Cited by 0Indigenous Knowledge Systems and AgricultureEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and Beyond

The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 4 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Estrategias y prácticas tradicionales amigables con la naturaleza en comunidades negras y Embera

Open access
Guerra Gutierrez, Jairo Miguel·2015·Revista Bioetnia

Abstract

Las tradiciones de las comunidades afropacífico y Embera asentadas en el Pacífico tienen diferencias y elementos en común; a los Embera se les puede ubicar en una “matriz cultural compartida” en todo el Chocó Biogeográfico colombiano. Observaciones en diferentes escenarios, particularmente en comunidades asentadas en el golfo de Tribugá, constituyen una muestra importante de esta matriz que es una opción valiosa para reconocer elementos de identidad regional y base para planear la conservación de biodiversidad existente en los ecosistemas del área. Las investigaciones en el golfo de Tribugá involucran 7 comunidades, tres afropacífico (Joví, Termales y Partadó) y cuatro Embera dóbida (Yucal del río Panguí, Tandó y Nuquí del río Nuquí y Jagua del río Chorí), realizadas en el marco de la ejecución del proyecto “Incorporación de cono- cimientos tradicionales asociados a la agrobiodiversidad en los agroecosistemas colombianos”. La metodología utilizada fue la etnografía implementada con instrumentos de observa- ción participativa, acompañamiento a las comunidades en el establecimiento de parcelas de cultivos asociados, eventos de rescate de semillas nativas, documentación de conocimientos tradicionales y su valoración a través del impulso de estrategias de comunicación en las comunidades. Como resultado se identificaron dos estrategias asociadas con la cosmovisión del territorio y cinco prácticas asociadas con la agrobiodiversidad y ecosistemas contiguos compartidas por comunidades indígenas Emberas y afrodescendientes con funciones de conservación de biodiversidad.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper documents nature-friendly traditional strategies and agricultural practices among Black and Embera communities in the Golfo de Tribugá, Chocó, Colombia, focusing on “respaldos” and “encierros” as territorial-conservation mechanisms. It finds these practices remain culturally important but are being eroded by cultural and ecological changes, with reported deficits in maize and rice production.

Key findings

  • Two ecosystem-management strategies are identified: “respaldos,” flexible family-held forest areas with communal resource use, and “encierros,” Embera-origin spiritual/territorial controls over sacred areas that limit human intervention and support fauna, medicinal plants, fish, and seed conservation.
  • Traditional agriculture uses soil selection by color/texture and indicator flora/fauna; minimal tillage follows a sequence of socola, tumba, repica, and pudre; associated crops dominate, with monoculture/clean crops unusual except for rice.
  • Measured colino/parcel areas: Embera communities averaged 0.834 ha (Bocas de Jagua, 22 parcels), 1.281 ha (Yucal, 23 parcels), and 1.187 ha (Nuquí Arriba, 21 parcels), with a reported synthesis average of 0.822 ha and about 2.5 ha per family across 2–3 parcels; Black communities averaged 1.094 ha (Partadó, 20 parcels), 1.391 ha (Joví, 18 parcels), and 1.101 ha (Termales, 19 parcels), with a synthesis average of 1.195 ha and about 3.5 ha per family across about 3 colinos.
  • Production figures: plantain about 70 raciones/ha/year, with one ración = 64 plantains (~25 kg), or 4,480 plantains/ha/year; maize 30–40 sacos/ha (14.5 kg), with 20 ha and 600–800 sacos/year in four indigenous communities, described as a deficit; rice 60 bultos/ha (bulto = 24 libras), with about 9 ha and 1,080 bultos/year, also insufficient for family demand.

Methods

  • Ethnographic methodology with elements of participatory action research (IAP) after Fals Borda (1981), using direct observation and participatory work with communities in the Golfo de Tribugá, municipality of Nuquí, Chocó.
  • Selected Black communities: Partadó, Termales, and Joví; selected Embera communities: Yucal (río Panguí), Nuquí Arriba (río Nuquí), and Bocas de Jagua (río Chorí). The project involved 10 families per community for the first component and five community reporters/communicators per community.
  • Data collection included open and semi-structured individual/collective talks, visits to crops, participant observation of parcel/colino establishment, training, communication activities, and cultural encounters; information was codified and systematized around thematic guides on local knowledge, soils, seeds, planting techniques, species, uses, losses, and territorial/resource management.

Limitations

  • The paper does not state a formal limitations section.
  • Evident from the text: the study is geographically confined to the Golfo de Tribugá/Nuquí area and draws on a small set of communities (three Black and three Embera) with 10 families per community for one component, limiting generalizability.
  • Evident from the text: some reported averages are internally inconsistent—e.g., the Embera synthesis average of 0.822 ha does not match the component averages of 0.834, 1.281, and 1.187 ha—and the analysis relies heavily on ethnographic/traditional knowledge and self-reported practices rather than statistical inference.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.51641/bioetnia.v12i1.173

Cites

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 4 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 19 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 57
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 24
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
64 of 64
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Las comunidades estudiadas son representativas de las comunidades negras y embera de la región del Pacífico colombiano, de modo que los hallazgos pueden generalizarse a ambas etnias.

    “Las comunidades conservan costumbres y métodos de siembras tradicionales; en los resultados de esta investigación se puede apreciar que siguen vigentes tanto estrategias como prácticas tradicionales aplicadas sea al manejo de territorio como a cultivos principales.”
1 of 1

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Embera parcel-area average does not match the three community averages

    Major

    The three reported community averages are 0.834, 1.281, and 1.187 ha. Their mean is about 1.101 ha, not the stated overall average of 0.822 ha.

    Reported 0.822 · recomputed 1.100667

  • Reported rice production is twice the stated yield times area

    Major

    At 60 bultos per hectare across approximately 9 hectares, production would be approximately 540 bultos, not 1,080.

    Reported 1080 · recomputed 540

  • Number of participating Indigenous communities changes from three to four

    Minor

    The methods name three selected Embera communities, but the discussion refers to four participating Indigenous communities.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Ortiz M, Borjas B. 2008. La investigación acción partici- pativa: aporte de Fals Borda a la educación popular. Espacio Abierto. 17 (4): 615-27. URL disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=12217404
  2. Restrepo E. 1996. Cultura y biodiversidad en Pacífico. ¿Desarrollo o diversidad? Pedrosa AE (ed.) Bogotá: CEREC-ECOFONDO.
  3. Rubiano J. 2010. Sobre el trance, el éxtasis y los estados alternos de conciencia en el chamanismo de tierras bajas, una visión desde los Embera-Chami y Kofan del Putumayo. Bol Antropol. 24 (41): 207-22.

Cited by

Still being checked.

Metadata

Authors
Guerra Gutierrez, J. M.
Venue
Revista Bioetnia
Published
2015-12-16
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
107-120
ISSN
  • 1900-0561 (ISSN-L)
  • 2745-0406
OpenAlex
W3198913717
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
es
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Revista Bioetnia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and Beyond
Keywords
traditional ecological knowledge, Embera, biodiversity conservation, agrobiodiversity, indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, Chocó biogeographic region, traditional practices, cosmovision, associated crops, traditional knowledge documentation, community communication strategy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review