Interdisciplinary Research on Taxonomy and Nomenclature For
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Article Progress in Physical Geography 1–21 ª The Author(s) 2015 Names matter: Interdisciplinary Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav research on taxonomy DOI: 10.1177/0309133315589706 and nomenclature for ecosystem ppg.sagepub.com management Elizabeth S. Barron University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, USA Chris Sthultz Harvard University, USA Dale Hurley University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, USA Anne Pringle Harvard University, USA Abstract Local ecological knowledge (LEK) is increasingly used to provide insights into ecosystem dynamics and to promote stakeholder inclusion. However, research on how to incorporate LEK into ecosystem management rarely discusses taxonomy and nomenclature despite the fact that processes of naming are deeply implicated in what types of knowledge are validated and used. Too often, local names are vetted against and then subsumed under ‘true’ scientific names, producing an oversimplified understanding of local names and perpetuating stereotypes about communities that use them. Ongoing revisions in mycological taxonomy and widespread interest in wild edible fungi make mushrooms an excellent case study for addressing nomen- clature as an important part of multi-stakeholder research. We use morel mushrooms collected from the Mid-Atlantic United States to demonstrate a methodological approach to nomenclature – performative method – that focuses both on maintaining culturally meaningful aspects of local names and on recognizing culture and meaning behind scientific names. While recognizing the utility of the Linnaean nomenclatural system, we argue that acknowledging the contextual meanings of names avoids the unequal power relations inherent in integrating local knowledge into scientific discourse, and instead reframes knowledge production around shared interests in environmental questions and challenges. Keywords Critical physical geography, situated knowledges, local ecological knowledge, fungi, performative method I Introduction Corresponding author: Demonstrating the existence of traditional and Elizabeth S. Barron, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, 800 local ecological knowledge has been a signifi- Algoma Blvd, Oshkosh, WI 54901, USA. cant tool for indigenous and community rights Email: [email protected] Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com by guest on July 10, 2015 2 Progress in Physical Geography movements to enable greater participation in names are encountered as fixed and final. Sci- ecosystem management, and in many ways this entific names are considered more ‘‘correct’’ tool has worked. Local ecological knowledge or ‘‘true,’’ and thus more powerful and rele- (LEK) is increasingly discussed by scientists vant for use in environmental management. and used by policy makers to provide insights By extension, scientists’ input is considered into ecosystem dynamics and to promote stake- ultimately more valuable for ecosystem man- holder inclusion (Berkes et al., 2003; Gadgil agement decision-making than that of local et al., 2003; Miller et al., 2008; Raymond stakeholder communities, thus extending this et al., 2010; Rist and Dahdouh-Guebas, 2006; power imbalance to concerns of social equity Salick et al., 2002). In the majority of research and political economy. on LEK and ecosystem management, however, By giving attention to power relations, our taxonomy and nomenclature are rarely dis- interdisciplinary project on taxonomy and cussed. Too often, local names are vetted nomenclature is intended to highlight ethical against and then subsumed under ‘‘true’’ scien- concerns about power imbalances among stake- tific names, or sidelined in discussions focused holders by focusing on the production of local on relating knowledge to power. Many natural and scientific names, rather than the names and social scientists perceive scientific and themselves. Our case study examines local and local names as a necessary bottleneck on the scientific naming processes of morel mush- way to answering more interesting questions rooms found in the Mid-Atlantic region of the about ecology (Wolfe et al., 2012b), evolution- United States. Morels make a particularly inter- ary biogeography (Wolfe et al., 2012a), indi- esting case study because they are prized wild genous politics (Agrawal, 2002), or critical edibles among lay experts and their scientific analyses of community engagement (Brosius taxonomy and nomenclature, like those of many and Russell, 2003). While valuable in their own genera in mycology, has been destabilized in the rights, this ‘‘bottleneck mentality’’ on nomen- past few decades. Examining how nomencla- clature distracts from the ethical dimensions of tural data are produced, and under what condi- the naming process and the power dynamics tions they are used and change, shifts the focus inherent therein, perpetuating stereotypes about away from hierarchical comparison and knowl- use, meaning, and value of both scientific and edge integration, which has proven to be local names, and lay and scientific experts. ineffective in enabling real social change in Nomenclature includes metrics, mechanics, environmental governance and conservation and techniques that laypeople use in their every- frameworks (Brook and McLachlan, 2008; day lives (Bowker and Star, 1999) as well as Lave et al., 2014). those that scientists use as part of their work. We consider this work within the scope of Considering nomenclature is an important part the emerging field of critical physical geogra- of an integrated, multi-stakeholder approach phy (CPG) (Lave, 2012), where analyses of to ecosystem research because processes of biophysical systems are related to and informed naming are deeply implicated in what types of by accompanying analyses of cultural and insti- knowledge are validated and used (Bowker, tutional systems (Tadaki et al., 2012). Neither 2000). We argue there is a continuing need for scientific nor social processes are privileged in in-depth research on taxonomy and classifica- our analysis. Rather, in accordance with the tion in both the natural and social sciences, and CPG framework, we ‘‘produce critical biophysi- that these lines of research benefit from being cal and social explanations while also reflecting conducted together. This need stems from the on the conditions under which those explana- power imbalance present when local and scientific tions [were] produced’’ (Lave et al., 2014: 4). Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com by guest on July 10, 2015 Barron et al. 3 In developing a CPG approach to taxonomy Performance, in short, seems to offer intriguing possi- and nomenclature, we consider claims from bilities for thinking about the constructedness of iden- bioscience and local knowledge to be equally tity, subjectivity, and agency. Our assumption [is] relevant to ecosystem management, and attend that a notion of performance is indeed crucial for criti- cal human geography concerned to understand the con- to the social power relations between them. struction of ...social power relations, and the way We emphasize ethical forms of producing space might articulate all of these. ...We agree that knowledge, rather than the development of both performance and performativity are important knowledge integration protocols. Focusing con- conceptual tools for a critical geography concerned to currently on environmental impacts, social denaturalize taken-for-granted social practices (Greg- equity, and political economic concerns gener- son and Rose, 2000: 434). ates an alternative ethical framework for future ecosystem management. With our focus on When taken together, these two concepts pro- ecology and critical nature discourses, our work vide a conceptual structure consistent with the extends the scope of CPG from the geomorpho- aims and goals of our project: to better under- logic to the biotic, and into dialogue with bios- stand the power relations inherent in the names cientific research. of organisms by seeing those names come into The paper proceeds in four parts. We begin being in specific places, at specific times, and section II with a review of a subset of the through shared experiences. We call our approach empirical literature on LEK in resource man- performative method: a form of self-ethnographic agement, primarily from the social-ecological data collection, analysis, and learning that pro- systems literature focusing on LEK integration. duces alternative ways of knowing nature. Our Our specific interests in ecosystem management aim with the concept of performative method and social equity are addressed more directly is to bring the methodological details of inter- there, although we also find insight in the ethno- disciplinary collaboration to the foreground, botanical and ethnoecological literature often with special attention to the social actions and associated with folk and biosystematics (Berlin, identities of local experts, scientific experts, 1992; Berlin et al., 1973; Rist and Dahdouh- and ourselves as an interdisciplinary research Guebas, 2006). We also include a review of for- team (Ellis and Waterton, 2005). The concep- mal classification in botany and mycology as a tual framework of situated knowledges and point of reference for those unfamiliar with performativity, in addition to our use of the these processes. social-ecological systems literature, further In section II we further include a discussion differentiates this project from classical ethno- of the concepts of ‘‘situated knowledges’’ and botanical work. ‘‘performativity,’’ which form the theoretical In section III, we briefly