, potentially diluting their spiritual significance and contributing to overharvesting of species such as Salvia apiana. These critiques frame such knowledge as communal intellectual property tied to cultural identity, advocating restrictions to preserve exclusivity against broader dissemination. Indigenous communities, especially in regions, have shown resistance to sharing ethnobotanical knowledge due to historical exploitation and fears of further loss of , with some groups withholding details on to protect against external validation or commercialization. However, plant properties and their effects represent empirical realities discoverable through and experimentation, independent of cultural origin; restricting access based on provenance can impede causal understanding and universal progress. For instance, the compounds in willow bark (Salix spp.), utilized by ancient Sumerians, , and various for millennia, informed the synthesis of aspirin in 1897, yielding acetylsalicylic acid that has alleviated suffering for billions worldwide without regard to its initial cultural contexts. Ethnobotanical research protocols emphasize (FPIC) to foster ethical collaboration, as outlined in guidelines from bodies like the International Society of Ethnobiology, requiring documentation of community agreement before knowledge exchange. Yet, while respecting communal sensitivities, overemphasis on as a barrier risks prioritizing identity preservation over verifiable scientific inquiry, potentially stalling advancements in and that benefit humanity broadly; empirical validation, rather than origin-based enclosure, ensures knowledge's utility endures beyond cultural bounds.

Debates on Traditional vs. Scientific Validation

A central debate in ethnobotany concerns the epistemological status of (TK) versus empirical scientific validation, with critics arguing that uncritical reliance on anecdotal or culturally embedded uses risks perpetuating ineffective or hazardous remedies under the guise of cultural reverence. Traditional botanical knowledge, often transmitted orally across generations, encompasses a vast array of plant uses for healing, yet systematic reviews reveal that much of it remains untested against controlled standards like randomized controlled trials (RCTs), where efficacy must exceed responses and demonstrate causal mechanisms through falsifiable hypotheses. For instance, ethnobotanical surveys frequently document hundreds of for medicinal purposes, but pharmacological scrutiny exposes limitations: many purported remedies exhibit rather than therapeutic benefits, as seen with aristolochic acids in like , which cause and urothelial cancers despite historical use in traditional Chinese and Mesoamerican medicine. Similarly, tubers, employed in some Asian folk practices, require precise processing to mitigate acute poisoning, underscoring how unverified TK can overlook dose-dependent dangers absent rigorous . This tension is amplified by tendencies in academic and media discourse to romanticize , particularly indigenous systems, attributing inherent wisdom without proportional experimental scrutiny—a pattern critiqued as potentially biasing research toward preservation over verification. A 2024 analysis in ethnobiology warns against associating uniformly with positive societal values, noting its heterogeneous, context-specific nature often includes trial-and-error accretions prone to placebo-driven perceptions of or outright errors, as local validations rely on observational correlations rather than isolated causal testing. Empirical data supports skepticism: while has inspired successes like artemisinin from for , the overall yield from ethnobotanical leads in remains low, with most candidates failing phase II/III trials due to insufficient or profiles, reflecting that fewer than 1% of screened products advance to market approval. Such outcomes highlight placebo effects in uncontrolled settings, where subjective improvements mask biochemical inertness, as evidenced by failed validations of common claims like garlic's broad prevention, which lacks RCT backing beyond . Proponents of scientific prioritization advocate hybrid approaches wherein ethnobotany furnishes testable hypotheses, but validation demands laboratory falsification to prioritize safety amid real-world risks, such as the opioid crisis where unproven herbal alternatives delayed evidence-based interventions. This contrasts with views emphasizing cultural holism over reductionism, yet causal realism favors the former: TK's value lies in hypothesis generation, not equivalence to peer-reviewed data, as unvalidated remedies like kava or comfrey have been linked to hepatotoxicity upon scrutiny, prompting regulatory withdrawals. Forward paths integrate TK into preclinical screening pipelines, as in high-throughput assays debunking inefficacy early, ensuring only mechanistically sound applications—like paclitaxel from Pacific yew bark—transition to clinical use while discarding overhyped claims normalized by bias-prone narratives in mainstream sources.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/ethnobotany
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9526633/
  3. https://www.ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2310244.pdf
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2700180/
  5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22984175/
  6. https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/ethnobotany/
  7. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-023-00604-5
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7749732_Ethnobotanyethnopharmacology_and_mass_bioprospecting_Issues_on_intellectual_property_and_benefit-sharing
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10649014/
  10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4508904/
  11. https://mollyhelfend.substack.com/p/what-is-ethnobotany
  12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0378874179900023
  13. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/01/250114125123.htm
  14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/ethnobotany
  15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230223625_Ethnobotany_The_Study_of_People-Plant_Relationships
  16. https://uou.ac.in/sites/default/files/slm/MSCBOT-608.pdf
  17. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-022-00539-3
  18. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-03408-3
  19. https://clinicalgate.com/ethnobotany-and-ethnopharmacy/
  20. https://sites.google.com/sheffield.ac.uk/archaeobotany/ethnobotany
  21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468265924000799
  22. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-024-00655-2
  23. https://worldherblibrary.org/dioscorides-and-the-birth-of-pharmacology-ancient-texts-in-focus/
  24. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/encyclopaedia_romana/aconite/materiamedica.html
  25. http://muslimheritage.com/botany-herbals-and-healing-in-islamic-science-and-medicine/
  26. https://www.cifor-icraf.org/publications/downloads/Publications/PDFS/JA98047.pdf
  27. https://societyofethnobotanists.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1_Ethnobotany-32-2020_Jain-1.pdf
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313759312_Ethnobotany_for_Beginners
  29. https://www.plantsjournal.com/archives/2017/vol5issue3/PartB/5-3-8-217.pdf
  30. https://naturalhistory.si.edu/research/botany/research/edward-palmer-father-ethnobotany
  31. https://journals.openedition.org/ethnoecologie/pdf/8248
  32. https://si-siris.blogspot.com/2012/08/ethnobotany-dangerous-hobby.html
  33. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2021.623070/full
  34. https://etnobotanica.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/2014-Chp-1-Balkans-book.pdf
  35. https://scienceline.org/2021/01/the-evolution-of-ethnobotany/
  36. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09647775.2023.2269222
  37. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32375597/
  38. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/11807/chapter/19
  39. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1102&context=botany_jps
  40. https://oldsite.econbot.org/_about_/index.php?sm=02
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11927197/
  42. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267569319_Ethnobotany_and_Biodiversity_Conservation
  43. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-017-0148-9
  44. https://faculty.washington.edu/stevehar/Ethnobotany.pdf
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312653721_What_Works_in_the_Field_A_Comparison_of_Different_Interviewing_Methods_in_Ethnobotany_with_Special_Reference_to_the_Use_of_Photographs
  46. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02780771231162190
  47. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274567837_Methods_and_Techniques_in_Ethnobiology_and_Ethnoecology
  49. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-025-00782-4
  50. https://global-diversity.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Conducting-and-Communicating-Ethnobotanical-Research.pdf
  51. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ppp3.70052
  52. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2018.00040/full
  53. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382453297_QUANTITATIVE_ANALYSIS_OF_ETHNOMEDICINAL_PLANTS_BY_DETERMINATION_OF_USE-VALUE_UV_INFORMANT_CONSENSUS_FACTOR_ICF_USED_IN_LOWA_PURBA_BARDHAMAAN
  54. https://repository.rcsi.com/articles/journal_contribution/Quantitative_ethnobotany_of_medicinal_plants_used_by_indigenous_communities_in_the_Bandarban_district_of_Bangladesh/20517408
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357976245_The_relevance_of_quantitative_ethnobotanical_indices_for_ethnopharmacology_and_ethnobotany
  56. https://juniperpublishers.com/ijesnr/IJESNR.MS.ID.556078.php
  57. https://www.rroij.com/open-access/phytochemical-validation-of-traditional-medicinal-plants-bridging-ethnobotany-with-modern-pharmacology.pdf
  58. https://austinpublishinggroup.com/public-health-epidemiology/fulltext/ajphe-v12-id1176.pdf
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10494464/
  60. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377178016_Integrating_depth_and_rigor_in_ethnobiological_and_ethnomedical_research
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11128107/
  62. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-025-00788-y
  63. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9833075/
  64. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004223018060
  65. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41573-020-00114-z
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9268545/
  67. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.4c00581
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9484184/
  69. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.9051176.x-i1
  70. http://cipotato.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/WP18052.pdf
  71. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229518933_Potato_Diversity_in_the_Andean_Center_of_Crop_Domestication
  72. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2834
  73. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/10.3390/su10082834/abstract
  74. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326932144_More_than_Yield_Ecosystem_Services_of_Traditional_versus_Modern_Crop_Varieties_Revisited
  75. https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/ethnobotany/fibers.shtml
  76. https://fibershed.org/2020/02/11/native-plants-for-textiles-3-bast-fibers-to-know-beyond-hemp-and-flax/
  77. https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/ethnobotany/dyes.shtml
  78. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-021-00497-2
  79. https://academic.oup.com/jue/article/5/1/juy028/5303355
  80. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S161886672200139X
  81. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8552430/
  82. https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art1/
  83. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-020-00422-z
  84. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7936095/
  85. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12142454/
  86. https://www.fs.usda.gov/psw/publications/lake/psw_2021_lake001.pdf
  87. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.2973
  88. https://fiveable.me/native-people-their-environment/unit-11/ethnobotanical-knowledge-plant-conservation/study-guide/umVJSTGjDDCabxZ3
  89. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-024-00748-y
  90. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ppp3.10146
  91. https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/FAFD%252024.%2520ASEAN%2520NTFP%2520Guidelines%2520Final%2520Draft.pdf
  92. https://www.herbalgram.org/resources/herbalgram/issues/118/table-of-contents/hg118-conserv-wildplants/
  93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12309637/
  94. https://www.mdpi.com/2813-2998/3/1/11
  95. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2023.1173328/full
  96. https://phytochem.nal.usda.gov/search
  97. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4966551/
  98. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2017.01966/full
  99. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0254629922006743
  100. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-025-00766-4
  101. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10717692/
  102. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-024-00746-0
  103. https://ethnobotanyjournal.org/index.php/era/issue/current
  104. https://ethnobotanyjournal.org/
  105. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X02000402
  106. https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt0505-511
  107. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/drug-developers-take-a-second-look-at-herbal-medicines/
  108. https://www.cbd.int/financial/bensharing/costarica-absinbio.pdf
  109. https://aromaticmedicineschool.com/smudging-an-issue-of-ethics-and-sustainability/
  110. https://www.willystreet.coop/reader/august-2019/smudge-and-the-cultural-appropriation-issue/
  111. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pan3.10321
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6496865/
  113. https://www.ashdin.com/articles/traditional-knowledge-in-drug-development-and-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples-a-legal-and-ethical-perspective-1099737.html
  114. https://www.ethnobiology.net/wp-content/uploads/ISE-COE_Eng_rev_24Nov08.pdf
  115. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12231-025-09634-4
  116. https://ethnobotany.org/home/governance/guidelines-of-professional-ethics.html
  117. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7762085/
  118. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2020.01160/full
  119. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3722488/
  120. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13002-024-00697-6
  121. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/medical-critical-thinking-health-and-nutrition/no-traditional-chinese-medicine-has-not-been-vindicated-science
  122. https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/how-folk-remedies-can-fuel-misinformation
  123. https://www.webmd.com/vitamins-and-supplements/features/risky-herbal-supplements
  124. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4370194/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.