Traditional Biodiversity Management Database
for the Vanuatu Cultural Centre
Researcher: Jeff Wescott
Overview. During the summer of 2006 I
assisted the government of Vanuatu, via the Vanuatu Cultural
Centre, in constructing the National Biodiversity Database.
The immediate aim of the database is to contribute to a new
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)-funded project
to record the biodiversity knowledge of the communities of
three islands in Vanuatu. The long-term goal of the database
is to provide a repository for biodiversity data, which will
be made available to the Fisheries and Forestry Departments,
the national Environment Unit, and the Cultural Centre.
Between July 3 and August 22, 2006 I constructed the
database from existing data in text, audio and video from
the National Library. Additional data for the long-term goal
were obtained from short visits to villages on the islands
of Efate and Lelepa.
Objectives. The database is designed to
collate information about individual species, their
vernacular, Bislama, scientific, and English common names,
and their traditional uses, with data describing resource
management practices with respect to these species among the
island communities of Gaua, Santo, and Tanna. Biodiversity
assessments by Environment Unit representatives and other
researchers provided much of the material on extant species
and their scientific and common (and in some cases, Bislama
and vernacular) names. Information on traditional uses and
vernacular names came from texts which provided data on
trees, birds, and marine organisms. I also consulted various
other biological assessments located in the National
Library, the Forestry and Fisheries Department, and
linguistic texts and papers. Online databases from
Australian and American universities and departments of
agriculture were consulted to resolve nomenclature and
spelling discrepancies among resource literature.
The purpose of constructing the database principally with
information on various names and traditional uses of species
is twofold. Firstly, as revealed in a 2001 compilation of
extant resource management data (A. Naupa, Environmental
Unit Subconsultancy Report), such information is limited for
the communities of Gaua, Santo, and Tanna. This fact
underscores the need for an active fieldworker presence in
these communities. Secondly, by providing various names and
uses for identified species, I established a framework from
which fieldworkers may identify resource management
practices specific either to species or to a suite of
culturally relevant groups of species (i.e., plants and/or
animals grouped together locally according to use, location,
etc.). These identifications may be made with reference to
Bislama or vernacular names, or with the aid of field guides
(which invariably list scientific and common names). The
goal of the database is therefore to facilitate the
collection of field data and the easy transfer of field
notes to the database (see Questionnaire section below).
Ni-Vanuatu fieldworkers will conduct most of the subsequent
surveys, under the supervision of the Cultural Centre.
Observations. Onformation regarding
resource management practices in the target areas is
limited. The 2001 Environmental Unit Subconsultancy Report
provides detailed information of informal interviews
conducted by VKS and Environment Unit staff, as well as a
description of the contents of the VKS audio and video
archives. The report provides insight into the general state
of traditional resource management, and is an impetus for
extensive formal fieldworker surveys. The conclusion: little
has been recorded with respect to management practices for
specific species or culturally significant taxon groups.
Questionnaire. Upon completion of the
species nomenclature and traditional use sections of the
database, I developed a questionnaire that will serve as the
survey instrument for Cultural Centre fieldworkers to
collect data on the much-needed cultural component of
biodiversity management.
The questionnaire topics
are as follows:
Traditional Knowledge (Species Distribution,
Migration, Behavior, etc.). Knowledge that members of
the local community have of (what are in scientific
terms) the biological and ecological attributes of
species.
Level of Group Access to
Resource (Village, Clan, Family). The largest inclusive
group of people recognized as having rights of access to
a given resource.
Gender Restriction?
Including whether a gender restriction is temporary or
permanent. Also, the extent of the restriction across a
resource (i.e., which species are prohibited to
whom).
Seasonal Restriction? Including
whether the restriction is annual (e.g., every spring),
or motivated by an event (e.g., death).
Restriction Indicators. Public displays of
proscription, such as tabu markers, or official
announcements from traditional authorities. Also, uses
of alternate species.
Positive
Management Actions. How specific actions of resource
users indicate their awareness of the threat of resource
overharvesting or depletion, and their commitment to the
management goals of the community.
Enforcements and Penalties.
Education. Past and present attempts by external
agencies (e.g., Environment Unit, Fisheries Department)
to bring awareness of resource threats to the community.
Also, how these threats are communicated to children
through schools and/or family members.
Current Effectiveness. Degree of compliance with
current management measures. Coded in a 5-point Likert
Scale (1 = completely ineffective, 2 = largely
ineffective, 5 = highly effective, etc.).
Fieldworkers will enter data directly from the survey
instrument to the database, matching resource management
data to each corresponding species. There will be many cases
in which management data must be matched to several species.
This will allow groups of species to be linked, and
displayed on the database, when a specific management
practice is entered into the Search Field. The database will
also provide links to relevant audio, video and
photography.
I will participate further in the development of the biodiversity database during my anthropological doctoral research in north Gaua in 2007-2008.
Vanuatu
has officially submitted its first nomination of a site
for World Heritage listing: the "Chief Roi Mata's
Domain" cultural landscape.
Artok Island (pictured left) burial place of Chief Roi Mata
Vanuatu Cultural Center
Nagu Pele Marine Protected Area
Vanuatu traditional marine practices project
Vanuatu women's traditional marine practices project
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0333444.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
|
