Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Children as ethnobotanists: methods and local impact of a participatory research project with children on wild plant gathering in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria

Authors: Susanne Grasser, Christoph Schunko, Christian R. Vogl

Published in: Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Ethically sound research in applied ethnobiology should benefit local communities by giving them full access to research processes and results. Participatory research may ensure such access, but there has been little discussion on methodological details of participatory approaches in ethnobiological research. This paper presents and discusses the research processes and methods developed in the course of a three-year research project on wild plant gathering, the involvement of children as co-researchers and the project’s indications for local impact.

Method

Research was conducted in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria, between 2008 and 2010 in four research phases. In phase 1, 36 freelist interviews with local people and participant observation was conducted. In phase 2 school workshops were held in 14 primary school classes and their 189 children interviewed 506 family members with structured questionnaires. In phase 3, 27 children and two researchers co-produced participatory videos. In phase 4 indications for the impact of the project were investigated with questionnaires from ten children and with participant observation.

Results

Children participated in various ways in the research process and the scientific output and local impact of the project was linked to the phases, degrees and methods of children’s involvement. Children were increasingly involved in the project, from non-participation to decision-making. Scientific output was generated from participatory and non-participatory activities whereas local impact - on personal, familial, communal and institutional levels - was mainly generated through the participatory involvement of children as interviewers and as co-producers of videos. Creating scientific outputs from participatory video is little developed in ethnobiology, whereas bearing potential.

Conclusions

As ethnobotanists and ethnobiologists, if we are truly concerned about the impact and benefits of our research processes and results to local communities, the details of the research processes need to be deliberately planned and evaluated and then reported and discussed in academic publications.
Literature
1.
2.
Bergold J, Thomas S. Participatory research methods: a methodological approach in motion. Forum Qual Sozialforschung/Forum Qual Soc Res. 2012;13(1):30.
3.
Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecol Soc. 2007;12(2):11.
4.
Caruso E, Schunko C, Corbera E, Mallén IR, Vogl CR, Martin G, et al. Lessons for research policy and practice: the case of co-enquiry research with rural communities. J Res Pract. 2016;12:1. Article M1.
5.
Shirk JL, Ballard HL, Wilderman CC, Phillips T, Wiggins A, Jordan R, et al. Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecol Soc. 2012;17(2):29.
6.
Conrad CC, Hilchey KG. A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environ Monit Assess. 2011;176:273–91.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Percy-Smith B, Thomas N, editors. A handbook of children and young people’s participation: perspectives from theory and practice. London ; New York: Routledge; 2010.
8.
9.
Wyndham FS. Environments of learning: Rarámuri children’s plant knowledge and experience of schooling, family, and landscapes in the Sierra Tarahumara, Mexico. Hum Ecol. 2010;38:87–99.CrossRef
10.
Yates S, Ramírez-Sosa CR. Ethnobotanical knowledge of Brosimum alicastrum (Moraceae) among urban and rural El Salvadorian adolescents. Econ Bot. 2004;58:72–7.CrossRef
11.
Zent S, López-Zent E. Ethnobotanical convergence, divergence, and change among the Hotï of the Venezuelan Guayana. In: Carlson T, Maffi L, editors. Ethnobot. Conserv. Biocultural Divers. New York: NYBG; 2004. p. 37–78.
12.
Reyes-García V, Kightley E, Ruiz-Mallén I, Fuentes-Peláez N, Demps K, Huanca T, et al. Schooling and local environmental knowledge: do they complement or substitute each other? Int J Educ Dev. 2010;30:305–13.CrossRef
13.
Cooper CL. Botanical knowledge of a group of South Carolina elementary school students. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2008;6:121–7.CrossRef
14.
Fagbemissi RC, Price LL. From novice to expert: agroecological competences of children orphaned by AIDS compared to non-orphans in Benin. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2011;7:4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
16.
Setalaphruk C, Price L. Children’s traditional ecological knowledge of wild food resources: a case study in a rural village in Northeast Thailand. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2007;3:33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Kellett M. Children as active researchers: a new research paradigm for the 21st century? ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, NCRM Methods Review Papers. 2005. http://​oro.​open.​ac.​uk/​7539. Accessed 2 Feb 2016
18.
Jacquez F, Vaughn LM, Wagner E. Youth as partners, participants or passive recipients: a review of children and adolescents in community-based participatory research (CBPR). Am J Community Psychol. 2013;51:176–89.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Lundy L, McEvoy L, Byrne B. Working with young children as co-researchers: an approach informed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Early Educ Dev. 2011;22:714–36.CrossRef
20.
Fox R. Resisting participation: critiquing participatory research methodologies with young people. J Youth Stud. 2013;16:986–99.CrossRef
21.
Alderson P. Research by children: rights and methods. Int J Soc Res Methodol Theory Pract. 2001;4:139–53.CrossRef
22.
Stepp JR. Advances in Ethnobiological Field Methods. Field Methods. 2005;17:211–8.CrossRef
23.
24.
UNESCO. Biosphere reserves: the Seville Strategy and the statutory framework of the world network. Paris: UNESCO; 1996.
25.
Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal Management. Leitbild Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. Thüringerberg: Biosphärenparkmanagement der REGIO Großes Walsertal; 2011.
26.
Bernard HR. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 4th ed. Lanham: Altamira Press; 2006.
27.
Weller SC, Romney AK. Systematic data collection. Newbury Park, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications; 1988.CrossRef
28.
Grasser S, Schunko C, Vogl CR. Gathering “tea”–from necessity to connectedness with nature. local knowledge about wild plant gathering in the Biosphere Reserve Grosses Walsertal (Austria). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2012;8:31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Grasser S. Reichhaltiges Erfahrungswissen über pflanzliche Vielfalt. Was steckt hinter diesem bedeutungsvoll klingenden Titel? Blickwinkel Informationsblatt Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. 2008. p. 41.
30.
Graham A, Powell M, Taylor N, Anderson D, Fitzgerald R. Ethical Research Involving Children. Florence: UNICEF Office of Research - Innocenti; 2013.
31.
Schunko C, Grasser S, Vogl CR. Explaining the resurgent popularity of the wild: motivations for wild plant gathering in the Biosphere Reserve Grosses Walsertal, Austria. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015;11:55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Gallagher M, Haywood SL, Jones MW, Milne S. Negotiating informed consent with children in school-based research: a critical review. Child Soc. 2010;24:471–82.CrossRef
33.
Grasser S. Reichhaltiges Erfahrungswissen über pflanzliche Vielfalt. “Gö mr gi Tee sammla!” – Kinder auf Forschung. Blickwinkel Informationsblatt Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. 2009. p. 45.
34.
Grasser S. Reichhaltiges Erfahrungswissen über pflanzliche Vielfalt. Auf ins Frühjahr und die 2.Forschungssaison. Blickwinkel Informationsblatt Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. 2009. p. 44.
35.
Grasser S, Vogl C, Grabowski M, Vogl T, Vogl-Lukasser B. Biokulturelle Vielfalt: Vom Lokalen Erfahrungswissen zu Pflanzen im Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. Endbericht zum Forschungsprojekt „Monitoring of Biocultural Diversity in the Biosphere Reserve Großes Walstertal, Austria. The use and management of biodiversity of crops, cultivars and wild gathered plant species”. Vienna: Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 2012
36.
Schunko C, Grasser S, Vogl CR. Intracultural variation of knowledge about wild plant uses in the Biosphere Reserve Grosses Walsertal (Austria). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2012;8:23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Burtscher E, Fuchs B. Grasser, editors. Bergtee. Eschen: Verein Alternative Wirtschaft; 2012.
38.
39.
40.
Grasser S. Reichhaltiges Erfahrungswissen über pflanzliche Vielfalt. Mensch & Kraut in Bild & Ton. Blickwinkel Informationsblatt Biosphärenpark Großes Walsertal. 2010. p. 50.
41.
Hart J, Newman J, Ackermann L. Children changing their world: understanding and evaluating children’s participation in development. London: Plan; 2004.
42.
Gompertz SB. Children as co-researchers: The impact of researching their own learning on attitude to and understanding of school science. Phd Thesis University of Exeter. 2014.
43.
Tremblay C, Jayme B d O. Community knowledge co-creation through participatory video. Action Res. 2015;13:298–314.CrossRef
44.
Lunch N, Lunch C. Insights Into Participatory Video: A Handbook for the Field. Oxford: Insightshare; 2006.
45.
Zent S, Maffi L. Final report on indicator No. 2: methodology for developing a vitality index of traditional environmental knowledge (VITEK) for the project Global Indicators of the Status and Trends of Linguistic Diversity and Traditional Knowledge. British Columbia: Terralingua; 2009.
46.
Cavalli-Sforza LL, Feldman MW. Cultural transmission and evolution: a quantitative approach. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1981.
47.
Reyes-García V, Martínez-Rodríguez MR, Broesch J, Calvet-Mir L, Fuentes-Peláez N, McDade TW, et al. Cultural transmission of ethnobotanical knowledge and skills: an empirical analysis from an Amerindian society. Evol Hum Behav. 2009;30:274–85.CrossRef
48.
McCarter J, Gavin MC. Perceptions of the value of traditional ecological knowledge to formal school curricula: opportunities and challenges from Malekula Island, Vanuatu. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2011;7:38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
Hart RA. Children’s participation: from tokenism to citizenship. Florence: UNICEF International Child Development Centre; 1992.
50.
Hart RA. Stepping back from “the ladder”: reflections on a model of participatory work with children. In: Reid A, Jensen BB, Nikel J, Simovska V, editors. Participation and learning: perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2008. p. 19–31.CrossRef
51.
Einarsdóttir J. Research with children: methodological and ethical challenges. Eur Early Child Educ Res J. 2007;15:197–211.CrossRef
52.
Boyden J, Ennew J. Children in focus: a manual for participatory research with children. Rädda Barnen: Stockholm; 1997.
53.
Molina G, Molina F, Tanner T, Seballos F. Child-friendly participatory research tools. Particip Learn Action. 2009;60:160–6.
54.
Barker J, Weller S. “Is it fun?” Developing children centred research methods. Int J Sociol Soc Policy. 2003;23:33–58.CrossRef
55.
Fargas-Malet M, McSherry D, Larkin E, Robinson C. Research with children: Methodological issues and innovative techniques. J Early Child Res. 2010;8:175–92.CrossRef
56.
Dockett S, Einarsdóttir J, Perry B. Balancing methodologies and methods in researching with young children. In: Harcourt D, Perry B, Waller T, editors. Researching young children’s perspectives: debating the ethics and dilemmas of educational research with children. London, New York: Routledge; 2011.
57.
Bucknall S. Children as researchers: exploring issues and barriers in English primary schools. PhD Thesis The Open University. 2009.
58.
Punch S. Research with children: the same or different from research with adults? Childhood. 2002;9:321–41.CrossRef
59.
Hunleth J. Beyond on or with: Questioning power dynamics and knowledge production in “child-oriented” research methodology. Childhood. 2011;18:81–93.CrossRef
60.
High C, Singh N, Petheram L, Nemes G. Defining participatory video from practice. In: Milne EJ, Mitchell C, de Lange N, editors. The Handbook of Participatory Video. Lanham: AltaMira Press; 2012. p. 35–48.
61.
Blazek M. Participatory Video with Children and Young People. Young. 2016;2:1.
62.
Mistry J, Berardi A. The challenges and opportunities of participatory video in geographical research: exploring collaboration with indigenous communities in the North Rupununi. Guyana Area. 2012;44:110–6.CrossRef
63.
Garrett BL. Videographic geographies: using digital video for geographic research. Prog Hum Geogr. 2011;35:521–41.CrossRef
64.
Fuller RJ. Guidelines for using video to document plant practices. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2007;5:219–31.CrossRef
65.
Metadata
Title
Children as ethnobotanists: methods and local impact of a participatory research project with children on wild plant gathering in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria
Authors
Susanne Grasser
Christoph Schunko
Christian R. Vogl
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1746-4269
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-016-0119-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

Ethnopharmacobotanical study on the medicinal plants used by herbalists in Sulaymaniyah Province, Kurdistan, Iraq

Research

Comparative ethnobotany of the Wakhi agropastoralist and the Kyrgyz nomads of Afghanistan

Research

Folk knowledge of wild food plants among the tribal communities of Thakht-e-Sulaiman Hills, North-West Pakistan

Research

Traditional alcoholic beverages and their value in the local culture of the Alta Valle del Reno, a mountain borderland between Tuscany and Emilia-Romagna (Italy)

Research

Forming a joint dialogue among faith healers, traditional healers and formal health workers in mental health in a Kenyan setting: towards common grounds

Reviewer acknowledgement

Acknowledgement of manuscript reviewers 2015