Erin P. Riley

Ethnoprimatology: Critical interdisciplinarity and multispecies approaches in anthropology

The emerging practice of ethnoprimatology creates an important venue for diverse epistemologies in anthropology and primatology to interact in an intellectually robust and engaged manner. At the same time that multispecies ethnographies are becoming more common in social anthropology, a subset of primatologists are immersing themselves in approaches that merge ethnographic engagement with primate studies. In these endeavors the distinction between “human worlds” and “nature” is discarded and multispecies entanglements become central aspects of anthropogenic ecologies. By drawing from ecological, biological, ethnographic and historical approaches, ethnoprimatology creates a more robust and accurate methodology for anthropologists and primatologists interested in understanding complex systems of human–alloprimate interface in the Anthropocene. In this essay, we outline what ethnoprimatology is, how it plays out in real-world contexts, and why it is a potentially powerful tool to move past historical rifts in anthropological practice and integrate perspectives in a successful and engaged manner. Finally, we address the practical and ethical considerations of human–alloprimate engagements in both conservation and scientific contexts.

Conserving social–ecological systems in Indonesia: human–nonhuman primate interconnections in Bali and Sulawesi

An important question asked by primatologists and conservationists alike is: what is the relevance of primates and primate conservation for ecosystem conservation? The goal of this article is to contribute to this dialogue by advocating the use of a research perspective that focuses on the dynamics of human–nonhuman primate sympatry and interaction (i.e., ethnoprimatology) in order to better understand complex social–ecological systems and to inform their conservation management. This perspective/approach is based largely on the recognition that human primates are important components of all ecological systems and that niche construction is a fundamental feature of their adaptive success. To demonstrate the relevance of the human–nonhuman primate interface for ecosystem conservation, we provide examples from our research from two islands in the Indonesian archipelago: Bali and Sulawesi. In Bali, humans and long‐tail macaques coexist in a system that creates favorable environments for the macaques. This anthropogenic landscape and the economic and ecological relationships between humans and monkeys on Bali provide insight into sustainable systems of human/nonhuman primate coexistence. In Lore Lindu National Park in Central Sulawesi, villagers and Tonkean macaques overlap in their use of both forest and cultivated resources. The finding that the Arenga pinnata palm is extremely important for both villagers and macaques points to a conservation management recommendation that may help protect the overall ecosystem; the cultivation and propagation of mutually important tree species at forest‐agricultural ecotone as a means to curb crop raiding and to alleviate farmers perceived need to clear additional forest. Am. J. Primatol. 73:62–74, 2011.

Ethnoprimatology: A Practical Guide to Research at the Human-Nonhuman Primate Interface

Drawing on expert knowledge from a fascinatingly diverse range of research backgrounds, the aim of this volume is to help primatologists (and ethnographers) “do” ethnoprimatology. Beginning with a brief history of ethnoprimatology’s rise in prominence since the late 20th century, the editors explain the hybrid nature of this field of study and its original aim of enriching conservation through a more complete involvement of humans as subjects of primate studies. Part I, “Characterizing the Interface,” is focused on biological and primatological techniques used in ethnoprimatology and comprises research ranging from the effects of habituation to tourists to human impact on parasite ecology. The methods in question range from instantaneous scan sampling and faecal analysis to camera trapping and behavioural observation; while these might, at first, seem to lend themselves much more to a traditional biological research approach, all the studies in the section take human activity into account, whether in terms of the effect of exotic plants introduced by humans on grey mouse lemurs or the more obvious question of the possible negative impact on non-human primates of habituation to tourists. The section is fascinating and really elucidates the multifaceted, hybrid nature of ethnoprimatology. The chapters, as in the rest of the book, are clearly laid out and easy to access as a learning tool, with each beginning with a brief overview of major questions asked, a theoretical basis of the issue at hand, the methods used to answer the questions and what other questions the methods could be used to address. In part II, “Following the Data: Incorporating Ethnography,” attention is turned to ethnographic tools, with an introductory chapter explaining the value and, importantly, the basic protocols and ethical considerations for conducting such research. This section of the book also covers theoretical components, such as multispecies ethnography, ethno-ecology and human-animal studies, in a way that makes these complex topics easy to grasp in the context of the research being discussed. The chapters cover some fascinating material on local perceptions of non-human primates and cover the important lesson of situating research findings in the broader historical and political context of the community in question. Many of the chapters begin to touch on the importance of this type of work for conservation application, thus leading neatly into the book’s final section. The final section, “Implications for Conservation,” is focused on the potential applications of ethnoprimatology for the conservation of non-human primates. In the section’s introduction, we are reminded that ecological systems and human interactions with them are dynamic and that an understanding of these interactions is crucial for effective conservation. The examples in the following chapters illustrate this very aptly. Chapters 20 and 21, for example, pick up on the heterogeneity of human communities, which is so often overlooked by researchers and is such an important factor in interactions with non-human primates. The 3 chapters in this section cover Published online: March 7, 2018

Local People’s Knowledge and Attitudes Matter for the Future Conservation of the Endangered Guizhou Snub-Nosed Monkey (Rhinopithecus brelichi) in Fanjingshan National Nature Reserve, China

Ethnoprimatology seeks to untangle the complex relationship between human and nonhuman primates, and in doing so, can provide a better understanding of how the local cultural context affects conservation initiatives. Fanjingshan National Nature Reserve in China is the last stronghold for the remaining global population of the Endangered Guizhou snub-nosed monkey (Rhinopithecus brelichi). In an effort to contribute to conservation management plans, we aimed to explore local people’s knowledge and attitudes toward the Guizhou snub-nosed monkey and conservation in the reserve using an ethnoprimatological approach. We conducted ethnographic interviews, involving structured, semistructured, and open-ended interview techniques, with 104 households in 11 villages located in and around the reserve. The results indicate that knowledge about the reserve and the monkey is unevenly distributed among respondents; men are significantly more knowledgeable about the reserve than women and women are significantly more knowledgeable about the monkey than men. Respondents are aware of the rules of the reserve but do not always agree with the rules or understand the rationale behind them. Nonetheless, respondents describe conservation as a trade-off and their attitudes toward the monkey and efforts to conserve it are generally positive and supportive. They expressed a feeling of connectedness with the Guizhou snub-nosed monkey because of its observable, humanlike behaviors; a mutual dependence on the forest; and a shared ancestry. Although our goal was to provide specific recommendations to park officials at our study site, our results also more broadly inform conservation management efforts for protected areas globally. For example, we recommend improving communication between reserve officials and local communities, appreciating the role local folklore can play in conservation, incorporating villagers’ perspectives into conservation planning, and implementing educational programs that target a wide demographic, with a particular emphasis on women.

Comparing the Use of Camera Traps and Farmer Reports to Study Crop Feeding Behavior of Moor Macaques ( Macaca maura )

Investigating crop feeding patterns by primates is an increasingly important objective for primatologists and conservation practitioners alike. Although camera trap technology is used to study primates and other wildlife in numerous ways, i.e., activity patterns, social structure, species richness, abundance, density, diet, and demography, it is comparatively underused in the study of human–primate interactions. We compare photographic (N = 210) and video (N = 141) data of crop feeding moor macaques (Macaca maura) from remote sensor cameras, functioning for 231 trap days, with ethnographic data generated from semistructured interviews with local farmers. Our results indicate that camera traps can provide data on the following aspects of crop feeding behavior: species, crop type and phase targeted, harvesting technique used, and daily and seasonal patterns of crop feeding activity. We found camera traps less useful, however, in providing information on the individual identification and age/sex class of crop feeders, exact group size, and amount of crops consumed by the moor macaques. While farmer reports match camera trap data regarding crop feeding species and how wildlife access the gardens, they differ when addressing crop feeding event frequency and timing. Understanding the mismatches between camera trap data and farmer reports is valuable to conservation efforts that aim to mitigate the conflict between crop feeding wildlife and human livelihoods. For example, such information can influence changes in the way certain methods are used to deter crop feeding animals from damaging crops. Ultimately, we recommend using remote-sensing camera technology in conjunction with other methods to study crop feeding behavior.

Beyond Neutrality: the Human–Primate Interface During the Habituation Process

Ethnoprimatology explores the ecological, social, and cultural interconnections between humans and other primates. Since the field’s emergence, researchers have examined overlapping human–primate resource use and conflict, human–primate disease transmission, primate folklore and its influence on conservation status, and primate tourism. One facet of the human–primate interface that remains underexplored from an ethnoprimatological perspective is habituation. Habituation—defined as when wild animals accept a human observer as a neutral element of their environment—has long been considered a critical first step for successful primate fieldwork. Although primatologists have explored how to accomplish habituation, little attention has been paid to habituation as a mutually modifying process that occurs between human observers and their primate study subjects. By drawing on the ethnoprimatological approach and engaging with perspectives from human–animal studies, this manuscript examines habituation as a scientific and intersubjective process. Over seven months, we documented behavioral changes in moor macaques (Macaca maura) and human participants that occur during habituation. We also conducted interviews with researchers and local field assistants to track perceptions of habituation progress. Integrating ethological measures with ethnographic material enabled us to explore how and why quantitative markers of habituation “success” differ from subjective impressions, observe habituation—and primate fieldwork in general—as a bidirectional, intersubjective experience, and come to understand habituation as a dynamic spectrum of tolerance rather than a state to be “achieved.” Collectively, these findings have important implications for future work in ethnoprimatology and habituation methodology, as well as the practice of primate fieldwork.

Monyet Yang Dihargai, Monyet Yang Dibenci: The Human-Macaque Interface in Indonesia

In this chapter we discuss the complex relationships between macaques and humans in Indonesia. The Indonesian archipelago is spread across a wide geographic range and located throughout are many distinct cultural communities. Without a homogenous cultural identity, Indonesia has become home to numerous unique worldviews. Included in many of these worldviews are folklore and mythology about the natural world and its relationship to human beings. Additionally, many cultures have their own set of perspectives specifically regarding macaques that influence their interactions with nearby macaque populations. With this in mind, we can best characterize the macaque-human interface in Indonesia by its variability rather than its uniformity. This chapter begins by addressing the high level of macaque species diversity in Indonesia and introducing the ecological contexts in which they are found. We then describe the relationship between macaques and humans in Indonesia as comprising a combination of interrelated ecological and cultural facets. Therefore, the overarching goal of this chapter is to discuss and contextualize the influence of these ecological and cultural facets in shaping the dynamic relationships that shift between tolerance and intolerance, reverence and disdain, and cooperation and conflict between humans and macaques throughout the archipelago. These potentially paradoxical relationships are further examined here through a research project addressing perceptions of macaque sacredness among Balinese Hindu communities outside of Bali. Specifically, we investigate whether the relocation of Balinese transmigrants to South Sulawesi has affected their perceptions of macaque sacredness and, if so, to what degree does that alter the two species’ interactions and coexistence. By focusing on a specific cultural worldview (i.e., Balinese Hinduism) across different locations we hope to examine the effect of changing ecological and cultural contexts on the overall relationship between macaques and local humans. We conclude by discussing the relevance of future research on the human-macaque interface in Indonesia and how accurate representations of culture’s dynamic capacity for change can be usefully applied to nonhuman primate conservation programs.

Male–Male Affiliation in Sulawesi Tonkean Macaques

Research during the early years of field primatology was primarily centered on the more conspicuous individuals (i.e., males) and behaviors (i.e., aggression), and in particular, males engaged in aggression (Bygott 1974; Hausfater 1975; Popp and DeVore 1979). Since that time, subsequent field research has increasingly revealed the importance of affiliation within primate social groups (Strum 1982, 2001; Smuts 1985; Strier 1994; Gould 1994; Silk 2002), leading some to argue for a renewed attention to the potential role it played in the evolution of primate sociality (Sussman et al. 2005). The primary focus of most of this work has been on the importance of affiliative and cooperative relationships between females and between males and females. Male-male relationships, however, remained largely viewed through the lenses of aggression and dominance (Hill and van Hooff 1994). This is because primate socioecological theory predicts that males and females compete for different resources (i.e., access to mates and food, respectively), and affiliative and cooperative behavior is expected to be high among females and low among males (Trivers 1972; Wrangham 1980). There is, however, increasing evidence that the nature of male-male relationships may be more diverse than previously thought (van Hooff and van Schaik 1994). For example, in 1994, an entire volume of the journal Behaviour was devoted to the topic of male-male bonding. Six years later, an edited volume titled Primate Males (Kappeler 2000) provided further evidence of the complexity of primate males, particularly with regard to male-male interactions and the role males play in shaping social organization. A number of these papers explore the key variables, both proximate and ultimate, that explain the occurrence of affiliation among males. Male philopatry and kinship have been identified as two of the most important variables (van Hooff and van Schaik 1994). The common chimpanzee represents a good example of male bonding in a male philopatric species; male chimps have been observed to form strong male-male alliances and engage in high levels of mutual grooming (Nishida and Hiraiwa-Hasegawa 1987). At the same time, although less common, male bonding has been observed in species in which males disperse, thereby suggesting that kinship need not be a prerequisite for male-male affiliation (Silk 1994; Hill and van Hooff 1994).

The Maturation of Ethnoprimatology: Theoretical and Methodological Pluralism

Most remaining populations of primates live in environments that have been influenced in some way by humans (e.g., protected forests bisected by major roads, forest–farm edges, and urban centers). The field of ethnoprimatology has made these environments where humans and other primates interface its primary concern, recognizing that to fully understand primate behavior, our research objectives and practice cannot be disengaged from the human dimension. During the field’s initial years, scholars drew largely from theory and technique in primate ecology and sociocultural anthropology. The contributions to this Special Issue, which include empirical research and review papers, exemplify how the ethnoprimatologist’s toolkit has since expanded to include concepts, frameworks, and methods from the natural sciences (evolutionary biology, conservation ecology, epidemiology), and the social sciences and humanities (anthropology, geography, philosophy, and science studies). Moreover, the settings in which to examine the human–primate interface have diversified to include rural, urban, mixed-landscape, and captive spaces. In this introduction, I review the emergence and scope of ethnoprimatology. I then challenge some of the critiques leveled against ethnoprimatology and highlight its broader conceptual contributions, key elements of the field’s maturation, and recent trends in theoretically and methodologically integrative scholarship in ethnoprimatology. I conclude by offering a set of postulates to guide future ethnoprimatological work that is theoretically and methodological pluralistic and positioned to advance effective primate conservation efforts and facilitate sustainable human–primate coexistence.