Cargando…

Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography

One of the main challenges when integrating biological and social perspectives in primatology is overcoming interdisciplinary barriers. Unfamiliarity with subject-specific theory and language, distinct disciplinary-bound approaches to research, and academic boundaries aimed at “preserving the integr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parathian, Hannah E., McLennan, Matthew R., Hill, Catherine M., Frazão-Moreira, Amélia, Hockings, Kimberley J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6267646/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30573938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10764-018-0027-9
_version_ 1783376122744930304
author Parathian, Hannah E.
McLennan, Matthew R.
Hill, Catherine M.
Frazão-Moreira, Amélia
Hockings, Kimberley J.
author_facet Parathian, Hannah E.
McLennan, Matthew R.
Hill, Catherine M.
Frazão-Moreira, Amélia
Hockings, Kimberley J.
author_sort Parathian, Hannah E.
collection PubMed
description One of the main challenges when integrating biological and social perspectives in primatology is overcoming interdisciplinary barriers. Unfamiliarity with subject-specific theory and language, distinct disciplinary-bound approaches to research, and academic boundaries aimed at “preserving the integrity” of subject disciplines can hinder developments in interdisciplinary research. With growing interest in how humans and other primates share landscapes, and recognition of the importance of combining biological and social information to do this effectively, the disparate use of terminology is becoming more evident. To tackle this problem, we dissect the meaning of what the biological sciences term studies in “human–wildlife conflict” or more recently “human–wildlife interactions” and compare it to what anthropology terms “multispecies ethnography.” In the biological sciences, human–wildlife interactions are the actions resulting from people and wild animals sharing landscapes and resources, with outcomes ranging from being beneficial or harmful to one or both species. In the social sciences, human–nonhuman relationships have been explored on a philosophical, analytical, and empirical level. Building on previous work, we advocate viewing landscapes through an interdisciplinary “multispecies lens” in which humans are observed as one of multiple organisms that interact with other species to shape and create environments. To illustrate these interconnections we use the case study of coexistence between people of the Nalu ethnic group and Critically Endangered western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) at Cantanhez National Park in Guinea-Bissau, to demonstrate how biological and social research approaches can be complementary and can inform conservation initiatives at the human–primate interface. Finally, we discuss how combining perspectives from ethnoprimatology with those from multispecies ethnography can advance the study of ethnoprimatology to aid productive discourse and enhance future interdisciplinary research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6267646
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62676462018-12-18 Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography Parathian, Hannah E. McLennan, Matthew R. Hill, Catherine M. Frazão-Moreira, Amélia Hockings, Kimberley J. Int J Primatol Article One of the main challenges when integrating biological and social perspectives in primatology is overcoming interdisciplinary barriers. Unfamiliarity with subject-specific theory and language, distinct disciplinary-bound approaches to research, and academic boundaries aimed at “preserving the integrity” of subject disciplines can hinder developments in interdisciplinary research. With growing interest in how humans and other primates share landscapes, and recognition of the importance of combining biological and social information to do this effectively, the disparate use of terminology is becoming more evident. To tackle this problem, we dissect the meaning of what the biological sciences term studies in “human–wildlife conflict” or more recently “human–wildlife interactions” and compare it to what anthropology terms “multispecies ethnography.” In the biological sciences, human–wildlife interactions are the actions resulting from people and wild animals sharing landscapes and resources, with outcomes ranging from being beneficial or harmful to one or both species. In the social sciences, human–nonhuman relationships have been explored on a philosophical, analytical, and empirical level. Building on previous work, we advocate viewing landscapes through an interdisciplinary “multispecies lens” in which humans are observed as one of multiple organisms that interact with other species to shape and create environments. To illustrate these interconnections we use the case study of coexistence between people of the Nalu ethnic group and Critically Endangered western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) at Cantanhez National Park in Guinea-Bissau, to demonstrate how biological and social research approaches can be complementary and can inform conservation initiatives at the human–primate interface. Finally, we discuss how combining perspectives from ethnoprimatology with those from multispecies ethnography can advance the study of ethnoprimatology to aid productive discourse and enhance future interdisciplinary research. Springer US 2018-04-18 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6267646/ /pubmed/30573938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10764-018-0027-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Parathian, Hannah E.
McLennan, Matthew R.
Hill, Catherine M.
Frazão-Moreira, Amélia
Hockings, Kimberley J.
Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title_full Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title_fullStr Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title_full_unstemmed Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title_short Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human–Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography
title_sort breaking through disciplinary barriers: human–wildlife interactions and multispecies ethnography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6267646/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30573938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10764-018-0027-9
work_keys_str_mv AT parathianhannahe breakingthroughdisciplinarybarriershumanwildlifeinteractionsandmultispeciesethnography
AT mclennanmatthewr breakingthroughdisciplinarybarriershumanwildlifeinteractionsandmultispeciesethnography
AT hillcatherinem breakingthroughdisciplinarybarriershumanwildlifeinteractionsandmultispeciesethnography
AT frazaomoreiraamelia breakingthroughdisciplinarybarriershumanwildlifeinteractionsandmultispeciesethnography
AT hockingskimberleyj breakingthroughdisciplinarybarriershumanwildlifeinteractionsandmultispeciesethnography