Perception and use of non-native and invasive flora from Sierras de Córdoba in central Argentina
ABSTRACT The perception, knowledge and use of non-native and invasive flora by social actors associated with protected areas in central Argentina were analyzed. Contemporary ethnoecology methods were followed. A total of 108 non-native species of botanical interest was documented. An organization of species is proposed according to their Relative Importance, and on an attitude scale in relation to conservation/elimination interest. In the case of invasive species, perceptions on ecology, importance and/or control are discussed based on the profiles of the social actors. The results shed light upon local points of view and nuances of what “non-native” and “invasive” means to the studied rural population. The use spectrum for some of the non-native species has shed light on adaptation to the cultural use of species based on resource availability, not necessarily associated with preference. Additionally, it should be noted that local actors perceive non-native and invasive species differently, which should be considered in the development of management and conservation guidelines.
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Digital revista |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sociedade Botânica do Brasil
2019
|
| Online Access: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-33062019000200241 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | ABSTRACT The perception, knowledge and use of non-native and invasive flora by social actors associated with protected areas in central Argentina were analyzed. Contemporary ethnoecology methods were followed. A total of 108 non-native species of botanical interest was documented. An organization of species is proposed according to their Relative Importance, and on an attitude scale in relation to conservation/elimination interest. In the case of invasive species, perceptions on ecology, importance and/or control are discussed based on the profiles of the social actors. The results shed light upon local points of view and nuances of what “non-native” and “invasive” means to the studied rural population. The use spectrum for some of the non-native species has shed light on adaptation to the cultural use of species based on resource availability, not necessarily associated with preference. Additionally, it should be noted that local actors perceive non-native and invasive species differently, which should be considered in the development of management and conservation guidelines. |
|---|