ABSTRACT Integrating Local Knowledge About Plants Into Conservation Practice In Dominica, West Indies by Swetha Peteru Much debate exists about whether scientific and local priorities complement each other or are mutually exclusive, with conservation policies and practices raising questions about whose knowledge counts. In Dominica, West Indies, conservation is highly important because of its large tracts of diverse forest and accordingly its image as the “Nature Island.” This research, conducted near Morne Trois Pitons National Park, adopts a stakeholder approach to compare local views on five trees of global (IUCN red-listed) and three trees of national (Forestry Division) importance in relation to trees local villagers view as important resources for their livelihoods. Results from interviews and transect walks show that residents can recognize trees by pictures or local names. They add to existing knowledge on global-national rare trees and broaden the conservation agenda to recognize 36 native and 19 non-native trees. The study complies a new plant guide that exemplifies how local knowledge and local priorities contribute to scientific understanding of plant conservation. INTEGRATING LOCAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PLANTS INTO CONSERVATION PRACTICE IN DOMINICA, WEST INDIES A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts Department of Geography by Swetha Peteru Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2010 Co-Advisor: _____________________ (Dr. Thomas Klak) Co-Advisor: _____________________ (Dr. Kimberly Medley) Reader: _____________________ (Dr. Charles Stevens) TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables iv List of Boxes v List of Figures vi Acknowledgements vii Introduction 1 Research Context - Literature review 5 Political Ecology as a Theoretical Framework in Conservation Research 5 A Stakeholder Approach and Analysis 6 Ethnobotany as Participatory Learning about Plants 7 Geographical Context: The Nature Island of Dominica 8 Conservation Planning and Protected Area Management in Dominica 10 The Study Area - Morne Trois Pitons National Park 12 Data and Methods 13 A Stakeholder Analysis 13 What is locally known about the trees? 14 Hardwood tree selection and evaluation 14 Gaining local viewpoints 15 What trees are recognized as locally important? 15 Results 17 What is locally known about the trees? 17 Hardwood tree selection and evaluation 17 Gaining local viewpoints 17 Internationally important trees 18 Cedrela odorata L. 18 Guaiacum officinale L. 22 Inga dominicensis Benth. 22 Swietenia macrophylla King. and Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. 23 Nationally Important trees 26 Hymenaea courbaril L. 26 Phoebe elongata Nees. 28 Sabinea carinalis Griseb. 29 Summary 30 What trees are recognized as locally important? 31 New plant guide 35 Discussion: Comparing and integrating knowledges 36 Assessing the local knowledge 36 ii Extra-local vs. local 36 Among local stakeholders 37 Within stakeholder groups 39 Integration of local concerns 40 Conclusion 41 Limitations 41 References 42 Appendix I: Human Subjects Application approved by Miami University’s IRB 48 Appendix II: Research permit from Dominica 51 Appendix III: Plant Guide 53 Appendix IV: Sample page of trail guides given to tour guides during training 61 iii LIST OF TABLES* Table 1. Historic events influencing human-resource relations and conservation 10 Table 2. Predominant species in vegetation zones of Morne Trois Pitons National Park 12 Table 3. Stakeholder groups and their interests 13 Table 4. Guiding questions used in semi-structured interviews and focus groups 15 Table 5. Local stakeholders and number interviewed 17 Table 6. List of species investigated in the study and their status 17 Table 7. The known local uses of Cedrela odorata 20 Table 8. The known local uses of Swietenia spp. 25 Table 9. The known local uses of Hymenaea courbaril 27 Table 10. The known local uses of Phoebe elongata 28 Table 11. The known local uses of Sabinea carinalis 30 Table 12. Locally important trees mentioned by the various stakeholders 32 *Note: All tables were created by author unless otherwise mentioned. iv LIST OF BOXES Box 1. How to protect trees according to local stakeholders 21 Box 2. Quotes from participants on what trees they think are important 35 v LIST OF FIGURES* Figure 1. A conceptual map 3 Figure 2. Map of Dominica in the Eastern Caribbean 8 Figure 3. Map of southern half of the island of Dominica 12 Figure 4. Example of a plant guide 14 Figure 5. Picture of Cedrela odorata 18 Figure 6. Percent of recognition of the Cedrela odorata by participants 18 Figure 7. Pictures of Guaiacum officinale 22 Figure 8. Pictures of Inga dominicensis 22 Figure 9. Pictures of Swietenia macrophylla and Swietenia mahagoni 23 Figure 10. Participant recognition of Swietenia macrophylla and Swietenia mahagoni 24 Figure 11. Pictures of Hymenaea courbaril 26 Figure 12. Participants‟ recognition of Hymenaea courbaril 26 Figure 13. Pictures of Phoebe elongata 28 Figure 14. Participants‟ recognition of Phoebe elongata 28 Figure 15. Picture of Sabinea carinalis 29 Figure 16. Recognition of Sabinea carinalis by participants 29 Figure 17. Cover of the integrated plant guide booklet 35 Figure 18. “Layers” of knowledge 39 Figure 19. Farm located within the Morne Trois Pitons National Park boundaries 39 Figure 20. Visualizing the relationship between scientific and local knowledges 41 *Note: All maps, figures, and pictures were created/taken by author unless otherwise mentioned. vi ACKNOLOWDEGEMENTS This research would not have been possible without the guidance of my advisors, Dr. Thomas Klak and Dr. Kim Medley and reader Dr. Charlie Stevens. Dr. Klak and Dr. Medley worked with me as I explored the findings and helped me transition raw material into a written thesis. Dr. Stevens along with Dr. Klak guided me through an independent study on understanding political ecology. Without the guidance and advice from all three of my committee members over the past two years, this research would not have been possible or complete. I would like to thank the William S. Turrell Herbarium at Miami University for funding the fieldwork for this thesis (Grant #210) and for holding the voucher specimens. And the Department of Geography for the funding for the fieldwork and the Sustainable Development and Ecotourism in the Eastern Caribbean (GEO 599.7) course. And finally the Center for the Enhancement of Learning, Teaching, and University Assessment (CELTUA) for funding the camera to record and take pictures of trees in the field. I would like to thank my family for supporting me and my friends for helping me remain calm during the process of writing this thesis. I would especially like to thank Rashesh Shrestha for always helping me with proof reading and being my sounding board. I would most of all like to thank Professor Maureen Hays-Mitchell (Colgate University) for helping me realize my potential and in helping me get to graduate school. vii Introduction Much debate exists as to whether scientific-based conservation can integrate local knowledge and concerns or if the two are mutually exclusive (Mauro and Hardison 2000). First, conservation research, based on scientific (Western) knowledge, too often focuses on habitat loss (fragmentation), ecosystem degradation, and the consequent loss of biodiversity (Chapin III et al. 2000). Many call conservation a “crisis discipline” as it substantiates threats that demand urgent actions (Salafsky et.al. 2002, Pullin 2002, Wilson 2002). Conservation science gained momentum in the 1970s because of the documented threats to biodiversity and from a growing global community that gained awareness and concern for the projected declines (Doak and Mills 1994, Drew and Henne 2006). Conservation research problems are often extra-locally defined and focused on already established hypotheses of negative human-resource relations. Second, in response to crisis narratives of biodiversity loss, extra-locally defined conservation practices establish fenced-off protected areas that marginalize local participation and the needs and livelihoods of the people and communities living nearby (e.g., Gezon 2006). Prohibiting human interaction in these protected areas serves as a primary agenda for biodiversity conservation (Pimbert & Pretty 1995). The effects of conservation management practices particularly manifest in the communities that are within or near the boundaries of protected areas. In contrast, other scholars stress the need to consider local knowledge, issues, and concerns when making decisions regarding conservation (Pierotti and Wildcat 2000, Terer et al. 2004). The process of establishing and managing protected areas should be more participatory to involve local communities (Ghimire et al. 2004). Brown and Lomolino (2000) indicate a need for a new theoretical framework for conservation that is closer to what is happening on the ground. Many times conservationists, ecologists, and policy makers are forced to make decisions in haste and without adequate data and information about the species or communities in concern (Doak and Mills 1994, Drew and Henne 2006). Due to limited data, conservationists and ecologists compensate by depending heavily on theory. Though theories have a lot to offer, they are over- generalized and have little to do with practical conservation decisions (Doak and Mills 1994). By integrating „scientific‟ knowledge with „local‟ knowledge, conservation research could achieve a more holistic framework. Mauro and