The Convention on Biological Diversity is defining the goals that will frame future global biodiversity policy in a context of rapid biodiversity decline and under pressure to make transformative change. Drawing on the work of Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, we argue that transformative change requires the foregrounding of Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ rights and agency in biodiversity policy. We support this argument with four key points. First, Indigenous peoples and local communities hold knowledge essential for setting realistic and effective biodiversity targets that simultaneously improve local livelihoods. Second, Indigenous peoples’ conceptualizations of nature sustain and manifest CBD’s 2050 vision of “Living in harmony with nature.” Third, Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ participation in biodiversity policy contributes to the recognition of human and Indigenous peoples’ rights. And fourth, engagement in biodiversity policy is essential for Indigenous peoples and local communities to be able to exercise their recognized rights to territories and resources.

The Neolithic Revolution narrative associates early-mid Holocene domestications with the development of agriculture that fueled the rise of late Holocene civilizations. This narrative continues to be influential, even though it has been deconstructed by archaeologists and geneticists in its homeland. To further disentangle domestication from reliance on food production systems, such as agriculture, we revisit definitions of domestication and food production systems, review the late Pleistocene–early Holocene archaeobotanical record, and quantify the use, management and domestication of Neotropical plants to provide insights about the past. Neotropical plant domestication relies on common human behaviors (selection, accumulation and caring) within agroecological systems that focus on individual plants, rather than populations—as is typical of agriculture. The early archaeobotanical record includes numerous perennial and annual species, many of which later became domesticated. Some of this evidence identifies dispersal with probable cultivation, suggesting incipient domestication by 10,000 years ago. Since the Pleistocene, more than 6500, 1206 and 6261 native plant species have been used in Mesoamerica, the Central Andes and lowland South America, respectively. At least 1555, 428 and 742 are managed outside and inside food production systems, and at least 1148, 428 and 600 are cultivated, respectively, suggesting at least incipient domestication. Full native domesticates are more numerous in Mesoamerica (251) than the Andes (124) and the lowlands (45). This synthesis reveals that domestication is more common in the Neotropics than previously recognized and started much earlier than reliance on food production systems. Hundreds of ethnic groups had, and some still have, alternative strategies that do involve domestication, although they do not rely principally on food production systems, such as agriculture.

People’s diets are usually restricted to a small number of plant species, even in regions with great diversity. We investigated the knowledge of residents in Ribeirão da Ilha, a district of Florianópolis (Santa Catarina, Brazil), about unconventional food plants (UFP). We report the UFP of the region, the parts used, the methods of processing, and the reasons for reduced use or even lack of use. From June 2014 to January 2015, we interviewed 26 long-established residents and made free listings of plant resources in the region. We also did three guided tours, and 24 residents (among the 26) checked pictures of the mentioned plants in order to identify them. We identified 63 species distributed in 25 botanical families. Half of the species were mentioned only by one informant. The fruit was the most frequently used part (80% of citations), consumed mainly without processing. Among those species, 27% were used exclusively in the past. The residents attributed non-use to the difficulty in locating the plants and loss of interest in the resource. Urbanization and environmental restrictions contribute to the difficulty of access to UFP. Encouraging residents to continue using UFP is necessary to perpetuate this threatened knowledge, promote a more diversified and healthier diet, stimulate a greater interaction among people and nature, and promote on farm conservation of edible plants.

For at least 30 years researchers have called for a deeper reflection on the paths we desire for ethnobotanical research. Although the discipline of ethnobotany is growing, as measured by the number of publications in the area, there is still work to be done regarding the homogeneity of theoretical and methodological approaches and the implications of ethnobotanical research findings for society as a whole. In this article we present 10 questions/issues that we believe can guide the research and actions of ethnobotanists for the coming years.

Zank, S., L. Gomes De Araujo, and N. Hanazaki. 2019. Resilience and adaptability of traditional healthcare systems: a case study of communities in two regions of Brazil. Ecology and Society 24(1):13. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10701-240113