Rebecca Zarger

Persistence of botanical knowledge among Tzeltal Maya children

a d o v a s i o , j . m . , o . s o f f e r , d . c . h y l a n d , j . s . i l l i n g w o r t h , b . k l ı́ m a , a n d j . s v o b o d a . 2001. Perishable industries from Dolnı́ Věstonice I: New insights into the nature and origin of the Gravettian. Archaeology, Ethnology, and Anthropology of Eurasia 2(6):48–65. a d o v a s i o , j . m . , o . s o f f e r , d . c . h y l a n d , b . k l ı́ m a , a n d j . s v o b o d a . 1998. Perishable technologies and the genesis of the Eastern Gravettian. Anthropologie 36(1–2):43–68. ———. 1999. Textil, kosakarstvi a site v mladém paleolitu moravy. Archeologické Rozhledy 51:58–94. b a h n , p . 1985. “Utilisation des ressources végétales dans le Paléolithique et le Mésolithique des Pyrénées Française,” in Homenage al Dr. Joseph Ma. Corominas, pp. 203–12. Quaderna del Centre d’Estudia Comarcals de Banyoles 1. ———. 2001. Palaeolithic weaving: A contribution from Chauvet. Antiquity 75:271–72. c h e y n i e r , a . 1967. Comment vivait l’homme des caverns à l’âge du renne. Paris: Editions Robert Arnaux. h e i t e , l . 1998. Spear straightener or spinning tool? Mammoth Trumpet 134(3):18–19. k e h o e , a . b . 1991. “The weaver’s wrath,” in The archaeology of gender: Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Conference of the Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary. Edited by D. Walde and N. D. Willow, pp. 430–35. Calgary: University of Calgary Archaeological Association. ———. 1999. “Warping prehistory: Direct data and ethnographic analogies for fiber manufactures,” in Ethno-analogy and the reconstruction of prehistoric artefact use and production. Edited by L. R. Owen and M. Porr, pp. 31–41. Urgeschichtliche Materialhefte 14. Tubingen: Mo Vince Verlag. l a c o r r e , f . 1960. La Gravette. Lavalloise: Imprimerie Berneoud. s o f f e r , o . 2000. “Gravettian technologies in social contexts,” in Hunters of the Golden Age. Edited by W. Roebroeks, M. Mussi, and J. Svoboda, pp. 59–75. Leiden: University of Leiden Press. s o f f e r , o . , j . m . a d o v a s i o , a n d d . h y l a n d . 2000. The “Venus” figurines: Textiles, basketry, gender, and status in the Upper Paleolithic. current anthropology 41:511–37. ———. 2002. “Perishable technologies and invisible people: Nets, baskets, and ’Venus’ wear ca. 26,000 b.p.,” in Enduring records: The environmental and cultural heritage of wetlands. Edited by B. A. Purdy, pp. 233–45. Oxford: Oxbow Books. s o f f e r , o . , j . m . a d o v a s i o , j . s . i l l i n g w o r t h , h . a . a m i r k h a n o v, n . d . p r a s l o v, a n d m . s t r e e t . 2000. Palaeolithic perishables made permanent. Antiquity 74: 812–21. s o f f e r , o . , a n d p . v a n d i v e r . 1994. “The ceramics,” in Pavlov I, excavations 1953–1954. Edited by J. Svoboda, pp. 161–74. Liège: University of Liège. ———. 1997. “The ceramics from Pavlov I, 1957 excavation,” in Pavlov I—Northwest: The Upper Paleolithic burial and its settlement context. Edited by J. Svoboda, pp. 383–402. Brno: Institute of Archaeology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. v a n d i v e r , p . b . , o . s o f f e r , b . k l ı́ m a , a n d j . s v o b o d a . 1989. The origins of ceramic technology at Dolnı́ Věstonice, Czechoslovakia. Science 246:1002–8. z a v e r n i a e v, f . m . 1987. Tekhnika obrabotki kosti iz Khotylevskoj verkhnepaleoliticheskoj stoianki. Sovetskaia Arkheologiia, no. 3, pp. 111–30. Persistence of Botanical Knowledge among Tzeltal Maya Children

Introduction: conceptual, methodological, practical, and ethical challenges in studying and applying indigenous knowledge

For over a half a century, indigenous knowledge systems have captured the attention of anthropologists (Hunn 2007). Recently, interest has intensified both inside and outside the discipline among scholars and practitioners in a wide variety of contexts ranging from international development, resource management, sustainability and resilience, disaster response, climate change, ethnobotany, ethnomedicine, and ethnoveterinary studies (ReyesGarcia et al. 2009, UNESCO 2009, Maffi and Woodley 2010). Simultaneously, sophisticated conceptual and methodological approaches have been developed, such as cultural consensus analysis and participatory mapping. Many of these recent advances tend to rely on theories of knowledge that focus attention on mental models and discrete, encapsulated, and abstracted aspects of knowledge that can be documented using formal interview methods (e.g., freelists, triads, pile sorts, surveys) (Zent 2009). However, a growing number of anthropologists have found that these approaches and techniques constrain descriptions and obscure the hybrid and heterogeneous nature of indigenous or local knowledge and modes of understanding (see Spoon 2014, Carothers et al. 2014). For example, as Lauer and Aswani (2009) note, “More research is needed to develop approaches and methods that can empirically record aspects of knowledge and understanding that are commonly ignored in indigenous knowledge studies,” in order to, “more fully explore, comprehend, and appreciate indigenous people‛s lives and perspectives in a rapidly changing world (Lauer and Aswani 2009: 327).“ In keeping with this call, many recent approaches to the study of knowledge converge on the recognition that knowledge is embedded in multiple systems of practice, beliefs, values, and power across all scales. As such, new concepts and methods are needed for studying and representing contemporary indigenous knowledge that traverses many different systems of understanding.

Toward political ecologies of environmental education

ABSTRACT Drawing a causal line between educational practice and ecological impact is a difficult intellectual task given the complexity of variables at work between educational event and ecological effect. This is further complicated by the anthropological fact that diverse peoples interact with nature in myriad ways. Our environmental interactions are socially organized and the result of political processes. Dominant approaches in educational research literature pay scant attention to the political-ecological aspects of producing knowledge about the environment, although recent work has begun to challenge such apolitical and acultural research paradigms. We therefore comment on the special issue articles and situate them within larger conversations currently shaping environmental anthropology and human geography. We conclude with considerations for future work toward developing political ecologies of environmental education and its research.

“It’s Good to Learn about the Plants”: promoting social justice and community health through the development of a Maya environmental and cultural heritage curriculum in southern Belize

Indigenous communities have the need to respond rapidly as development processes continue to change global environments. This paper argues that the health of communities, broadly defined, is linked to traditional ecological practices and that this linkage should be considered toward the goal of promoting social justice through education. Using data gathered using multiple methods in and around Mopan and Q’eqchi’ Maya villages in southern Belize, the paper outlines how ecological practices related to land use are valued and valuable in several, interlinked ways: through their contribution to what makes a “healthy life,” through their part in defining what it means to be “Maya” and have Maya heritage, and through their distinct role in the learning of skills as part of the informal education process. Informed by this research and the data collected through the implementation of the lessons themselves, this paper identifies how formalizing these ecological practices as part of an environmental and cultural heritage curriculum for primary schools, while not without challenges, has potential to positively impact well-being in indigenous communities, thereby promoting social justice through the maintenance of the ability to live healthy, valued lives.

Ecomyopia in the Anthropocene

The authors apply longue duree and semiotic approaches to a case study of flood management in the American Midwest to critique the suggestion that naming the current geological epoch the ‘Anthropocene’ might encourage global environmental sustainability. It is unlikely that the Anthropocene moniker has the symbolic power to correct ecomyopia, which the authors define as the tendency to not recognize, to ignore, or fail to act on new information that contradicts political arrangements, social norms, or world views. Anthropogenic transformation of the Mississippi River watershed shifted world views toward the human domination of nature and afforded opportunities for social stratification and the consolidation of capital and control over resources, which has biased social responses to increasing flooding. Globally, biological systems have been replaced with technological systems of increasing complexity creating canalized trajectories of practice and thought in which societies become insulated from ecological realities. The global capitalist response to the Anthropocene will likely be to embrace technological hubris.