Journal of Applied Ecology 2009, 46, 1275–1282
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01713.x
Conservation implications of rainforest use patterns:
mature forests provide more resources but secondary
forests supply more medicine
Michael C. Gavin*
School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington,
New Zealand
Summary
1. Tropical rainforests are a global conservation priority. Robust arguments supporting rainforest
conservation can attract funding and shape land-use management. However, some popular
assertions regarding the value of tropical forests remain largely untested.
2. This study tests the validity of two arguments in support of mature tropical rainforest conservation: first, that these forests should be conserved based on their value as potential sources of
medicine. This argument requires mature forests to be better sources of medicine than alternative
land-use types, including secondary forests. Second, secondary forest use may help conserve mature
forests by providing sufficient resources to buffer against resource extraction in mature forests.
3. The research was conducted in three communities in the Cordillera Azul, Peru, where 369
individuals from 66 households were surveyed. Participants recorded all flora and fauna collected in
mature (>20 years) and secondary forests over 180 days in six use categories (food, medicine,
wood, weavings, adornments and ‘other’). Ecological knowledge of secondary and mature forest
species was assessed for male and female household heads.
4. Households used 346 folk species (as defined by local classification systems) from 3668 collection
events. Individuals had better knowledge of secondary forest species, but more access to mature forests. Participants collected significantly more medicines from secondary than from mature forests.
In other major use categories (food, wood, weaving, adornment), secondary forests provided fewer
resources than mature forests. Participants collected a different set of species from secondary and
mature forests, with only 130 folk species (38%) collected in both secondary and mature forests.
5. Synthesis and applications. The arguments to protect mature rainforests as sources of new drugs
may be overstated, because secondary forests can provide more medicinal plant resources than
mature forests, and landscapes that incorporate forests of different ages can maximize availability
of medicinal plant species. Conservation efforts must take a landscape level approach given the
spread of resource use across different forest types. Because of the heterogeneity of resource availability and use among community members, and the dynamic nature of resource use on forest frontiers, conservation should embrace participatory adaptive management approaches that
incorporate a variety of resource users.
Key-words: Amazon, conservation planning, ethnobiology, forest option value, medicine,
natural resource use, pharmaceutical bioprospecting, secondary forests, tropical rainforests
Introduction
Tropical rainforests are a global conservation priority. Numerous arguments have been formulated in support of conserva-
*Correspondence author. E-mail: [email protected]
tion of these forests. Here, the validity of two such arguments
are tested: one based on the potential value of mature rainforests as sources of pharmaceuticals, and the other focused on
use of secondary forests as a buffer against extraction in older
forests. The idea that we must protect mature tropical rainforests as possible sources of ‘new’ medicines gained popularity in
the 1980s and 1990s buoyed by academic research and the
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society
1276 M. C. Gavin
popular press, and supported by the Convention on Biological
Diversity (Hamilton 2004; Voeks 2004; Burtis 2007). Tropical
rainforests contain at least two-thirds of the planet’s terrestrial
biodiversity, and more plant species than any other biome
(Mittermeier et al. 1999; Kier et al. 2005; Gardner et al. 2009).
Therefore, these ecosystems have been portrayed as ideal hunting grounds for new drugs. Mendelsohn & Balick (1995) note
that 47 pharmaceuticals have been developed from rainforest
plant extracts, and they estimate that an additional 328 remain
to be discovered. The total revenue from these discoveries
could total $3Æ2–$4Æ7 billion, and would increase to $147 billion
if social benefits of the medicines are calculated (Mendelsohn
& Balick 1995). Other estimates of the option value of rainforests for drug discovery range up to $1Æ8 trillion (Principe 1991;
Gentry 1993; Pearce & Puroshothaman 1995). However, the
expected windfall from bioprospecting has been tempered by a
recent shift in the pharmaceutical industry towards laboratory-based drug discovery (Macilwain 1998; Firn 2003). In
addition, in most cases, the few profits bioprospecting has
brought have not benefited conservation (Laird & ten Kate
2002; Hamilton 2004; Burtis 2007). Despite these setbacks, several researchers are still optimistic that scientific advances can
improve the efficiency of bioprospecting, and that improved
regulations can ensure benefits are equitably shared with conservation receiving more funding (e.g. Rausser & Small 2000;
Laird & ten Kate 2002; Kursar et al. 2006, 2007; Ragavan
2008). Arguments in support of bioprospecting can point to
the fact that over one-third of new medicines have been derived
from natural sources since the early 1980s (Newman, Cragg &
Snader 2003; Koehn & Carter 2005). However, an important
ecological caveat is fundamental to the option value argument:
for mature tropical forests to be conserved based on potential
medicinal value, they should be better sources of medicine than
alternative land-use types, including secondary forests.
Secondary forests are also the focus of another conservation
strategy. Tropical mature forests are a critical source of natural
resources for millions of people across the globe (Sunderlin
et al. 2005). This widespread use of forest products has had
enormous impacts on mature rainforest ecosystems, including
habitat loss and extirpation of targeted species (Redford 1992;
FAO 2007). If sufficient forest products can be found on other
land-use types, some of the pressure on mature forests may be
relieved. This is an increasingly relevant strategy as tropical
landscapes become mosaics of different uses. Mature rainforests are progressively more fragmented due to the spread of
pasture lands, agriculture, and logging (FAO 2007). Historically, these disturbed lands have been written off in terms
of their value for biodiversity conservation (Vandermeer &
Perfecto 2007; Chazdon et al. 2009). However, these landscapes are not mere wastelands, but often comprise complex
patchworks, including tracts of secondary forests at various
stages of ecological succession that can hold impressive
amounts of biodiversity and provide critical ecological services
and products (Tschakert, Coomes & Potvin 2007; Harvey
et al. 2008; Gardner et al. 2009). These secondary forests
derive both from the dynamics of swidden-fallow agriculture,
in which crop plots are rotated to allow nutrient recovery, and
from land abandoned as market forces change livelihoods (e.g.
shifts away from extensive pasture use) or lead to immigration
to urban centres (Rudel, Bates & Machinguiashi 2002). Due to
this combination of forest clearance and fallowing or abandonment, tropical secondary forests are some of the fastest
expanding resources on the planet. If secondary forests can
provide sufficient natural resources, extraction from mature
forests may diminish (Brown & Lugo 1990; Chazdon & Coe
1999; Robinson & Bennett 2004; FAO 2005). As Robinson &
Bennett (2004) note, the use of secondary forests may allow us
the opportunity to ‘have our wildlife (and plants) and eat it
too’. This conservation strategy requires secondary forests to
provide sufficient resources to serve as alternatives to mature
forest extraction.
In this study, both the medicinal option value argument and
the secondary forest extraction alternative are tested by examining the use of plants and animals by local communities in the
Cordillera Azul region of the Peruvian Amazon.
Materials and methods
In the search for new natural sources of pharmaceuticals, ethnobotanical survey methods have been widely advocated (King 1992;
Prance, Chadwick & Marsh 1994; Bedoya et al. 2001). The methods
involve recording indigenous pharmacopoeia as an initial step in narrowing the list of potential sources of new medicines. Researchers
have promoted different versions of the survey techniques based on
the large percentage of indigenous medicines found to have pharmacological activity (e.g. Cox et al. 1989; Douwes et al. 2008). This
study employed an ethnobotanical survey technique, in which local
use of flora and fauna was recorded to test the validity of both conservation arguments: medicinal option value and secondary forest use.
Data were collected using participatory methods with 369 individuals from 66 randomly selected households in three communities in the
buffer zone of the Cordillera Azul National Park (615¢–900¢S and
75 20¢–7640¢W). The communities were active research participants,
for which I adapted a code of ethics from the International Society of
Ethnobiology (ISE 2006). Prior to research beginning, informed verbal consent was obtained from participants. A summary of results
was reported to communities in aggregate to protect identities of
resource users.
Three communities were sampled that were typical of the region in
terms of population size (approximately 300–600) and location within
tropical moist forest between 200 and 500 m. All three communities
are semi-subsistence relying on slash-and-burn agriculture, hunting,
and gathering of river and forest products for food and basic needs.
According to local informants, Quechua Lamista indigenous people
have occupied the region for at least 500 years. The region experienced an economic boom in the 1980s based on coca (Erythroxylum
coca) production, which subsided with eradication efforts in the
1990s. More recently, immigration rates have risen with families
arriving from the Peruvian coast and Andean region to establish
farms on open-access lands.
The Cordillera Azul is part of the tropical Andes biodiversity hotspot, a region Myers et al. (2000) described as the ‘epicentre of global
biodiversity’. The Cordillera Azul National Park was gazetted as
Peru’s ninth national park in 2001. The region’s biodiversity remains
poorly studied, but initial surveys estimated the park contains 6000
plant species and 800 bird species (Alverson, Rodriquez & Muskovits
2001).
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
Conservation implications of rainforest use 1277
Approximately one-third of all households in each community
(17–28 households, 99–144 individuals per community) were randomly selected. All selected houses stood within 2-h walk of the community centre, and household members were permanent community
residents willing to participate in the study (10 households declined to
participate). Livelihoods of participating households focused on
slash-and-burn agriculture and hunting and gathering. Households
represented indigenous Quechua Lamista families and non-indigenous immigrants.
I differentiated between secondary and mature forests using time
since abandonment of agricultural fields. A combination of floristics, forest structure, and ecosystem function (Guariguata & Ostertag 2001) may provide more accurate assessment of forest stages;
however such a typology would be difficult to employ in a cross-cultural setting. The residence times and ecological knowledge of participating households varied enormously. In turn, the ability of
informants to differentiate forest types was highly variable. All
informants were able to distinguish between secondary forest
(1–20 years old, locally referred to as ‘purma’) and mature forest
(>20 years old, locally known as ‘monte alto’). The secondary
forests in the region exist on old agricultural plots left in fallow.
Farmers continue to manage these parcels of land by encouraging
growth of desirable species via weeding. Mature forests include
lands that began recovery from human disturbance a generation or
more ago, as well as forests that have not been disturbed by humans
for hundreds of years, if ever.
Participants recorded all flora and fauna collected over 180 days.
Prior to the survey, informants determined six use categories within
which all collection events would be recorded. Participating households from one community assisted in defining use categories; and I
then piloted the categories in the other two communities to ensure
final use categories were culturally appropriate for all three communities. To construct use categories, informants first created free lists (cf.
Fleisher & Harrington 1998; Bernard 2002) of forest product use categories (e.g. medicine, food, etc.). Subsequently, informants carried
out pile sorts (cf. Roos 1998; Bernard 2002) from free list data. The
pile sorting results were used to define final use categories via hierarchical clustering. The number of final use categories was limited to six
to reduce informant fatigue. Final use categories were food, medicine,
wood (both commercial and domestic wood products), weavings
(baskets, mats, roofing, etc.), adornments (e.g. leather, jewellery,
musical instruments), and ‘other’.
For each collection event, households noted the forest type where
collection occurred, whether collection was on their land, on a neighbour’s land, or on open-access land, the name of the species collected,
and the use for the material collected. Because each collection event
could not be observed, local classification systems were used to identify forest products (i.e. folk names). Voucher specimens of all plant
folk species noted by participating households were collected and
identified at the herbarium of the Universidad Nacional Agraria La
Molina in Lima. However, I could not identify all specimens to
species level, and the folk species used to report all results here do not
always coincide with scientific species (e.g. ‘cedro’ refers to both Cedrela odorata and Cedrela fisilis). Scientific names of animals were
determined through knowledge of local informants in conjunction
with illustrated field guidebooks. In semi-structured interviews participants were asked to list their land holdings and ages of all forest types
they owned. Forest ages were cross-referenced against major events
in participants’ lives (births, deaths, etc.). When informants indicated
a forest product as collected from a neighbour’s land, I also estimated
the neighbour’s holdings. Open-access lands were defined as areas not
claimed by any community member.
Male and female heads of household (n = 132) were surveyed to
test ecological knowledge regarding species found in secondary vs.
mature forests. Questions were divided between secondary and
mature species, with half the questions asking about animals and half
about plants. Two-thirds of the questions focused on plant and animal identification, and one-third asked about basic biology (e.g. does
species ‘x’ have white fruit?). The five most well-known hunters
and ⁄ or healers in each community provided lists of species commonly
seen in secondary and mature forest The average position of a species
on the lists of all informants was used to define its rank order, and the
five species of plants and five species of animals with the highest rank
order in each forest type were used to develop questions. I presented
informants with specimens for all plant identification questions, and
field guides were used for animal identification questions (Hilty &
Brown 1986; Emmons & Feer 1997). Following Godoy et al. (1998),
all questions were formatted to require yes ⁄ no answers to avoid partially correct responses. Ecological knowledge questionnaires were
administered, with help from field assistants, separately and simultaneously to male and female heads of each household. The survey was
completed within a 2-day period to minimize sharing of answers
among households. The date and time of each survey was recorded,
and analysis showed no significant correlation between time of survey
administration and survey results.
Because the distributions of number of folk species used, number
of collection events, and ecological knowledge test scores differed
from normal, non-parametric tests were used in the analysis. Wilcoxon signed ranks tests were used when conducting pair-wise comparisons of households’ use and knowledge of secondary vs. mature
forests. Mann–Whitney U-tests were employed to compare ecological
knowledge of men vs. women and locals vs. immigrants.
Results
Ecological knowledge varied significantly based on origins of
heads of household, sex and domain of knowledge (animals vs.
plants). In both forest types, indigenous heads of households
(n = 105) had higher levels of ecological knowledge than
immigrants (n = 27, P < 0Æ001). Men (n = 66) scored better
on ecological knowledge in both forest types than women
(n = 66; P < 0Æ001). In both forest types, heads of household
also had better knowledge of animals than of plants (n = 132;
P < 0Æ001). However, in general, regardless of origins, sex or
domain of knowledge, heads of household (n = 132) had better knowledge of secondary forest species (Median = 75%
questions correct) than mature forest species (Median =
50%; P < 0Æ001; see Fig. 1).
Participants recorded a total of 3668 collection events, in
which they used 346 different folk species. The 66 households
surveyed extracted 130 folk species from both mature and secondary forests, 105 folk species only from mature forests, and
111 from only secondary forests. Participants used more folk
species from mature forests for wood, weavings, adornments,
and ‘other’ uses; but for food, mature forests (108 folk species)
and secondary forests (109 folk species) were the sources of
approximately the same number of species (Fig. 2a). Medicine
was the only use category in which households extracted notably more species from secondary forests (83 folk species, 58 of
which were unique to secondary forests) than from mature
forests (52 folk species, 27 of which were unique to mature
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
1278 M. C. Gavin
1·0
Secondary forest knowledge
Mature forest knowledge
Ecological knowledge
(% correct answers)
0·8
0·6
Collected in mature forest only
Collected in mature and secondary
Collected in secondary forest only
(a) 60
No. of folk spp. used
(a)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0·4
Food
Meds
Wood
Weave
Adorn.
Other
(b) 1000
0·2
Amazonia
Ecological knowledge
(% correct answers)
(b)
Other (Coast, Andes)
Origins of respondents
1·0
Total collection events
Mature forest
800
Secondary forest
600
400
200
0·8
0
Food
Meds
Wood
Weave
Adorn. Other
0·6
Fig. 2. Number of folk species (a) and number of collection events (b)
from secondary and mature forests collected for different uses by 66
households in Cordillera Azul, Peru.
0·4
*
0·2
Men
Women
Fig. 1. Box plots of mature and secondary forest ecological knowledge of (a) local vs. immigrant and (b) male vs. female heads of household (n = 132) in the Cordillera Azul, Peru.
forests). In total, more collection events occurred in mature
forests (2036) than in secondary forests (1632), and mature forests saw more collection events for every use category except
medicine and ‘other’ (Fig. 2b).
The summaries of species used and collection events for all
66 households mask the great variability in use within the sample (see Fig. 3). For example, the number of folk species collected by individual households ranged from 0 to 63 in mature
forests and 1 to 46 in secondary forests. Collection events ranged from 0 to 92 in mature forests and 1 to 101 in secondary
forests. Households collected more resources in mature forests
(Median = 29 collection events) than in secondary forests
(Median = 21) (P < 0Æ05). Importantly, results varied for
different use categories (Fig. 3a): For food (P < 0Æ05), wood
(P = 0Æ001), and adornments (P < 0Æ001) more collection
events occurred in mature forests. I found no significant difference in collection events between forest types for weaving
materials or ‘other’ uses. However, for medicine more collection events occurred in secondary (Median = 5) than in
mature forests (Median = 3, P < 0Æ001). Even when I con-
trolled for origins of household heads (i.e. indigenous vs. immigrant, data not shown), medicine is the only use category with
more collection events in secondary forests.
Regardless of family origins, medicine is also the only use
category with significantly more species extracted from secondary forests (Fig. 3b). Households used more folk species from
mature forests for food (P < 0Æ05), wood (P < 0Æ001), and
adornments (P < 0Æ001). I found no difference in the number
of folk species used from different forest types for weaving or
‘other’ uses. However, for medicines, participating households
extracted significantly more folk species from secondary forests (Median = 4) than from mature forests (Median = 2,
P < 0Æ001).
The types of folk species extracted from secondary and
mature forests also varied (Table 1). Participating households
collected nearly one-third (111) of folk species used from just
one forest type. Of the fifty most collected plants and animals
in each forest type, only 17 were collected in both secondary
and mature forests. Twenty animal folk species were in the top
50 most collected folk species in mature forests, but only 10
animal folk species made the top 50 list in secondary forests.
Animal collection events accounted for 47% of all mature forest collection, but only 22% of secondary forest collection.
Whereas palms (Arecaceae) were the most widely collected
family of plants in both forest types, the top five most collected
plant folk species were different between the two forest types.
For animal species, two species (Dasyprocta fuliginosa and
Agouti paca) were in the top five most collected in both forest
types.
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
Conservation implications of rainforest use 1279
More mature forest collection
Safe Log (difference in no. collect. events)
(a)
10
1
–0·1
–1
–10
More secondary forest collection
–100
Food
Meds.
Wood
Weave
Adorn.
Other
(b)
Safe Log (difference in no. spp. used)
More mature forest collection
10
1
–0·1
–1
number of collection events a household made in secondary vs.
mature forests (adjusted R2 £ 0Æ2 for all use categories).
In addition, the folk forest classification (i.e. mature forests
defined as over 20 years old) has a potentially large influence
over the results. Ecologically-based classifications of forest
types may identify forests as secondary well beyond 20 years
following disturbance, based on species compositions and forest structure. Such a shift in the timeframe used to define secondary forests could alter some of my conclusions (i.e. even
more species and collection events may be in secondary forests). Because ecological surveys or detailed land-use histories
were not available for each plot of land where resource use
occurred, I cannot be certain that all forests over 20 years old
were undisturbed in the past. However, the nature of local land
tenure arrangements mean that most forests over 20 years old
in the communities sampled have probably been undisturbed
by humans for a considerable time period, and would thus be
called mature even under ecological classification systems.
Because of the quantity of open-access land in the region, in
most cases, families claimed new parcels of land that had been
undisturbed prior to their working on them. In turn, only in
cases where families had worked on a parcel for more than
20 years (n = 4, 6% of cases) would the possibility exist that
mature forest had been disturbed by humans in the recent past.
The results presented here did not differ when these four households were removed from the analysis.
–10
Discussion
More secondary forest collection
Food
Meds.
Wood
Weave
Adorn.
Other
Fig. 3. Box plots indicating the difference in number of collection
events (a) and number of species collected (b) between secondary and
mature forests across different use categories for 66 different households in the Cordillera Azul, Peru. (Note: negative values indicate
more species used or more collection events in secondary forests, and
positive values indicate more in mature forests. Safe log allows for use
of 0 and negative values. Safe log = sign(x) · log(1 + abs(x)).
Comparisons between secondary and mature forest collection may be influenced by the relative availability of the forest
types. The households surveyed had much more mature forest
available to them. Mature forest covered virtually all openaccess lands outside of the agricultural zones of the communities surveyed. In addition, participants owned far more mature
forest (Median = 26 ha, 73% of total holding) than secondary forest (Median = 3Æ88 ha, 16% of total holding,
P < 0Æ001). However, the proportion of secondary forest on
private holdings varied widely (0–84%). Despite this large
range in availability, neither the amount of secondary forest
owned nor the proportion of land in secondary forests was a
good predictor of the relative number of folk species a household used from secondary vs. mature forests (across all use categories linear regressions had adjusted R2 £ 0Æ2). Similarly,
neither the amount of secondary forest owned nor the proportion of land in secondary forests was able to predict the relative
Although popular conservation arguments hold that mature
forests should be conserved for their high potential medicinal
value and that mature forests might be conserved by encouraging local use of secondary forests, the results presented here
imply the opposite conclusions. Previous studies point to the
potential value of disturbed habitats (including secondary forests) as sources of medicinal plants (e.g. Toledo et al. 1992;
Frei, Sticher & Heinrich 2000; Stepp & Moerman 2001). For
example, seven healers interviewed by Voeks (1996) in Brazil
identified more potentially useful medicinal plants in secondary forests than in primary forests. Similarly, Posey (1984)
found Kayapo informants believed 94% of species encountered in secondary forests were potentially useful for medicine,
whereas almost no species in primary forest had potential for
medicine. In this study, the actual use of plants and animals in
the Cordillera Azul was recorded, and it was found that informants collected more medicinal plant folk species and undertook more medicinal plant collection events in secondary
forests. Based on these results, secondary forests may have
greater option value for medicinal prospecting than mature
forests. However, because the ethnobotanical survey method
used here focused only on locally useful species, some mature
forest species (e.g. canopy epiphytes in mature forests), and the
secondary compounds they hold, are certainly underrepresented.
Two factors hypothesized as contributing to the importance
of disturbed habitats for medicinal plant collection are accessibility and familiarity. Recent studies noted that species which
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
1280 M. C. Gavin
Table 1. Most frequently collected species and families in mature and secondary forests in the Cordillera Azul, Peru (n = 369 resource users)
Secondary forest
Collection
events
Mature forest
Collection
events
Ten most collected plant families
Arecaceae
Ulmaceae
Bombacaceae
Fabaceae
Cyclanthaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Sterculiaceae
Rubiaceae
Rutaceae
Verbenaceae
111
94
80
75
73
69
64
51
48
48
Arecaceae
Meliaceae
Fabaceae
Araceae
Moraceae
Rubiaceae
Bignoniaceae
Bombacaceae
Celastraceae
Euphorbiaceae
214
126
82
82
70
57
50
40
40
38
Five most collected plant folk species
Atadijo Trema micrantha (L.) Blum.
Bombonaje Carludovica palmata Ruı́z & Pav.
Shapaja Attalea butyracea (Mart. Ex L. f.) Weis
Topa Ochroma pyramidale (Cav. ex Lam.) Urb.
Sangre de grado Croton lechleri Muell. Arg.
94
73
62
51
42
Shapaja Attalea butyracea (Mart. Ex L. f.) Weis
Tamshi Heteropsis sp.
Caoba Swietenia macrophylla
Piesaba Geonoma sp.
Chuchuhuasi Maytenus sp.
90
81
70
48
40
Five most collected animal folk species
Añuje Dasyprocta fuliginosa
Conejo Sylvilagus brasiliensis
Majas Agouti paca
Zorro Didelphis marsupialis
Carachupa Bombero Dasypus kappleri
63
35
25
25
18
Añuje Dasyprocta fuliginosa
Venado Colorado Mazama americana
Majas Agouti paca
Sajino Tayassu tajacu
Pucacunga Penelope spp.
116
102
84
78
49
are relatively more abundant or available (e.g. due to seasonal
constraints), may be used more frequently (Albuquerque 2006;
Lucena, Lima Araujo & Albuquerque 2007). Secondary forests are often more accessible to local people given the predominance of these forests in human-dominated landscapes (Voeks
1996, 2004; Stepp & Moerman 2001). However, accessibility
does not appear to be a crucial factor in determining sources of
medicinal plants in communities surveyed in this study in the
Cordillera Azul because households had access to more mature
forests. Likewise, the proportion of land held in secondary forest was not a good predictor of the relative use of secondary
forests. Alternatively, local people may be more familiar with
secondary forest species (Voeks 2004). Support was found for
this hypothesis in the Cordillera Azul, with both indigenous
and non-indigenous heads of households holding more ecological knowledge related to secondary forests.
Although some medicinal plants can be found in mature forests, the ethnobotanical survey method used here leads to the
conclusion that secondary forests are the source of more
medicinal plants than mature forests; and a landscape with a
mixture of secondary and mature forests would maximize
medicinal plant availability. Critical to this argument is the
nature of secondary forests. Not all secondary forests are created equally. The number of species secondary forests contain,
as well as forest structure, ecosystem functions, and forest
product availability will vary based on numerous factors,
including the level of disturbance prior to succession, degree of
isolation from seed sources, and the degree of management
intervention during forest recovery (cf. Chazdon 2008 and references therein). Therefore, the managed fallows in the Cordillera Azul will be likely to contain far more species than other
secondary forest types, such as commercial plantations. However, if some secondary forests, such as those studied here, are
just as good or better sources of medicinal plants than mature
forests, then conservation arguments based on the value of
mature forests for bioprospecting will need to be rethought.
For instance, in the Cordillera Azul, biodiversity values may
be maximized by conserving large stands of mature forests, but
bioprospecting values could be maximized with land that supports a mix of mature and secondary forests.
Although the households I surveyed had higher levels of ecological knowledge of secondary forest species, they still preferred mature forests for collection in use categories other than
medicine. Under current livelihood strategies, secondary forests cannot buffer against mature forest extraction. Local people can be expected to collect products that best match their
needs. Overall, in the Cordillera Azul, mature forests provided
more products, in terms of total collection events. However, in
general, resource use in the two forest types appeared to be
complementary. Participating families collected different folk
species in mature vs. secondary forests (see Table 1). Secondary forests also seem unlikely to serve as alternative sources for
many resources given that mature forests were the sole source
of 105 folk species, many of which are mature forest obligates.
In terms of use categories, secondary forests produced more
useful medicine; whereas mature forests, that harbour larger
trees, were better sources of wood products. Therefore,
because current livelihood strategies require local people to
access both secondary and mature forests, land management
in the Cordillera Azul, whether focused on conservation or on
local development, will need to be done on a landscape scale.
This conclusion mirrors similar recommendations from other
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
Conservation implications of rainforest use 1281
social-ecological systems in tropical forests (e.g. Harvey et al.
2008; Chazdon et al. 2009; Gardner et al. 2009). Conservation
efforts centred on mature forests in the region (e.g. Cordillera
Azul National Park) cannot afford to design management in
isolation of the surrounding human-dominated matrix. This
point is even more pertinent given the dynamic nature of the
human-dominated landscapes, in which mature forests are
rapidly converted into other land uses.
Any conservation conclusions reached by studies of current
resource use patterns must reflect the dynamic social and ecological landscape of forest frontiers. The relative coverage of
different forest types and the use of these forests vary greatly
within communities. For example, the number of mature forest
folk species used in the communities studied here varied from 1
to 46, and the hectares of secondary forest owned ranged from
0–84% of total land owned. Other studies from the Peruvian
Amazon report similar heterogeneity in land ownership and
resource use (e.g. Takasaki, Barham & Coomes 2001; Tschakert et al. 2007). This heterogeneity of resource availability and
use emphasizes the need to incorporate a wide range of stakeholders into conservation processes to ensure that management can account for the needs and potential impacts of
different resource users (Salafsky & Margoluis 2004; Gavin,
Wali & Vasquez 2007).
In addition, forest coverage and use will vary over time. As
is true of many tropical rainforest frontiers regionally and
globally (Wittemyer et al. 2008), the buffer zone of the Cordillera Azul is undergoing rapid change driven by high rates of
immigration. Immigrants arrive from all over Peru seeking
open lands to establish farms. Immigration will probably
increase forest clearance, and ultimately increase the proportion of land held in secondary forests. More secondary forest
could alter livelihood strategies. Resource users could switch
to use more secondary forest species, or they may seek the
same mature forest species by collecting resources farther from
community centres. For the communities focused on here, this
would mean potentially more forest collection inside the
national park. Therefore, conservation management cannot
ignore local resource use outside the protected area. A participatory adaptive management approach provides the best
option for incorporating the concerns and needs of local stakeholders into management, within a framework that continuously gathers new data and changes according to available
information and the dynamic nature of the social-ecological
system in question (Salafsky, Margoluis & Redford 2008). In
fact, the Cordillera Azul National Park’s management plan
already includes participatory adaptive management in a landscape level approach to the management of natural resource
use (Gavin, Wali & Vasquez 2007).
In conclusion, the resource use patterns recorded in the Cordillera Azul have several important conservation implications.
For one, arguments to protect mature rainforests as sources of
new drugs may be significantly overstated because secondary
forests may provide more medicinal plant resources than
mature forests, and a landscape that incorporates forest of
different ages can maximize availability of medicinal plant
species. Secondly, conservation efforts must take a landscape
level approach given the impacts of resource users on different
forest types. Thirdly, a variety of different resource users
should be included in the management process given the
heterogeneity of resource availability and use among
community members. Finally, the highly dynamic nature of
social-ecological systems on forest frontiers can alter resource
use over time, and therefore conservation in these locations
should embrace participatory adaptive management
approaches.
Acknowledgements
I thank J. Solomon, R. Dunn, W. Linklater, R. Wallace, two anonymous
reviewers and the editors for useful comments. Field research was supported by
grants from the Conservation, Food, and Health Foundation, Switzer Foundation, US Fulbright Programs, Garden Club of America, and the Conservation
and Research Foundation. I thank G. Anderson, the staff of the Centro de
Conservacion, Investigacion, y Manejo de Recursos Naturales, the Centro de
Desarrollo e Investigacion de la Selva Alta, the Instituto de Investigaciones de
la Amazonia Peruana, M. Vasquez, M. Ozambela, and L. Garcia for invaluable
assistance and advice. Special thanks to the communities who supported the
research effort in countless ways.
References
Albuquerque, U.P. (2006) Re-examining hypotheses concerning the use and
knowledge of medicinal plants: a study in the caatinga vegetation of N. E.
Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 2, 30–40.
Alverson, W.S., Rodriquez, L.O. & Muskovits, D.K. (2001) Peru: Biabo Cordillera Azul, Rapid Biological Inventories, Report 2. The Field Museum of
Chicago, Chicago.
Bedoya, L.M., Sanchez-Palomino, S., Abad, M.J., Bermejo, P. & Alcami, J.
(2001) Anti-HIV activity of medicinal plant extracts. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 77, 113–116.
Bernard, H.R. (2002) Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
Brown, S. & Lugo, A.E. (1990) Tropical secondary forests. Journal of Tropical
Ecology, 6, 1–32.
Burtis, P. (2007) Can bioprospecting save itself? Journal of Sustainable Forestry,
25, 218–245.
Chazdon, R.L. (2008) Beyond deforestation: restoring forests and ecosystem
services on degraded lands. Science, 320, 1458–1460.
Chazdon, R.L. & Coe, F.G. (1999) Ethnobotany of woody species in secondgrowth, old-growth, and selectively logged forests of northeastern Costa
Rica. Conservation Biology, 13, 1312–1322.
Chazdon, R.L., Harvey, C.A., Oliver, K., Griffith, D., Ferguson, B.,
Martinez-Ramos, M., Morales, H., Nigh, R., Soto-Pinto, L., van Breugel, M. & Philpott, S.M. (2009) Beyond reserves: a research agenda
for conserving biodiversity in human-modified tropical landscapes.
Biotropica, 41, 142–153.
Cox, P.A., Sperry, L.R., Tuominen, M. & Bohlin, L. (1989) Pharmacological
activity of the Samoan ethnopharmacopoeia. Economic Botany, 43, 487–
497.
Douwes, E., Crouch, N.R., Edwards, T.J. & Mulholland, D.A. (2008) Regression analyses of southern African ethnomedicinal plants: informing the
targeted selection of bioprospecting and pharmacological screening subjects.
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 119, 356–364.
Emmons, L.H. & Feer, F. (1997) Neotropical Rainforest Mammals. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
FAO (2005) State of the World’s Forests, 2005. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/
y5574e/y5574e00.htm Downloaded on 26 February, 2009.
FAO (2007) State of the World’s Forests, 2007. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/
a0773e/a0773e00.HTM. Downloaded on 26 February, 2009.
Firn, R.D. (2003) Bioprospecting – why is it so unrewarding? Biodiversity and
Conservation, 12, 207–216.
Fleisher, M.S. & Harrington, J.A. (1998) Freelisting: management at a
women’s federal prison camp. Using Methods in the Field: A Practical Introduction and Casebook (eds V.C. de Munck & E.J. Sobo), pp. 69–83. Alta
Mira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282
1282 M. C. Gavin
Frei, B., Sticher, O. & Heinrich, M. (2000) Zapotec and Mixe use of tropical
habitats for securing medicinal plants in Mexico. Economic Botany, 54,
73–81.
Gardner, T.A., Barlow, J., Chazdon, R., Ewers, R.M., Harvey, C.A., Peres,
C.A. & Sodhi, N.S. (2009) Prospects for tropical forest biodiversity in a
human-modified world. Ecology Letters, 12, 561–582.
Gavin, M.C., Wali, A. & Vasquez, M. (2007) Parks, people, and participation:
towards collaborative and community-based natural resource management.
Connecting People, Participation and Place: Participatory Action Research
Approaches and Methods (eds S. Kindon, R. Pain & M. Kesby), pp. 60–70.
Routledge, London.
Gentry, A. (1993) Tropical forest biodiversity and the potential for new medicinal plants. Human Medicinal Agents from Plants (eds A.D. Kinghom & M.F.
Balandrin), pp. 13–24. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
Godoy, R., Brokaw, N., Wilkie, D., Colón, D., Palermo, A., Lye, S. & Wei, S.
(1998) Of trade and cognition: markets and the loss of folk knowledge
among the Tawahka Indians of the Honduran rain forest. Journal of Anthropological Research, 54, 219–233.
Guariguata, M.R. & Ostertag, R. (2001) Neotropical secondary forest succession: changes in structural and functional characteristics. Forest Ecology and
Management, 148, 185–206.
Hamilton, A.C. (2004) Medicinal plants, conservation and livelihoods. Biodiversity and Conservation, 13, 1477–1517.
Harvey, C.A., Komar, O., Chazdon, R., Ferguson, B.G., Finegan, B., Griffth,
D.M., Martinez-Ramos, M., Morales, H., Nigh, R., Sotopinto, L., van
Breugel, M. & Wishnie, M. (2008) Integrating agricultural landscapes with
biodiversity conservation in the Mesoamerican hotspot: opportunities and
an action agenda. Conservation Biology, 22, 8–15.
Hilty, S.L. & Brown, W.L. (1986) Birds of Colombia. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
ISE (2006) ISE Code of Ethics (with 2008 additions). International Society of
Ethnobiology. http://ise.arts.ubc.ca/global_coalition/ethics.php. Downloaded on 19 June, 2009.
Kier, G., Mutke, J., Dinerstein, E., Ricketts, T.H., Kuper, W., Kreft, H. &
Barthlott, W. (2005) Global patterns of plant diversity and floristic knowledge. Journal of Biogeography, 32, 1107–1116.
King, S.R. (1992) Pharmaceutical discovery, ethnobotany, tropical forests, and
reciprocity: integrating indigenous knowledge, conservation, and sustainable
development. Sustainable Harvest and Marketing of Rain Forest Products
(eds M. Plotkin & L. Famolare), pp. 231–238. Island Press, Washington,
DC.
Koehn, F.E. & Carter, G.T. (2005) The evolving role of natural products in
drug discovery. Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery, 4, 206–220.
Kursar, T.A., Caballero-George, C.C., Capson, T.L., Cubilla-Rios, L., Gerwick, W.H., Gupta, M.P., Ibañez, A., Linington, R.G., McPhail, K.L., Ortega-Barrı́a, E., Romero, L.I., Solis, P.N. & Coley, P.D. (2006) Securing
economic benefits and promoting conservation through bioprospecting. BioScience, 56, 1005–1012.
Kursar, T.A., Caballero-George, C.C., Capson, T.L., Cubilla-Rios, L., Gerwick, W.H., Heller, M.V., Ibáñez, A., Linington, R.G., McPhail, K.L., Ortega-Barrı́a, E., Romero, L.I. & Coley, P.D. (2007) Linking bioprospecting
with sustainable development and conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 16, 2789–2800.
Laird, S.A. & ten Kate, K. (2002) Linking biodiversity prospecting and forest
conservation. Selling Forest Environmental Services (eds S. Pagiola, J. Bishop
& N. Landell-Mills), pp. 151–172. Earthscan, London.
Lucena, R.F.P., Lima Araujo, E. & Albuquerque, U.P. (2007) Does the local
availability of woody caatinga plants (Northeastern Brazil) explain their use
value? Economic Botany, 61, 347–361.
Macilwain, C. (1998) When rhetoric hits reality in debate on bioprospecting.
Nature, 392, 535.
Mendelsohn, R. & Balick, M.J. (1995) The value of undiscovered pharmaceuticals in tropical forests. Economic Botany, 49, 223–228.
Mittermeier, R.A., Myers, N., Gil, P.R. & Mittermeier, C.G. (1999) Hotspots:
Earth’s Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions. Cemex, Conservation International and Agrupacion Sierra Madre, Monterey,
Mexico.
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B. & Kent,
J. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403, 853–
858.
Newman, D.J., Cragg, G.M. & Snader, K.M. (2003) Natural products as
sources of new drugs over the period 1981–2002. Journal of Natural Products,
66, 1022–1037.
Pearce, D.W. & Puroshothaman, S. (1995) The economic value of plantbased pharmaceuticals. Intellectual Property Rights and Biodiversity Conservation (ed T. Swanson), pp. 127–138. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Posey, D.A. (1984) A preliminary report on diversified management of tropical
forest by the Kayapo¢ Indians of the Brazilian Amazon. Ethnobotany in the
Neotropics (eds G.T. Prance & J.A. Kallunki), pp. 112–126. New York
Botanical Garden, New York.
Prance, G.T., Chadwick, D.J. & Marsh, J. (1994) Ethnobotany and the Search
for New Drugs. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Principe, P.P. (1991) Valuing the biodiversity of medicinal plants. Conservation
of Medicinal Plants (eds O. Akerele, V. Heywood & H. Synge), pp. 79–124.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Ragavan, S. (2008) New paradigms for protection of biodiversity. Journal of
Intellectual Property Rights, 13, 514–522.
Rausser, G.C. & Small, A.A. (2000) Valuing research leads: bioprospecting and
the conservation of genetic resources. The Journal of Political Economy, 108,
173–206.
Redford, K.H. (1992) The empty forest. BioScience, 42, 412–422.
Robinson, J.G. & Bennett, E.L. (2004) Having your wildlife and eating it too:
an analysis of hunting sustainability across tropical ecosystems. Animal Conservation, 7, 397–408.
Roos, G. (1998) Pile sorting: ‘‘kids like candy’’. Using Methods in the Field: A
Practical Introduction and Casebook (eds V.C. de Munck & E.J. Sobo), pp.
97–109. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
Rudel, T.K., Bates, D.M. & Machinguiashi, R. (2002) A tropical forest transition? Agricultural change, out-migration, and secondary forests in the
Ecuadorian Amazon. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92,
87–102.
Salafsky, N. & Margoluis, R. (2004) Using adaptive management to improve
ICDPs. Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: Towards More Effective Conservation and Development (eds T.O. McShane & M.P. Wells), pp. 372–394.
Columbia University Press, New York.
Salafsky, N.R., Margoluis, R. & Redford, K. (2008) Adaptive management: a
tool for conservation practitioners. Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC. http://fosonline.org/resources/Publications/AdapManHTML/
adman_1.html Downloaded on 3 May, 2008.
Stepp, J.R. & Moerman, D.E. (2001) The importance of weeds in ethnopharmacology. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 75, 19–23.
Sunderlin, W., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L. &
Wunder, S. (2005) Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing
countries: an overview. World Development, 33, 1383–1402.
Takasaki, Y., Barham, B.L. & Coomes, O.T. (2001) Amazonian peasants, rain
forest use, and income generation: the role of wealth and geographical factors. Society & Natural Resources, 14, 291–308.
Toledo, V.M., Batis, A.I., Becerra, R., Esteban, M. & Ramos, C.H.
(1992) Products from the tropical rain forests of Mexico: an ethnoecological approach. Sustainable Harvest and Marketing of Rain Forest
Products (eds M. Plotkin & L. Famolare), pp. 99–109. Island Press,
Washington, DC.
Tschakert, P., Coomes, O.T. & Potvin, C. (2007) Indigenous livelihoods, slashand-burn agriculture, and carbon stocks in Eastern Panama. Ecological Economics, 60, 807–820.
Vandermeer, J. & Perfecto, I. (2007) The agricultural matrix and a future paradigm for conservation. Conservation Biology, 21, 274–277.
Voeks, R.A. (1996) Tropical forest healers and habitat preference. Economic
Botany, 50, 381–400.
Voeks, R.A. (2004) Disturbance pharmacopoeias: medicine and myth from the
humid tropics. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94, 868–
888.
Wittemyer, G., Elsen, P., Bean, W.T., Burton, A.C.O. & Brashares, J.S. (2008)
Accelerated human population growth at protected area edges. Science, 321,
123–126.
Received 25 June 2009; accepted 23 August 2009
Handling Editor: Jan Leps
2009 The Author. Journal compilation 2009 British Ecological Society, Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1275–1282