Comparing conservation priorities for useful plants among botanists and Tibetan doctors

  • Wayne Law
  • Jan Salick
Original Paper


Perspectives of diverse constituencies need to be incorporated when developing conservation strategies. In Menri (Medicine Mountains) of the Eastern Himalayas, Tibetan doctors and professional botanists were interviewed about conservation of useful plants. We compare these two perspectives and find they differ significantly in conservation priorities (Wilcoxon Signed Ranks P < 0.05), both in how they prioritized, as well as the priorities themselves. Tibetan doctors first consider which plants are most important to their medical practice and, then secondarily, the conservation status of these plants. Additionally, perceptions of threatened medicinal plants differ among Tibetan doctors who received medical training in Lhasa, who were local trained, and who were self-taught. In contrast, professional botanists came to a consensus among themselves by first considering the conservation status of plants and then considering use. We conclude that, in order to effect community based conservation, opinions from both Tibetan doctors and professional botanists should be considered in establishing conservation priorities and sustainable conservation programs. Furthermore, we set our own research agenda based on combined perspectives.


Conservation Tibetan medicine Threatened plants Useful plants Tibetan doctors 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams WM, Aveling R, Brockington D, Dickson B, Elliott J, Hutton J, Roe D, Vira B, Wolmer W (2004) Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty. Science 306:1146–1149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barett CB,, Brandon K, Gibson C, Ghertsen H (2001) Conserving tropical biodiversity amid weak institutions. Bioscience 51(497–502):497–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett BC (1992) Plants and people of the Amazonian rainforests: the role of ethnobotany in sustainable development. Bioscience 42:599–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10(5):1251–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berkes F (2004) Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv Biol 18(3):621–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brosius JP (1997) Endangered forest, endangered people: environmentalist representations of indigenous knowledge. Human Ecol 25(1):47–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campbell LM, Vainio-Mattila A (2003) Participatory development and community-based conservation: opportunities missed for lesson learned? Human Ecol 31(3):417–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cardi F (2005) Evolution of Tibetan medical knowledge in the socio-economic context: the exploitation of medicinal substances among traditional doctors. Milan, Societa Italiana di Scienze NaturaliGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapin M (2004) Challenge to conservationists. World Watch Magazine November/December 2004Google Scholar
  10. Etkin NL (2002) Local knowledge of biotic diversity and its conservation in rural Hausaland, Northern Nigeria. Econ Bot 56(1):73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fang ZD (1993) The wildflowers in Hengduan Mountains in Yunnan China. Yunnan People’s Publishing House, KunmingGoogle Scholar
  12. Fletcher SA (1990) Parks, protected areas and local populations: new international issues and imperatives. Landscape Urban Plan 19:197–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gadgil M (1992) Conserving biodiversity as if people matter: a case study from India. Ambio 21(3):266–270Google Scholar
  14. International Council for Science (Fensted JE, Hoyningen-Huene P, Hu Q, Kokwaro J, Nakashima D, Salick J, Shrum W, Subbarayappa BV) (2002) Science, traditional knowledge and sustainable development. ICSU Series on Sustainable Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
  15. The World Conservation Union (1980) The world conservation strategy. The World Conservation Union, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  16. Johannes RE (1978) Traditional marine conservation methods in Oceania and their demise. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 9:349–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johannes RE (1998) The case of data-less marine resource management: examples from tropical near-shore finfisheries. Trends Ecol Evol 13:243–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kellert SR (1985) Social and perceptual factors in endangered species management. J Wildlife Manage 49(2):528–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kletter C, Kriechbaum M (2001) Tibetan medicinal plants. CRC Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Lama YC, Ghimire SK, Aumeeruddy-Thomas Y (2001) Medicinal plants of Dolpo. WWF Nepal Program, Kathmandu, NepalGoogle Scholar
  21. Law W, Salick J (2005) Human induced dwarfing of Himalayan snow lotus (Saussurea laniceps (Asteraceae)). Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:10218–10220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Law W, Salick J, Knight TM (In preparation) Comparative population ecologies and sustainable harvest of Tibetan medicinal snow lotus (Saussurea laniceps and S. medusa (Asteraceae)).Google Scholar
  23. Mackinnon J, Sha M, Cheung C, Carey G, Zhu X, Melville D (1996) A biodiversity review of China. WWF International, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
  24. Marcus RR (2001) Seeing the forest for the trees: integrated conservation and development projects and local perceptions of conservation in Madagascar. Human Ecol 29(4):381–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) PC-ORD. Gleneden Beach, Oregon, MjM software design: multivariate analysis of ecological dataGoogle Scholar
  26. Mehta JN, Kellert SR (1998) Local attitudes toward community-based conservation policy and programmes in Nepal: a case study in the Makalu-Barun conservation area. Environ Conserv 25(4):320–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mittermeier RA, Myers N, Thomsen JB, Da Fonseca GAB, Olivieri S (1998) Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conserv Biol 12:516–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Murphree MW (2002) Protected areas and the commons. Common Prop Resour Digest 60:1–3Google Scholar
  29. Olsen CS, Larsen HO (2003) Alpine medicinal plant trade and Himalayan mountain livelihood strategies. Geogr J 169:243–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olsen CS, Bhattarai N (2005) A typology of economic agents in the Himalayan plant trade. Mountain Res Develop 25:37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Olsson P, Folke C (2001) Local ecological knowledge and institutional dynamics for ecosystem management: a study of Lake Racken Watershed, Sweden. Ecosystems 4:85–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ohmagari K, Berkes F (1997) Transmission of indigenous knowledge and bush skills among the Western James Bay Cree women of subarctic Canada. Human Ecol 25(2):197–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Redford KH, Sanderson SE (2000) Extracting humans from nature. Conserv Biol 14:1362–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salick J, Anderson D, Woo J, Sherman R, Norbu C, Na A, Dorje S (2004) Tibetan ethnobotany and gradient analyses, Menri (Medicine Mountains), Eastern Himalayas millennium ecosystem assessmentGoogle Scholar
  35. Salick J, Yang YP, Gunn BF (2005) In situ capacity building: traditional ecological knowledge for conservation and sustainable development. Saint Louis, MOGoogle Scholar
  36. Salick J, Amend A, Gunn B, Law W, Schmidt H, Byg A (2006) Tibetan medicine plurality. Econ Bot 60(2)Google Scholar
  37. SAS Inc. (2003) JMP. Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  38. Sheil D, Lawrence A (2004) Tropical biologists, local people and conservation: new opportunities for collaboration. Trends Ecol Evol 19(12):634–638PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. SPSS Inc. (2001) SPSS for windows. Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  40. Songorwa AN (1999) Community-based wildlife management (CWM) in Tanzania: are the communities interested? World Develop 27:2061–2079Google Scholar
  41. Xu J, Wilkes A (2004) Biodiversity impact analysis in northwest Yunnan, southwest China. Biodivers Conserv 13:955–983Google Scholar
  42. Yang JS, Chuchengjiancuo (1989) Diqing Zang Yao. Kunming Shi, Yunnan Min Zu Chu Ban SheGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyWashington UniversitySt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Missouri Botanical GardenSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations