Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity

AR254-AN34-29 ARI 7 September 2005 21:35
Linguistic, Cultural,
and Biological Diversity
Luisa Maf
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2005.34:599-617. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
Terralingua, Salt Spring Island, British Columbia V8K 2N6, Canada;

email: maf@terralingua.org
by 142.173.101.138 on 10/09/05. For personal use only.
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. Key Words

2005. 29:599617
linguistic diversity, cultural diversity, biodiversity, biocultural
First published online as a
Review in Advance on diversity
June 28, 2005
Abstract
The Annual Review of
Anthropology is online at Over the past decade, the eld of biocultural diversity has arisen
anthro.annualreviews.org as an area of transdisciplinary research concerned with investigat-
doi: 10.1146/ ing the links between the worlds linguistic, cultural, and biologi-
annurev.anthro.34.081804.120437 cal diversity as manifestations of the diversity of life. The impetus
Copyright
c 2005 by for the emergence of this eld came from the observation that all
Annual Reviews. All rights three diversities are under threat by some of the same forces and
reserved
from the perception that loss of diversity at all levels spells dramatic
0084-6570/05/1021- consequences for humanity and the earth. Accordingly, the eld of
0599$20.00
biocultural diversity has developed with both a theoretical and a
practical side, the latter focusing on on-the-ground work and policy,
as well as with an ethics and human rights component. This review
provides some background on the historical antecedents and begin-
nings of this eld and on its philosophical and ethical underpinnings,
and then surveys the key literature on biocultural diversity, concen-
trating on three main aspects: global and regional studies on the
links between linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity; the mea-
surement and assessment of biocultural diversity; and the protection
and maintenance of biocultural diversity. The review concludes with
some considerations about future prospects for this emerging eld.
599
quences of loss of these interlinked diversities;

Contents (c) approaches to the joint maintenance and
revitalization of biocultural diversity; and (d)
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600
development of the related aspects of human
HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS . . 600
rights.
DEVELOPMENT OF CURRENT
This review rst outlines the history of the
LINES OF RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . 601
elds emergence and then appraises various
PHILOSOPHICAL AND
aspects of the relevant body of literature.
ETHICAL UNDERPINNINGS . 602
LINGUISTIC AND BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY: GLOBAL AND HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS
REGIONAL STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . 604
Parallels and afnities between evolutionary
MEASURING AND ASSESSING
biology and historical linguistics and between
BIOCULTURAL DIVERSITY . . . 610

languages and species were already drawn by
PROTECTING AND
Charles Darwin (in both his Origin of Species
MAINTAINING
and The Descent of Man; Darwin 1859, 1871)
BIOCULTURAL DIVERSITY . . . 612
and commented on by linguist August Schle-
FUTURE PROSPECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
icher in Darwinism Tested by the Science of Lan-

guage (Schleicher 1863), although such re-
marks soon led to a reaction in linguistics
against what was interpreted as a likening
INTRODUCTION of languages to natural organisms. Analogies
If the 1980s might be remembered as the between languages and species became dis-
decade of biodiversityin which the term credited and were relegated to the shelves of
biodiversity was coined to call attention to the misconceived ideas until recently.
massive, human-made extinction crisis threat- As for the links between language and the
ening the diversity of life in naturethen the environment, interest in this topic has prece-
1990s might be dubbed the decade of biocul- dents in the history of anthropology. In the
tural diversitywhen the concept of an in- North American anthropological tradition,
timate link between biological, cultural, and the study of Native American languages nat-
linguistic diversity was put forth and its im- urally led to such interest, as linguistic an-
plications for life in both nature and culture thropologists such as Boas, Sapir, and Whorf
began to be explored. By the mid-2000s, a were struck by the elaborate ways in which
small but signicant body of literature on bio- indigenous languages encoded and invento-
cultural (or, in a less widespread version, bi- ried, among other things, the characteristics
olinguistic) diversity has accumulated, and a of the local landscape and its ora and fauna.
related eld of both scholarly research and In particular, Sapir noted that language bears
practical applications is emerging. the stamp of the physical environment in
The main foci of this emerging eld are which the speakers are placed while reect-
as follows: (a) the parallels and correlations ing the interest of the people in such en-
between biodiversity and linguistic diversity, vironmental features (Sapir 1912, pp. 228,
the overlaps in the global distribution of lan- 229). From Boass famous notes on Eskimo
guages and biodiversity, and the relationships words for snow (Boas 1911; see Martin 1986,
between language, traditional knowledge, and Pullum 1989 on the later vast misinterpreta-
the environment; (b) studies and assessments tions and distortions, both scholarly and pop-
of the common threats to biodiversity, cul- ular, of this topic) to Whorfs related remarks
tural diversity, and linguistic diversity and of in his popular 1940 article Science and Lin-
the sociocultural and environmental conse- guistics (Whorf 1940), these early studies had
600 Maffi
a foundational role in anthropology. How- full understanding of culture (Kroeber 1963,

ever, this was not specically to the effect of p. 1)a statement that might be taken as pro-
giving rise to a distinct tradition of research on grammatic for the current lines of research,
the relations between language (and/or cul- if with the addition that recognition of these
ture) and the environment. By and large, these relationships is, conversely, also central to the
early observations on the language of the en- full understanding of nature.
vironment rather contributed to the devel-
opment of concepts of linguistic and cultural
relativity. DEVELOPMENT OF CURRENT
Another pioneer of North American an- LINES OF RESEARCH
thropology, Alfred Kroeber, studied the re- Despite such signicant antecedents, the de-
lationships between Native American cul- velopment of an integrated eld of research on
ture areas and the natural areas (today, we cultural, linguistic, and biological diversity has
would say ecosystems or ecological niches) long been in the making. Recent interest in
of the North American continent, nding the links between language and the environ-
signicant geographical correlations between ment has arisen in part from the work carried
the two (Kroeber 1963). Whereas several of out over the past few decades by ethnobiolo-
Kroebers students (including Julian Steward) gists and ethnoecologists studying indigenous
later developed a focus on cultural ecology, knowledge and use of local ora, fauna, and
Kroebers specic approach in this classic ecosystems, as well as by researchers inter-
work did not directly result in an established ested in indigenous place naming. In part, this
research tradition on the links of cultures interest also stems from research in linguistics
(and/or languages) and biogeography. Rather, on the notion of linguistic ecologies, seen as
the idea of such correlations tended to be un- networks of human relationships that encom-
popular among scholars, as it was also before pass not only the linguistic and social envi-
Kroebers work, because it evoked romantic ronment, but also the physical environment,
nationalist theories of geographic and biolog-
as interrelated parts of a whole (Muhlh ausler
ical determinism. 1996). Investigation of these topics has led to
This unpopularity is somewhat of a para- increasing recognition of the value of the eco-
dox in light of Kroebers conviction that this logical knowledge and practices of indigenous
area of inquiry offered a special opportunity and other local peoples, and of the signicant
for a modern, nonsimplistic environmental extent to which such knowledge and prac-
study which would almost certainly stimu- tices are developed, encoded, and transmitted
late analogous research elsewhere (Kroeber through language.
1928, quoted in Heizer 1963) and that his More specically, a focus on the relation-
work in no way represented a relapse to- ships between linguistic, cultural, and biologi-
ward the old environmentalism which be- cal diversity, their global overlapping distribu-
lieved it could nd the causes of culture in tions, and the common threats they are facing
environment (Kroeber 1963, p. 1). Kroeber emerged in the mid-1990s in the wake of an
made it clear that [w]hile it is true that cul- alarming and thought-provoking observation:
tures are rooted in nature, and can therefore that the ongoing worldwide loss of biodiver-
never be completely understood except with sity is paralleled by and seems interrelated
reference to that piece of nature in which to the extinction crisis affecting linguistic
they occur,. . .[t]he immediate causes of cul- and cultural diversity (Krauss 1992; Harmon
tural phenomena are other cultural phenom- 1996, 2002; Nabhan 1997; Posey 1999; Maf
ena. . . .[T]his does not prevent the recogni- 2001c).
tion of relations between nature and culture, In the early 1990s, linguists started call-
nor the importance of these relations to the ing attention to a worrisome trend that was
www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 601

becoming increasingly apparent: Many of the guages, Endangered Knowledge, Endangered

worlds languages, especially those spoken by Environments, held in Berkeley, California,
small-scale indigenous and minority societies, in 1996. This conference brought together
Biocultural
diversity: diversity were seriously under threat of replacement by scholars and practitioners in the linguistic, so-
of life in all its larger, majority languages, whether national cial, behavioral, and natural sciences, along
manifestations or transnational (Robins & Uhlenbeck 1991, with members of indigenous peoples, to iden-
biological, cultural, Hale et al. 1992). This loss of linguistic di- tify avenues for theoretical investigation of
and linguistic
versity was estimated to endanger the survival and applied work on what was beginning to
which are
interrelated within a of 50%90% of the 6000+ currently spoken be labeled as biocultural diversity. (For the
complex languages by 2100 (Krauss 1992). In the effort outcome of the conference, see Maf 2001c.)
socio-ecological to rally linguists and others around this issue, The conference was organized by Terralingua
adaptive system parallels were drawn with the better-known (http://www.terralingua.org), an interna-
phenomenon of biodiversity loss and with the tional nonprot organization also created in
endeavors undertaken by biologists to stem 1996 with the specic purpose to promote
this loss (Krauss 1992). knowledge and protection of biocultural di-
This clarion call did not go unnoticed by versity through research, education, policy
nonlinguists, soon reaching a small but active development, and on-the-ground action.
contingent of social scientists and conserva- As a result of the conuence of these and
tionists who had independently been point- other related endeavors, a multifaceted eld
ing to the links between and the common of inquiry on linguistic, cultural, and biolog-
threats to cultural and biological diversity ical diversity, with both a theoretical and an
(Dasmann 1991, Harmon 1992, Nietschmann applied side, has begun to developan inter-
1992, Clay 1993, Durning 1993; see also the esting case of a new domain of interlinked in-
Declaration of Belem issued in 1988 by the vestigation and practice arising from a per-
International Society of Ethnobiology, which ceived urgent need in the real world, similar
afrmed the existence of an inextricable link to the prior development of conservation bi-
between cultural and biological diversity). It ology in response to the biodiversity extinc-
was increasingly apparent that the variety of tion crisis. At this point, a picture of language-
cultural knowledges, beliefs, and practices de- environment interrelations is taking shape at
veloped by human societies, as well as the lan- various degrees of resolution, from a global
guages that embody them, are being placed at to a local scale. The following sections re-
risk by the socioeconomic and political pro- view some of the key aspects of this emerging
cesses threatening the integrity and the very picture through the recent literature. First,
survival of indigenous and local cultures and though, it may be useful to touch on some of
of the environments in which they liveand the philosophical and ethical underpinnings
that this massive and rapid change has pro- of this new eld, as they have been explored
found implications for the maintenance of life in some of this literature.
on earth. It became clear that an interdisci-
plinary effort was needed to bring together
these different threads and begin to portray an PHILOSOPHICAL AND
integrated picture of the state of the diversity ETHICAL UNDERPINNINGS
of life in all its formsbiological, cultural, and Harmon has offered the as yet most thorough
linguisticthe pressures it is undergoing, and and thoughtful approach to the philosophi-
the possible actions to ensure its perpetuation cal and ethical foundations for the eld of
(Harmon 1995, 1996; Krauss 1996). biocultural diversity. In his work, he has pro-
Among the events that catalyzed such vided the rst comprehensive review of the
an interdisciplinary effort was the interna- state of linguistic diversity and the geographi-
tional working conference Endangered Lan- cal overlaps between linguistic and biological
602 Maffi
diversity pointing to the converging extinc- best gained through a diversity of languages.
tion crises of these diversities (Harmon 1995, (And see Fishman 1982 for an early, mas-
1996; see next section for details). With ap- terful treatment of this topic from a Whor-
Language richness:
propriate caveats, he takes linguistic diver- an perspective.) Along similar lines, Krauss the total number of
sity to be a major indicator for cultural di- (1996) has proposed that global linguistic di- distinct languages
versity and the loss of language richness as versity as such constitutes an intellectual web found in a given
a proxy for the loss of cultural richness. On of life, or logosphere, that envelops the region or country or
worldwide, as a
this basis, he addresses a fundamental question planet and is as essential to human survival
measure of linguistic
(Harmon 2002): If the worlds diversity in na- as the biospherea concept of course remi- diversity
ture and culture is indeed rapidly diminishing, niscent of Teilhard de Chardins noosphere
Logosphere: the
why should we care? and of the classical notion of the Logos. symbolic planetary
His answer stems from an examination Further, from both a psychological and an web of the logos,
of philosophical, biological, psychological, ethical perspective, Harmon (2001, 2002) pin-
or spoken word,
and linguistic literature from the Enlighten- points the enduring fallacy of equating unity represented by the
global network of
ment to the present. Through this excursus, with uniformity (which underlies all efforts to
human languages
he shows the interwoven (and possibly coe- promote homogenization, whether by nation-
volved) diversity in nature and culture to be states or by the forces of economic globaliza-
the preeminent fact of existence, the basic tion). Rather, he argues that the perception of
condition of life on earth. The continued de- diversity is the basic condition for the func-
crease of biocultural diversity, he concludes, tioning of human consciousness (through the
would staunch the historical ow of being it- distilling of sameness from difference) so that
self, the evolutionary processes through which if consciousness is what denes us as humans,
the vitality of all life has come down to us then diversity makes us human. From this, he
through the ages (Harmon 2002, p. xiii). derives a moral imperative to preserve di-
Others have similarly stressed the evolu- versity and to strive not for uniformity but for
tionary signicance of diversity not only in unity in diversity.
nature but also in culture and language as Wollock (2001) reaches analogous conclu-
a way of keeping options alive for the fu- sions through a critique of Western linguistic
ture of humanity and the earth (Maf 1998, science. He suggests that, if this scholarly tra-
2001a). Bernard (1992, p. 82) has suggested dition has largely been silent about linguis-
that [l]inguistic diversity. . . is at least the tic diversity and has ignored or even denied
correlate of (though not the cause of) diver- any connection between language and the real
sity of adaptational ideas and that therefore world, it is because it was born of the nomi-
any reduction of language diversity dimin- nalist philosophical tradition that has taken
ishes the adaptational strength of our species hold in the history of Western thought. Nom-
because it lowers the pool of knowledge inalism treats all universal concepts (includ-
from which we can draw. Muhlh ausler (1995, ing nature and community) as arbitrary
p. 160) has argued that convergence toward social constructs with no connection to the
majority cultural models increases the like- real world. Within this tradition, language
lihood that more and more people will en- itself is seen as an arbitrary system of signs
counter the same cultural blind spots that bears little or no relation to the extralin-
undetected instances in which the prevailing guistic world (on this point, see also Pawley
cultural model fails to provide adequate so- 2001). Such a conception of language, Wol-
lutions to societal problems. Instead, he pro- lock argues, is by denition incapable of ad-
poses,[i]t is by pooling the resources of many dressing the relationship between language
understandings that more reliable knowledge and the environment or with the ways in
can arise; and access to these perspectives is which language may orient the mind in

certain directionsincluding directions that LINGUISTIC AND BIOLOGICAL

may be either benecial to or destructive DIVERSITY: GLOBAL AND
GIS: geographic
of the environment. According to the au- REGIONAL STUDIES
information systems, thor, nominalist philosophy in fact lies behind
The tasks of systematically testing the claim
a technology for most of the discourse of colonizing cultures
that biodiversity and linguistic and/or cul-
representing and about both language and the environment,
tural diversity are mutually related and of
analyzing and behind the increasing tendency for this
georeferenced data assessing the state of each of these diversi-
discourse to treat diversity as an epiphe-
ties in relation to the others depend largely
nomenon at best and a nuisance and a threat
on the availability of effective ways to rep-
at worst.
resent, locate, and measure these diversities.
On the other hand, Wollock also con-
The focus of much of the rst generation
tends that the response does not lie in the re-
of biocultural diversity research, begin-
cent postmodernist trend, which, in reaction
ning with Harmons groundbreaking work

to the centralizing and homogenizing ten-
(Harmon 1995, 1996), has thus been on de-
dencies of modernism, denies the existence
veloping such tools. This effort has been facil-
of any overarching system of meaning and
itated by the progressive accumulation of data
only admits of diversity, decrying unity as
on biodiversity and linguistic diversity (and, to
an illusion. Wollock observes that all great

a lesser extent, other aspects of cultural diver-
metaphysical traditions recognize endless di-
sity), as well as by the recent development of
versity as the reality of the planet, and in-
electronic means for representing geospatial
deed the universe, while perceiving a funda-
data [that is, geographic information systems
mental unity in itthe unity of the Logos,
(GIS)].
whose likeness can be approximated only
In approaching this challenge, Harmon
through the maximum diversity. He argues
(1996, 2002) rst revisited the once-tabooed
that only a shift from viewing language as
issue of the comparison of species and lan-
grammar to viewing it as action within the
guages, dispelling the misperception that an
social and natural world can make it possi-
analogy between the two implies equating lan-
ble to talk adequately about the relationship
guages with natural organisms. He illustrated
of linguistic diversity to biodiversity, of how
how, although the concepts of species and lan-
languages as repositories of cultural memory
guages (and speciation and language gene-
and guides to action can inuence the land-
sis) are unquestionably fuzzy categories with
scape and its biodiversity. In understanding
porous boundaries and defy ironclad deni-
and celebrating unity in diversity, he con-
tion, they are not arbitrary and correspond to
cludes, lies our best hope for a sustainable
real entities (and processes) in the world. (For
future.
another recent view of languages as species,
From yet another complementary angle,
see Mufwene 2001.) The factual observation
Suckling (2000) suggests that the deep con-
that the global distributions of species and lan-
nections between language and ecology, and
guages signicantly overlap, Harmon pointed
thus the mutual consequences of linguistic
out, then begs for explanation as well as
and biological diversity loss, are apparent es-
heightened attention to the common threats
pecially in the role of metaphor in human
both species and languages are undergoing.
communication and the extent to which bi-
Drawing on global biodiversity data as well
ologically based metaphors support our un-
as catalogs of the worlds languages (Harmon
derstanding of the world. As both biological
1995), Harmon showed notable correlations
and linguistic diversity are eroded, he argues,
between linguistic and biological diversity
these fundamental metaphors are also being
on a global scale (Harmon 1996). He found
lost as tools for thought and for recognition
that 10 out of the top 12 megadiversity
of identity and otherness.
604 Maffi
countries for biodiversity [as dened by guistic, and biological diversity, see also Hunn
IUCNThe World Conservation Union; 2001, Maf 2001b, Smith 2001.)
McNeely et al. 1990] also gure among the
In contrast, Muhlh ausler (1996) called at-
IUCN: The World
top 25 most linguistically diverse countries. tention to the fact that linguistic and cul- Conservation Union
His global cross-mapping of languages and tural distinctiveness can develop also in the
Sympatric
higher vertebrate species (see Maf 1998 absence of mutual isolation: for example, linguistic boundary
for the earliest printed version of this map) among human groups belonging to the same formation: the
(Figure 1) brought out a remarkable over- broadly dened cultural area, or whose lan- development of
lap between linguistic and biological diver- guages are considered to be historically re- linguistic
distinctiveness
sity throughout the world, with the high- lated or to have undergone extensive mutual
between human
est concentration of bioculturally megadi- contact, and who occupy the same or contigu- communities in the
verse countries in Central and South Amer- ous ecological niches. Such circumstances absence of
ica, central Africa, South and Southeast Asia, high concentrations of linguistically distinct
geographic
and the Pacic. Similar results emerged communities coexisting in the same areas and discontinuity
from a global comparison of languages and communicating through complex networks Lineage density:
owering plant species. These correlations, of multilingualismhave occurred frequently the ratio of distinct
linguistic lineages to
Harmon argued, suggest that both biological throughout human history (Hill 1997) and
areas within a
and linguistic diversity in such countries are still do today in many parts of the world, continent or other
especially vulnerable to the effects of adverse the Pacic being a prime example. This phe- well-dened region
political, economic, and social processes and nomenon of sympatric linguistic boundary Spread zone:
policies. formation points to the role of sociocultural geographic area
Harmon (1996) also pointed to several factors, along with biogeographic factors, in characterized by
large-scale biogeographic factors that could the development of linguistic diversity. rapid spread of
languages or
account for these correlations because they Other research conducted by linguists and
language families
might comparably affect the development of anthropologists during the 1990s also sought and presenting low
both biological and linguistic diversity (such to correlate the global distribution of lin- genetic linguistic
as extensive land masses with a variety of ter- guistic diversity with both environmental and diversity
rains, climates, and ecosystems; island territo- social factors. Nichols (1990, 1992) devel-
ries, especially with internal geophysical bar- oped a theory of linguistic diversity in space
riers; or tropical climates, fostering higher and time in her work on linguistic typology.
numbers and densities of species). In addition, She identies biogeographic factors similar to
he hypothesized a process of coevolution of Harmons, which affect the worldwide distri-
small human groups with their local ecosys- bution of lineage density. She lists features
tems, through which, over time, humans in- such as low latitude, coastlines, high rain-
teracted closely with the environment, mod- fall, and mountains among the factors posi-
ifying it as they adapted to it and developing tively correlated with high lineage diversity.
specialized knowledge of it, as well as special- To these, she adds historical and economic
ized ways of talking about it. Thus the local factors such as scale of economylarge-scale
languages, through which this knowledge was economies historically bring about both eco-
encoded and transmitted, would in turn have nomic and linguistic spread and thus lower di-
become molded by and specically adapted versity. This, she shows, has been the case es-
to their socioecological environments. Along pecially in the Old World (Africa and Eurasia),

the same lines, Muhlh ausler (1995, p. 155) whereas early human colonization of the New
notes, Life in a particular human environ- World and the Pacic brought about very
ment is dependent on peoples ability to talk high lineage density. On this basis, she distin-
about it. (On the evolutionary dimensions of guishes spread zones, characterized by rapid
human-environment relationships and the is- spread of languages or language families and
sue of the possible coevolution of cultural, lin- with low genetic linguistic diversity, from

residual zones with high genetic diversity and generalizability of his otherwise signicant
no appreciable spread of languages or lan- ndings.]
guage families. Early work on the links between bio-
Residual zone:
geographic area In a study on density of human languages diversity and linguistic and cultural diver-
characterized by in North America, Mace & Pagel (1995) hy- sity soon attracted the attention of conser-
high genetic pothesized that group boundary formation in vation organizations and other international
linguistic diversity human societies may be an active process cor- agencies concerned with implementing the
and presenting no
related with competition over resources and mandate of sustainable development issued
appreciable spread of
languages or that this process in turn may lead to language by the Rio Summit of 1992, and particu-
language families diversication. On a smaller scale, Hill (1996) larly with the call for protection and pro-
Ecological risk: the reported comparable ndings in a study of motion of the innovations and practices of
level of risk that dialectal variation in Tohono Oodham (a indigenous and local communities embody-
Uto-Aztecan language spoken in Arizona, in ing traditional lifestyles relevant for the con-
ecological factors
such as climate and the United States), where the differential servation and sustainable use of biological
rainfall pose for a
sociolinguistic characteristics of two dialect diversity (Convention on Biological Diver-
populations
subsistence communities of Tohono Oodham (a localist sity, Article 8j; CBD 1992). The United Na-
versus a distributed stance) correlate with the tions Educational, Scientic, and Cultural Or-
UNESCO: United
Nations Educational, extent to which each community can make se- ganization (UNESCO), the United Nations
Scientic, and cure claims over vital resources such as water. Environment Program (UNEP), the World
Cultural On similar grounds, Nettle (1998, 1999) Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the Society
Organization aimed to develop a theory of linguistic diver- for Conservation Biology, and IUCN all com-
UNEP: United sity and its global distribution by correlating missioned and published articles and studies
Nations this distribution with ecological and socioe- on biocultural diversity (Borrini-Feyerabend
Environment
conomic factors. He identied seasonal ver- et al. 2004, Harmon & Maf 2002, Maf
Program
sus nonseasonal climates, with the attendant 1998, Maf et al. 1999, Oviedo et al. 2000,
WWF: World Wide
patterns of rainfall, as the key factors affecting Skutnabb-Kangas et al. 2003), propelling this
Fund for Nature
the distribution of linguistic diversity world- work into the domain of policy.
Ecoregion:
wide. He subsumes these factors under the In particular, Oviedo et al. (2000) under-
relatively large land
or water unit concept of ecological risk. His data show that took the further development of Harmons
containing a set of areas with lower rainfall and shorter growing initial work on the global overlaps between
natural communities seasons, where people are at higher subsis- biological and cultural diversity through the
that share most of tence risk, tend to correlate with geograph- use of GIS. Again with due caveats, the distri-
their species,
ically more extended ethnolinguistic groups bution of the worlds languages (based on the
dynamics, and
environmental and fewer different languages, whereas areas GIS database elaborated by SIL International,
conditions with higher rainfall and longer or constant the makers of Ethnologue, the as yet most com-
growing seasons (such as in tropical and equa- plete catalog of the worlds languages; Grimes
torial regions) correlate with higher num- 2000) was taken as a convenient proxy for cul-
bers of smaller-scale ethnolinguistic groups tural diversity at large and plotted against the
and thus higher linguistic diversity. He at- distribution of the worlds ecoregions (as iden-
tributes this difference to the fact that in the tied by WWF), with special reference to the
former case people need to establish larger 200 ecoregions chosen by WWF as priori-
networks of exchange to mitigate their eco- ties for conservation, to determine the extent
logical risk, whereas in the latter case peo- to which cultural diversity abounds in those
ple can be more self-sufcient in their local- biodiversity-rich and threatened ecoregions.
ized ecological niches. [See Harmon (2002) A map of the global overlapping distributions
and Skutnabb-Kangas & Harmon (2002) for of ecoregions and languages was produced for
some of the theoretical and methodological inclusion in the publication. An initial analy-
shortcomings of Nettles work that limit the sis of the results of this mapping showed that
606 Maffi
the highest concentration of ethnolinguistic mote a more sustainable and equitable use
groups occurs in tropical forest ecosystems, of natural resources (CEESP 2004). UN-
whereas lower densities are found in arctic and ESCOs recent Universal Declaration on Cul-
CEESP: IUCNs
desert environments (a nding that coincides tural Diversity (UNESCO 2001), although Commission on
with Nettles, reviewed above, and for which not recognizing an explicit link between cul- Environmental,
Oviedo et al. similarly provide an explanation tural and biological diversity, emphasizes cul- Economic, and
in terms of subsistence strategies). tural diversity as the wellspring of creativity Social Policy
The applied goal of this project was to pro- (Article 7) and afrms that cultural diversity
mote an integrated biocultural approach to is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity
the conservation of WWFs priority ecore- is for nature (Article 1).
gions and of biodiversity at large, through The topic of global biocultural correla-
mutually benecial partnerships with indige- tions has continued to stimulate both fur-
nous and traditional peoples living in those ther research and critiques in the academic
regions and the promotion of their land and environment as well, contributing to the de-
traditional resource rights and linguistic and velopment of theory, methodology, and data
cultural rights. At this level, the project drew sets for this eld of study and to the rene-
some criticism from observers (e.g., McIntosh ment of research hypotheses and parameters.
2001) concerned that WWFs shift from a lo- Apparently unaware of some of the previ-
cal to an ecoregional (thus often transnational) ous research on the same topic (particularly
scale in their conservation efforts may actu- Harmons), Sutherland, an ecologist, com-
ally purport a move away from the greater pares both the global distribution and the
accountability involved in community-based extinction risk of languages and species
conservation, particularly in regards to in- (Sutherland 2003), reaching conclusions that
digenous counterparts. (Concerns of this na- are largely in line with earlier ndings and
ture are part of a larger ongoing debate about forecastings. In particular, by applying to
the goals and modus operandi of conservation both species and languages the internation-
organizations and the successes and failures ally agreed criteria for classiying extinction
of the sustainable development paradigm; see risk in species, he nds that languages (as per
Chapin 2004, Maf 2004 for reviews.) the Ethnologue catalog) are at far greater risk
At the same time, these critics saluted than are species (specically birds and mam-
the key nding that emerged from this map- mals, which he chooses for comparison). His
ping exercise, that is, the strong correlations quantications conrm the conjectures found
between biodiversity and cultural diversity, early on in the current literature on language
pointing out that this nding stresses the cen- endangerment (e.g., Krauss 1992). With some
tral role of indigenous peoples in the global discrepancies (perhaps due to different meth-
conservation initiative. The signicance of ods of analysis), Sutherland also conrms a
this issue, and more generally of the role of number of biogeographic correlations in the
culture in conservation, has in fact continued distribution of languages and species, high di-
to work its way into conservation organiza- versity in both cases being positively associ-
tions, particularly IUCN, whose Commission ated in his data with area, low latitude, forest
on Environmental, Economic, and Social Pol- cover, and altitude, but not with rainfall. In his
icy (CEESP) now includes, among the pri- calculations, he also nds period since settle-
orities for its 20052008 mandate, the im- ment to have little effect on language diversity.
proved understanding of the synergy between Because of the high visibility of its pub-
cultural diversity and biological diversity and lisher (the journal Nature), Sutherland (2003)
on how this may be harnessed and applied triggered several media stories, including a
towards shared values, tools, mechanisms and scathing essay by Berreby in the New York
processes that enhance conservation and pro- Times (Berreby 2003), in which the author

inveighed (mostly on ideological grounds) the random effect of historical factors, but re-
against the validity of species-languages com- ects both the length of population history in
parisons and of efforts to maintain or re- a given location and the constraints and po-
vitalize endangered languages. Several let- tential carrying capacity of the environment.
ters from the public later published by In this context, while calling for more studies
the Times vigorously countered Berrebys of the behavioral and cultural factors leading
arguments. to boundary formation, they argue that social
Collard & Foley (2002) follow the lines of boundary formation, which in turn reects
earlier studies such as Mace & Pagel (1995) social behavior and interaction between resi-
and Nettle (1998) in exploring biogeograph- dential units, is responsive to environmental
ical correlates and possible determinants of and resource factors (Collard & Foley 2002,
human cultural diversity. In this case, instead p. 379). Another signicant point Collard &
of using languages as proxies for the worlds Foley make is that, although the distribution
cultures, they derive the distribution of cul- of cultural diversity shows clear global pat-
tural diversity from Atlas of World Cultures terns, analysis at higher resolution and smaller
(Price 1990). The article contains a concise scale also reveals signicant differences from
but very useful discussion of some of the main region to region. This discrepancy between
caveats in the use of such global comparative global and sub-global patterns leads them to
databases on cultures, as well as of the no- call for smaller-scale analyses that will be more
tion of culture itself as an analytical unit sensitive to the role of local, especially his-
caveats that mirror those about languages torical, factors in altering patterns of global
noted by other researchers (e.g., Harmon diversity.
1996, 2002; Oviedo et al. 2000). The authors This point is widely shared among re-
also point to historical factors (such as state searchers on biocultural diversity. Stepp et al.
expansion) that may have reduced cultural di- (2004) explicitly stress the need for developing
versity and masked the impact and visibility of studies on a regional scale that will allow in-
older ecological factors. They stress, though, vestigators to better identify the correlations
the importance of separating out the issue of and mutual inuences and perhaps even dis-
how easy it is to dene any particular cultural cern causal factors in the development, main-
unit from the issue of whether such units ex- tenance, and loss of biocultural diversity. At
ist (Collard & Foley 2002, p. 374) and con- the same time, these authors make a major
sider this unit as valid both temporally and contribution to the renement of global bio-
spatially for their analytical purposes. On this cultural analyses by bringing greater sophisti-
basis, they map out the distribution of world cation to the use of GIS in such studies. Their
cultures according to latitude, which shows a work, still at a preliminary stage, marks a shift
pattern fully consistent with that of the distri- in the intended use of GIS: from employ-
bution of languages in earlier studies: Cultural ing this technology mostly as a demonstra-
diversity is higher in tropical areas and lower tion tool to illustrate the patterns of biolog-
at higher latitudes, in both the northern and ical and linguistic (and cultural) diversity, to
the southern hemisphere, and in both evo- using it for the in-depth exploration of factors
lutionarily older continents such as Africa that may correlate with observed patterns and
and newer ones such as the Americas, with of explanatory hypotheses about these pat-
Europe showing the lowest diversity, a likely terns. This research is also beginning to ex-
reection of empire formation there. The au- pand the roster of data used to explore the
thors also nd positive correlations of cul- links between biological and linguistic diver-
tural diversity with temperature and rainfall. sity (the latter again being taken as a proxy for
These ndings suggest to them that the pat- cultural diversity, with data from Ethnologue).
tern of human cultural diversity is not simply One signicant advance is the adoption of a
608 Maffi
GIS database of global biodiversity (speci- 2002a,b). All these data variously help focus
cally, vascular plant diversity) organized not attention on the theoretical and methodolog-
by countries or ecoregions as in previous stud- ical requirements and on the kinds of data and
Diversity zones:
ies but by diversity zones (standardized units integration thereof needed for in-depth stud- units of area (10,000
of area), which allows for comparable diver- ies at a subglobal level. Especially highlighted sq. km.) that
sity categories on a global scale (database de- is the need for historical perspective both categorize the
veloped by Wilhelm Barthlott and coworkers on processes of environmental change and worlds biodiversity
on the basis of the
at the University of Bonn). A GIS mapping of on human population movements and expan-
number of vascular
the two data sets shows a high geographical sions and other social, economic, and politi- plant species per unit
correlation between linguistic diversity and cal factors that may have affected the location
biodiversity, particularly in Mesoamerica, the and numbers of human populations and their
Andes, West Africa, the Himalayas, and South relationships with and effects on the environ-
Asia/Pacic (Figure 2). As in previous re- ment. The importance of a better understand-
search, the observed correlation is strongest in ing of how environmental factors may sim-
the tropics. Another signicant pattern noted ilarly or differentially affect cultural groups
by Stepp et al. is a correlation between low and species, as well as issues of scale and de-
population density and high biocultural di- gree of resolution of the analyses, is also in the
versity, perhaps due to an increase in both foreground.

linguistic homogenization and impact on the In this connection, Manne (2003) provides
environment at higher population densities. a critical appraisal of biodiversitycultural
In the further development of their work, the diversity links through a study focused on
authors plan to elaborate regional mappings Central and South America, using the distri-
that will allow for better exploration of such bution of languages as indicator of cultural di-
patterns, with the inclusion of possible social versity and that of Passeriform birds for bio-
and historical factors. diversity. Her main nding is that the scale
A number of continental and regional stud- of resolution strongly affects the results. At a
ies, some descriptive, some based on mappings coarse scale, the respective distributions over-
and quantitative data, are already available, in- lap signicantly in the region of study. At a
cluding a map of indigenous peoples and envi- ner scale, however, the correlation is con-
ronments in Central America (Chapin 1992); siderably weakened, with no simple mono-
an overview of biodiversity and cultural diver- tonic relationship between numbers of species
sity in Mexico (Toledo 1994); a study of cul- and languages. Mannes research also shows
tural and biological diversity in Latin Ameri- no common environmental variables (of the
can ecoregions (Wilcox & Duin 1995); an eco- kinds instead found to be signicant in other
logical approach to language diversity in West studies reviewed above) affecting the distribu-
Africa (Nettle 1996); cross-mappings between tion of languages and species. She also nds
the locations of South American indigenous differences in geographical range sizes and
peoples and habitat types as well as between overlaps between species and languages; the
South American indigenous reserves and bio- ranges of birds are larger and more overlap-
sphere reserves and national parks (Lizarralde ping than those of languages and the cultural
2001); a study of the correlation of linguis- groups who speak them. [But note that this
tic, cultural, and biological diversity in Amer- nding may be skewed by the lack of ade-
ica north of Mexico (Smith 2001); an analysis quate data on and ways of representing the de-
of the distribution of cultural and biological gree of porousness of cultural and linguistic
diversity in Africa (Moore et al. 2002); and borders. Both linguists and anthropologists,
overviews of the Colorado Plateau ecoregion
e.g., Muhlh ausler (1996), Turner et al. (2003),
in the southwestern United States as a have shown such borders to be the locus of
hotspot of biocultural diversity (Nabhan et al. signicant cross-linguistic and cross-cultural

interaction and of higher levels of diversity of itor the state of the natural world. Harmon
linguistic and cultural traits.] set out to identify indicators that might al-
Manne also compares degrees of threat for low for gauging the state of cultural diver-
IBCD: Index of
Biocultural Diversity species and languages, adapting to languages, sity in relation to the state of biodiversity,
as did Sutherland, the internationally recog- and thus for determining whether cultural di-
nized threat categories for species. Her nd- versity is indeed diminishing and whether it
ing here is that even at a coarse scale the dis- is diminishing in tandem with biodiversity.
tributions of threatened languages and species He proposed a number of potential indica-
do not tend to coincide in Central and South tors: from language, ethnicity, and religion to
America. She points to some possible histor- diet, crops, land management practices, med-
ical as well as data availability factors that ical practices, social organization, and forms
might account for this nding, but from both of artistic expression.
this result and her data on distribution of lan- In later work, Harmons choice of cultural
guage and species richness she concludes that indicators has focused on the rst three
we should not generally expect spatial con- indicators listed above owing to the ready
gruence in distribution of richness or of en- availability of global data sets on languages
dangerment between biological and cultural (Grimes 2000) and ethnicity and religion
diversity (Manne 2003, p. 526). Interestingly, (Barrett et al. 2001). In a collaborative effort,
a global map of threatened ecosystems and Harmon and Loh have developed a frame-
languages (Skutnabb-Kangas et al. 2003), al- work for an Index of Biocultural Diversity
though showing a similarly limited correla- (IBCD) (Harmon & Loh 2004, Loh &
tion in South America, presents a signicant Harmon 2005), which is meant to measure
correlation in Mexico and Central America, the condition and trends in biocultural diver-
as well as parts of North America, Equato- sity on a country-to-country basis (the level at
rial Africa, South Asia, and the Pacic. This which the available data sets are organized) by
nding suggests that establishing the extent aggregating data on the three cultural indi-
to which Mannes statement may indeed be cators with data on diversity of bird/mammal
generalizable to analyses at a subglobal level species and plant species as indicators for
depends on the future availability of a greater biodiversity (also selected on the basis of
number of such studies and on more standard- data availability). The IBCD features three
ized and therefore comparable methodologies components: a biocultural diversity richness
and data sets. component, which is the sheer aggregated
measure of a countrys richness in cultural
and biological diversity; an areal component,
MEASURING AND ASSESSING which adjusts the indicators for a countrys
BIOCULTURAL DIVERSITY land area and thus measures biocultural
The issue of standardization and compara- diversity relative to the countrys physical
bility is also central to another aspect of the extent; and a population component, which
eld of biocultural diversity, that is, work con- adjusts the indicators for a countrys human
cerned with the joint measurement and assess- population and thus measures biocultural
ment of the global conditions and trends of diversity in relation to a countrys population
biodiversity and cultural diversity. The ear- size. For each country, the overall IBCD
liest efforts in this connection go back to then aggregates the gures for these three
Harmon (1992) in the context of afrming components, yielding a global picture of the
the relevance of cultural diversity for pro- state of biocultural diversity in which three
tected area conservation. Indicators of biodi- areas emerge as core regions of exceptionally
versity were by then commonly used to mon- high biocultural diversity: the Amazon Basin,
610 Maffi
Central Africa, and Indomalaysia/Melanesia. (2002), Zarger & Stepp (2004), Zent & Zent
This largely conrms the geographical corre- (2004), and others are contributing to the de-
lations found in other work reviewed above, velopment of quantitative methods for the in-
TEK: traditional
in which either languages or ethnicities were vestigation of the acquisition and transmis- ecological knowledge
used as proxies for cultural diversity. sion of ethnobotanical and ethnoecological
Harmon and Loh point to a number of lim- knowledge and for the identication of fac-
itations of the IBCD and caveats concerning tors (such as age, formal education, bilingual
its use, making it clear that this index, like ability, length of residency, change in subsis-
any index, should be used only to measure tence practice, etc.) that may affect the main-
general conditions and trends and should not tenance or loss of TEK. As more of these
be expected to provide an in-depth analysis studies become available, they will likely con-
of the phenomenon at hand, particularly as stitute an increasingly signicant source of
concerns within-country variation in biocul- data for the elaboration of more rened in-
tural diversity. They also point out that, in its dicators of the conditions and trends of cul-
current version, the IBCD only portrays the tural diversity in support of a better under-
state of biocultural diversity at the beginning standing of the state of biocultural diversity
of the twenty-rst century, whereas data on and of the development of appropriate
trends are as yet missing and are the object policies.

of future research. They conclude that these Likewise, signicant contributions to the
latter data, used in conjunction with careful measurement and assessment of biocultural
qualitative analyses, will ultimately provide a diversity should come from linguistics, in
more adequate and accurate picture of the terms of more elaborate criteria for evaluat-
global state of biocultural diversity. They do, ing the state of the worlds languages. Even if
however, openly acknowledge that the main time-series data on the number of languages
value of such an index will be largely practical should become available in the near future,
and political, such as to raise awareness about sheer trends in language richness are not a
biocultural diversity among decision makers, fully adequate indicator of the state of lan-
opinion makers, and the general public and guages, as researchers in this eld well rec-
promote needed action for its protection and ognize. Better data on numbers of speakers
restoration. over time and other sociolinguistic vital statis-
It is in fact noteworthy that the Conven- tics, particularly on intergenerational lan-
tion on Biological Diversityone of whose guage transmission, contexts of use, availabil-
goals, as previously mentioned, is the pro- ity of mother tongue education, etc., will be
tection and promotion of traditional knowl- needed for this purpose. An expert group on
edge, innovations, and practices relevant to language endangerment and language main-
the conservation of biodiversityis currently tenance recently gathered by UNESCO has
considering the state and trends of linguis- put forth a set of recommendations for the
tic diversity as a possible indicator of the assessment of linguistic vitality (UNESCO
state and trends of traditional knowledge. The 2003), which should provide useful guidance
IBCD is a potential candidate to fulll this also for the development of linguistic diver-
role. sity indicators. [Specically on the role of
Also very relevant in this connection is education through a mother-tongue medium
some of the recent quantitative work carried and on educational policies in the mainte-
out by ethnobiologists to measure and assess nance of linguistic diversity, see Skutnabb-
the persistence and loss of traditional eco- Kangas (2000). On structural and functional
logical knowledge (TEK). Researchers such indicators of language obsolescence, see Hill
as Zent (1999, 2001), Lizarralde (2001), Ross (2001).]

PROTECTING AND tional policies, as well as an increase in the

MAINTAINING BIOCULTURAL availability of nancial and other resources
DIVERSITY in support of efforts to promote the protec-
tion and maintenance of biocultural diversity
Of course, no matter how sophisticated our
at various levels. Yet, much more is needed,
understanding of biocultural diversity and
especially in terms of change in general atti-
ability to represent, measure, and assess it may
tudes and behaviors. The recent proliferation
be, without appropriate action we would still,
of news stories as well as of popular books
most likely, be presiding over the demise of
on the loss of linguistic diversity (e.g., Crystal
our bioculturally rich world, given the forces
2000, Dalby 2003, Nettle & Romaine 2000)
causing its erosion. This is why the relevance
which generally point to a link between lan-
of affecting policy and public opinion is high
guage loss and culture and knowledge loss,
on the minds of researchers in this eld, giv-
and in some cases also biodiversity lossmay
ing it its characteristic mixture of theory and

help increase general awareness of biocultural
practice, research and advocacy, and knowl-
diversity and its predicament, which should be
edge building and knowledge dissemination.
a key to political action.
As indicated at various points above,
Ultimately, the most fundamental impetus
several international organizations, both in
for the protection and maintenance of biocul-

the biodiversity conservation area (WWF,
tural diversity can come, not from top-down
UNEP, IUCN) and in that of linguistic and
efforts, but only from the ground-up action
cultural diversity (UNESCO), have noted the
of indigenous and other societies worldwide
signicance of the biocultural perspective and
whose languages, cultural identities, and lands
incorporated it to a greater or lesser extent in
are being threatened by global forces. A per-
their own approaches and activities.
ceived link between language, cultural iden-
Developments in the eld of human rights,
tity, and land (rather than an abstract notion
such as the United Nations Draft Declaration
such as nature) is common among many in-
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other
digenous societies (see, e.g., Blythe & Brown
advances in the denition of indigenous peo-
2003). It is no surprise, then, that many of the
ples and minorities land rights, traditional
most explicit efforts to maintain and revital-
resource rights, property rights, and cultural
ize linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity
and linguistic rights, are also relevant to the
jointly are grassroots efforts, whether entirely
protection and promotion of biocultural di-
endogenous or promoted and assisted by na-
versity. All these are contributing to the es-
tional and international organizations. Learn-
tablishment of a link between biodiversity and
ing about and from these efforts and mak-
cultural and linguistic diversity in the arena
ing the lessons as widely available as possible
of human rights, as well as to the promotion
is the goal of some of the ongoing work in
of a new vision in which the protection of
biocultural diversity (L. Maf & E. Woodley,
human rights (both individual and collective)
Global Source Book on Biocultural Diversity, in
is intimately connected to the afrmation of
preparation).
human responsibilities toward and steward-
ship over humanitys heritage in nature and
culture. (For reviews, see Maf 2001a, Posey FUTURE PROSPECTS
2001, Skutnabb-Kangas 2000.)
Over the course of about 10 years, the eld
The dissemination of research activities,
of biocultural diversity has emerged as an ex-
along with advocacy, has thus had some ini-
ample of an integrated, transdisciplinary eld
tial success in producing general awareness of
(Somerville & Rapport 2000), spanning the
these issues. It has even resulted in a certain
natural and social sciences, as well as linking
amount of change in national and interna-
theory with practice and science with policy,
612 Maffi
ethics, and human rights. No doubt, at the plinary teams, and thus to the elaboration of a
present stage this eld needs an opportu- new synthesis about the connections between
nity to better dene its theoretical and philo- linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. A
sophical assumptions, its research questions, transdisciplinary approach should also make
its methodologies, and its overall goals. The research more sensitive to real world needs
increasing focus on the topic of biocultural and research ndings more relevant for policy
diversity in academic settings promises to and other applications. Above all, a transdis-
bring to this eld the benet of scientic rigor ciplinary study of biocultural diversity should
and critical analysis. We can also hope that the contribute to our understanding that, as
adoption of biocultural diversity as a domain Harmon (2002) puts it, diversity in nature and
for academic inquiry will foster a transdisci- culture makes us human. In this resides the
plinary turn in academe, leading to greater hope that greater respect for and stewardship
communication and exchanges among disci- over our shared natural and cultural heritage
plines, as well as more work by interdisci- can be achievedbefore it is too late.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Research relevant to the preparation of this article was conducted with support from two grants
awarded by The Christensen Fund to Terralingua (20032004, 2005). This support is gratefully
acknowledged. I am also grateful to Tove Skutnabb-Kangas and Dave Harmon for their careful
reading of and helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.
LITERATURE CITED
Barrett DB, Kurian GT, Johnson TN. 2001. World Christian Encyclopedia: A Comparative Survey
of Churches and Religions in the Modern World. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 2nd ed.
Bernard R. 1992. Preserving language diversity. Hum. Organ. 51:8289
Berreby D. 2003. Fading species and dying tongues: when the two part ways. New York Times,
May 27, p. F-3
Blythe J, McKenna Brown R, eds. 2003. Maintaining the Links. Language, Identity and the
Land. Proc. Conf. Found. Endanger. Lang., 7th, Broome, Aust. Bath, UK: Found. Endanger.
Lang.
Boas F. 1911. The Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 1. Bur. Am. Ethnol. Bull. 40, Part
1. Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst.
Borrini Feyerabend G, MacDonald K, Maf L, eds. 2004. History, Culture and Conservation.
Policy Matters 13:1308 (Spec. issue)
CBD 1992. Approved by the contracting parties at the United Nations Conf. Environ. Dev. Rio de
Janeiro, 5 June. Available at http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp
CEESP. 2004. Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) Mandate 2005
2008. Gland, Switz.: IUCNThe World Conservation Union
Chapin M. 1992. The co-existence of indigenous peoples and environments in Central America.
Res. Explor. 8(2):map
Chapin M. 2004. A challenge to conservationists. World Watch Nov./Dec.:1731
Clay JW. 1993. Looking back to go forward: predicting and preventing human rights violations.
In State of the Peoples: A Global Human Rights Report on Societies in Danger, ed. MS Miller,
pp. 6471. Boston: Beacon
Collard IF, Foley RA. 2002. Latitudinal patterns and environmental determinants of recent
human cultural diversity: Do humans follow biogeographical rules? Evol. Ecol. Res. 4:371
83

Crystal D. 2000. Language Death. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press

Dalby A. 2003. Language in Danger: The Loss of Linguistic Diversity and the Threat to Our Future.
New York: Columbia Univ. Press
Darwin C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. London: Murray
Darwin C. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. 2 vols. London: Murray
Dasmann RF. 1991. The importance of cultural and biological diversity. In Biodiversity: Culture,
Conservation, and Ecodevelopment, ed. ML Oldeld, JB Alcorn, pp. 715. Boulder: Westview
Durning AT. 1993. Supporting indigenous peoples. In State of the World 1993: A Worldwatch
Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society, pp. 80100. New York: Norton
Fishman JA. 1982. Whoranism of the third kind: ethnolinguistic diversity as a worldwide
societal asset. Lang. Soc. 11:114
Grimes BF. 2000. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Dallas: SIL Int. 14th ed.
Hale K, Krauss M, Watahomigie L, Yamamoto A, Craig C, et al. 1992. Endangered languages.
Language 68:142
Harmon D. 1992. Indicators of the worlds cultural diversity. Presented at World Congr. Natl.
Parks and Protected Areas, 4th, Caracas, Venezuela
Harmon D. 1995. The status of the worlds languages as reported in Ethnologue. Southwest J.
Ling. 14:133
Harmon D. 1996. Losing species, losing languages: Connections between biological and lin-
guistic diversity. Southwest J. Ling. 15:89108
Harmon D. 2001. On the meaning and moral imperative of diversity. See Maf 2001c, pp.
5370
Harmon D. 2002. In Light of Our Differences: How Diversity in Nature and Culture Makes Us
Human. Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst. Press
Harmon D, Loh J. 2004. The IBCD: a measure of the worlds biocultural diversity. See Borrini-
Feyerabend et al. 2004, pp. 27180
Harmon D, Maf L. 2002. Are linguistic and biological diversity linked? Conserv. Biol. Pract.
3(1):2627
Heizer RF. 1963. Foreword. See Kroeber 1963, pp. vix
Hill JH. 1996. Languages of the land: toward an anthropological dialectology. Presented at
David Skomp Disting. Lect. Ser. Anthropol., Indiana Univ., Dept. Anthropol., 21 March
Hill JH. 1997. The meaning of linguistic diversity: knowable or unknowable? Anthropol. Newsl.
38(1):910
Hill JH. 2001. Dimensions of attrition in language death. See Maf 2001c, pp. 17589
Hunn ES. 2001. Prospects for the persistence of endemic cultural systems of traditional
environmental knowledge: a Zapotec example. See Maf 2001c, pp. 11832
Krauss M. 1992. The worlds languages in crisis. Language 68:410
Kroeber AL. 1928. Native culture of the Southwest. Univ. Calif. Publ. Am. Archaeol. Ethnol.
23:37598
Kroeber AL. 1963 [1939]. Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America. Berkeley: Univ.
Calif. Press (originally published in Calif. Publ. Am. Archaeol. Ethnol. Vol. 38)
Lizarralde M. 2001. Biodiversity and loss of indigenous languages and knowledge in South
America. See Maf 2001a, pp. 26581
Loh J, Harmon D. 2005. A global index of biocultural diversity. Ecol. Indic. 5(3):23141
Mace R, Pagel M. 1995. A latitudinal gradient in the density of human languages in North
America. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261:11721
Maf L. 1998. Language: a resource for nature. Nature Resour. UNESCO J. Environ. Nat. Resour.
Res. 34(4):1221
614 Maffi
Maf L. 2001a. Language, knowledge, and indigenous heritage rights. See Maf 2001c, pp.
41232
Maf L. 2001b. Linking language and environment: a co-evolutionary perspective. In New Di-
rections in Anthropology and Environment: Intersections, ed. CL Crumley, pp. 2448. Walnut
Creek, CA: AltaMira
Maf L, ed. 2001c. On Biocultural Diversity: Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment.
Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst. Press
Maf L. 2004. Conservation and the two cultures: bridging the gap. See Borrini-Feyerabend
et al. 2004, pp. 25666
Maf L, Skutnabb-Kangas T, Andrianarivo J. 1999. Linguistic diversity. See Posey 1999, pp.
2157
Manne LL. 2003. Nothing has yet lasted forever: current and threatened levels of biological
diversity. Evol. Ecol. Res. 5:51727
Martin L. 1986. Eskimo words for snow: a case study in the genesis and decay of an anthro-
pological example. Am. Anthropol. 88:41823
McIntosh IS. 2001. Plan A and plan B partnerships for cultural survival. Cult. Surv. Q. 1(2):46
McNeely JA, Miller KR, Reid WV, Mittermeyer RA, Werner TB. 1990. Conserving the Worlds
Biological Diversity. Gland, Switz./Washington, DC: IUCN, WRI, CI, WWF-US, The
World Bank
Moore JL, Manne L, Brooks T, Burgess ND, Davies R, et al. 2002. The distribution of cultural
and biological diversity in Africa. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269:164553
Mufwene SS. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press

Muhlh ausler P. 1995. The interdependence of linguistic and biological diversity. In The Politics
of Multiculturalism in the Asia/Pacic, ed. D Myers, pp. 15461. Darwin, Aust.: North.
Territory Univ. Press

Muhlh ausler P. 1996. Linguistic Ecology: Language Change and Linguistic Imperialism in the Pacic
Rim. London: Routledge
Nabhan GP. 1997. Cultures of Habitat. Washington, DC: Counterpoint
Nabhan GP, Joe T, Maf L, Pynes P, Seibert D, et al. 2002a. Safeguarding the Uniqueness of
the Colorado Plateau: An Ecoregional Assessment of Biocultural Diversity. Flagstaff, AZ: Cent.
Sustainable Environ., Terralingua, Grand Canyon Wildlands Counc.
Nabhan GP, Pynes P, Joe T. 2002b. Safeguarding species, languages, and cultures in the time
of diversity loss: from the Colorado Plateau to global hotspots. Ann. Mo. Bot. Garden
89:16475
Nettle D. 1996. Language diversity in West Africa: an ecological approach. J. Anthropol. Ar-
chaeol. 15:40338
Nettle D. 1998. Explaining global patterns of linguistic diversity. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 17:354
74
Nettle D. 1999. Linguistic Diversity. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Nettle D, Romaine S. 2000. Vanishing Voices: The Extinction of the Worlds Languages. Oxford:
Oxford Univ. Press
Nichols J. 1990. Linguistic diversity and the rst settlement of the New World. Language
66:475521
Nichols J. 1992. Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time. Chicago/London: Univ. Chicago Press
Nietschmann BQ. 1992. The interdependence of biological and cultural diversity. Occas. Pap.
21, Cent. World Indig. Stud., Olympia, WA
Oviedo G, Maf L, Larsen PB. 2000. Indigenous and Traditional Peoples of the World and Ecore-
gion Conservation: An Integrated Approach to Conserving the Worlds Biological and Cultural
Diversity. Gland, Switz.: WWF-Int., Terralingua

Pawley A. 2001. Some problems of describing linguistic and ecological knowledge. See Maf
2001c, pp. 22847
Posey DA, ed. 1999. Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity. London/Nairobi: Intermed.
Technol. Publ., UNEP
Posey DA. 2001. Biological and cultural diversity: the inextricable, linked by language and
politics. See Maf 2001c, pp. 37996
Price D. 1990. Atlas of World Cultures. London: Sage
Pullum GK. 1989. The great Eskimo vocabulary hoax. Nat. Lang. Ling. Theory 7:27581
Robins RH, Uhlenbeck EM, eds. 1991. Endangered Languages. Oxford: Berg
Ross N. 2002. Cognitive aspects of intergenerational change: mental models, cultural change,
and environmental behavior among the Lacandon Maya of southern Mexico. Hum. Organ.
61:12538
Sapir E. 1912. Language and environment. Am. Anthropol. 14:22642
Schleicher A. 1863. Die Darwinische Theorie und die Sprachwissenschaft. Weimar: Boehlau H.
Skutnabb-Kangas T. 2000. Linguistic Genocide in EducationOr Worldwide Diversity and Human
Rights? Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Skutnabb-Kangas T, Harmon D. 2002. Review of Daniel Nettle, Linguistic Diversity. Lang.
Policy 1:17582
Skutnabb-Kangas T, Maf L, Harmon D. 2003. Sharing a World of Difference: The Earths
Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity and companion map The Worlds Biocultural
Diversity: People, Languages, and Ecosystems. Paris: UNESCO
Smith EA. 2001. On the coevolution of cultural, linguistic, and biological diversity. See Maf
2001c, pp. 95117
Somerville MA, Rapport DJ. 2000. Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating Integrated Knowledge. Oxford:
EOLLS
Stepp JR, Cervone S, Castaneda H, Lasseter A, Stocks G, et al. 2004. Development of a GIS
for global biocultural diversity. See Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004, pp. 26770
Suckling K. 2000. A house on re: linking the biological and linguistic diversity crises. Anim.
Law 6:193202
Sutherland WJ. 2003. Parallel extinction risk and global distribution of languages and species.
Nature 423:27679
Toledo VM. 1994. Biodiversity and cultural diversity in Mexico. Differ. Drummer 1(3):1619
Turner NJ, Davidson-Hunt IJ, OFlaherty N. 2003. Living on the edge: ecological and cultural
edges as sources of diversity for social-ecological resilience. Hum. Ecol. 31:43961
UNESCO. 2001. Universal declaration on cultural diversity. Approved by UNESCOs Gen.
Conf., 31st Session, Paris. Available at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001271
/127160m.pdf
UNESCO. 2003. Language vitality and endangerment. Int. Expert Meet. UNESCO Intan-
gible Cult. Heritage Units Ad Hoc Expert Group Endanger. Lang. Paris-Fontenoy,1012
March. Document approved by the participants on 31 March 2003, available at
http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/file download.php/1a41d53cf46e10710298d31
4450b97dfLanguage+Vitality.doc
Whorf BL. 1940. Science and linguistics. Technol. Rev. (MIT) 42:22931, 24748
Wilcox BA, Duin KN. 1995. Indigenous cultural and biological diversity: overlapping values
of Latin American ecoregions. Cult. Surv. Q. 18(4):4953
Wollock J. 2001. Linguistic diversity and biodiversity: some implications for the language
sciences. See Maf 2001c, pp. 24862
Zarger RK, Stepp JR. 2004. Persistence of botanical knowledge among Tzeltal Maya children.
Curr. Anthropol. 45(3):41318
616 Maffi
Zent S. 1999. The quandary of conserving ethnoecological knowledge: a Piaroa example. In

Ethnoecology: Knowledge, Resources, and Rights, ed. TL Gragson, BG Blount, pp. 90124.
Athens: Univ. Georgia Press
Zent S. 2001. Acculturation and ethnobotanical knowledge loss among the Piaroa of Venezuela:
demonstration of a quantitative method for the empirical study of TEK change. See Maf
2001c, pp. 190211
Zent S, Lopez-Zent E. 2004. Ethnobotanical convergence, divergence, and change among the
Hoti of the Venezuelan Guayana. In Ethnobotany and Conservation of Biocultural Diversity,
ed. TJS Carlson, L Maf, pp. 3778. Adv. Econ. Bot. Ser. Vol. 15. Bronx: New York Bot.
Garden Press

HI-RES-AN34-29-Maffi.qxd
9/8/05
5:31 PM
Page C-1
www.annualreviews.org
Figure 1
World map showing overlap of endemism in languages and higher vertebrates. Original work by D. Harmon, based on Harmon 1996. First
published in Maffi 1998. Reproduced with permission.
Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity

C-1
C-2
HI-RES-AN34-29-Maffi.qxd
Maffi
9/8/05
5:31 PM
Page C-2
Figure 2
Plant diversity and language distribution. From Stepp et al. 2004. Used with permission.
Contents ARI 12 August 2005 20:29
Annual Review of
Anthropology
Volume 34, 2005
Contents
Frontispiece
Sally Falk Moore p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xvi
Prefatory Chapter
Comparisons: Possible and Impossible

Sally Falk Moore p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 1
Archaeology
Archaeology, Ecological History, and Conservation

Frances M. Hayashida p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p43
Archaeology of the Body
Rosemary A. Joyce p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 139
Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage: The Inadequate
Response
Neil Brodie and Colin Renfrew p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 343
Through Wary Eyes: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeology
Joe Watkins p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 429
The Archaeology of Black Americans in Recent Times
Mark P. Leone, Cheryl Janifer LaRoche, and Jennifer J. Babiarz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 575
Biological Anthropology
Early Modern Humans

Erik Trinkaus p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 207
Metabolic Adaptation in Indigenous Siberian Populations
William R. Leonard, J. Josh Snodgrass, and Mark V. Sorensen p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 451
The Ecologies of Human Immune Function
Thomas W. McDade p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 495
vii
Linguistics and Communicative Practices
New Directions in Pidgin and Creole Studies

Marlyse Baptista p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p33
Pierre Bourdieu and the Practices of Language
William F. Hanks p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p67
Areal Linguistics and Mainland Southeast Asia
N.J. Eneld p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 181
Communicability, Racial Discourse, and Disease
Charles L. Briggs p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 269
Will Indigenous Languages Survive?
Michael Walsh p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 293

Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity
Luisa Maf p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 599
International Anthropology and Regional Studies
Caste and Politics: Identity Over System

Dipankar Gupta p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 409
Indigenous Movements in Australia
Francesca Merlan p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 473
Indigenous Movements in Latin America, 19922004: Controversies,
Ironies, New Directions
Jean E. Jackson and Kay B. Warren p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 549
Sociocultural Anthropology
The Cultural Politics of Body Size

Helen Gremillion p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p13
Too Much for Too Few: Problems of Indigenous Land Rights in Latin
America
Anthony Stocks p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p85
Intellectuals and Nationalism: Anthropological Engagements
Dominic Boyer and Claudio Lomnitz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 105
The Effect of Market Economies on the Well-Being of Indigenous
Peoples and on Their Use of Renewable Natural Resources
Ricardo Godoy, Victoria Reyes-Garca, Elizabeth Byron, William R. Leonard,
and Vincent Vadez p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 121
viii Contents
An Excess of Description: Ethnography, Race, and Visual Technologies

Deborah Poole p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 159
Race and Ethnicity in Public Health Research: Models to Explain
Health Disparities
William W. Dressler, Kathryn S. Oths, and Clarence C. Gravlee p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 231
Recent Ethnographic Research on North American Indigenous
Peoples
Pauline Turner Strong p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 253
The Anthropology of the Beginnings and Ends of Life
Sharon R. Kaufman and Lynn M. Morgan p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 317
Immigrant Racialization and the New Savage Slot: Race, Migration,

and Immigration in the New Europe
Paul A. Silverstein p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 363
Autochthony: Local or Global? New Modes in the Struggle over
Citizenship and Belonging in Africa and Europe

Bambi Ceuppens and Peter Geschiere p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 385
Caste and Politics: Identity Over System
Dipankar Gupta p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 409
The Evolution of Human Physical Attractiveness
Steven W. Gangestad and Glenn J. Scheyd p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 523
Mapping Indigenous Lands
Mac Chapin, Zachary Lamb, and Bill Threlkeld p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 619
Human Rights, Biomedical Science, and Infectious Diseases Among
South American Indigenous Groups
A. Magdalena Hurtado, Carol A. Lambourne, Paul James, Kim Hill,
Karen Cheman, and Keely Baca p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 639
Interrogating Racism: Toward an Antiracist Anthropology
Leith Mullings p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 667
Enhancement Technologies and the Body
Linda F. Hogle p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 695
Social and Cultural Policies Toward Indigenous Peoples: Perspectives
from Latin America
p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 717
Guillermo de la Pena
Surfacing the Body Interior
Janelle S. Taylor p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 741
Contents ix
Theme 1: Race and Racism
Race and Ethnicity in Public Health Research: Models to Explain

Health Disparities
William W. Dressler, Kathryn S. Oths, and Clarence C. Gravlee p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 231
Communicability, Racial Discourse, and Disease
Charles L. Briggs p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 269
Immigrant Racialization and the New Savage Slot: Race, Migration,
and Immigration in the New Europe
Paul A. Silverstein p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 363
The Archaeology of Black Americans in Recent Times
Mark P. Leone, Cheryl Janifer LaRoche, and Jennifer J. Babiarz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 575

Interrogating Racism: Toward an Antiracist Anthropology
Leith Mullings p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 667
Theme 2: Indigenous Peoples
The Effect of Market Economies on the Well-Being of Indigenous

Peoples and on Their Use of Renewable Natural Resources
Ricardo Godoy, Victoria Reyes-Garca, Elizabeth Byron, William R. Leonard,
and Vincent Vadez p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 121
Recent Ethnographic Research on North American Indigenous
Peoples
Pauline Turner Strong p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 253
Will Indigenous Languages Survive?
Michael Walsh p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 293
Autochthony: Local or Global? New Modes in the Struggle over
Citizenship and Belonging in Africa and Europe
Bambi Ceuppens and Peter Geschiere p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 385
Through Wary Eyes: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeology
Joe Watkins p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 429
Metabolic Adaptation in Indigenous Siberian Populations
William R. Leonard, J. Josh Snodgrass, and Mark V. Sorensen p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 451
Indigenous Movements in Australia
Francesca Merlan p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 473
Indigenous Movements in Latin America, 19922004: Controversies,
Ironies, New Directions
Jean E. Jackson and Kay B. Warren p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 549
x Contents
Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity

Luisa Maf p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 599
Human Rights, Biomedical Science, and Infectious Diseases Among
South American Indigenous Groups
A. Magdalena Hurtado, Carol A. Lambourne, Paul James, Kim Hill,
Karen Cheman, and Keely Baca p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 639
Social and Cultural Policies Toward Indigenous Peoples: Perspectives
from Latin America
p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 717
Guillermo de la Pena
Indexes
Subject Index p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 757

Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 2634 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 771
Cumulative Index of Chapter Titles, Volumes 2634 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 774
Errata
An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Anthropology chapters

may be found at http://anthro.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml
Contents xi

Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AR254-AN34-29 ARI 7 September 2005 21:35

Terralingua, Salt Spring Island, British Columbia V8K 2N6, Canada;

Annu. Rev. Anthropol. Key Words

quences of loss of these interlinked diversities;

BIOCULTURAL DIVERSITY . . . 610

icher in Darwinism Tested by the Science of Lan-

a foundational role in anthropology. How- full understanding of culture (Kroeber 1963,

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 601

becoming increasingly apparent: Many of the guages, Endangered Knowledge, Endangered

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 603

certain directionsincluding directions that LINGUISTIC AND BIOLOGICAL

ning with Harmons groundbreaking work

an illusion. Wollock observes that all great

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 605

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 607

versity, perhaps due to an increase in both foreground.

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 609

trends are as yet missing and are the object policies.

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 611

PROTECTING AND tional policies, as well as an increase in the

ing it its characteristic mixture of theory and

for the protection and maintenance of biocul-

plines, as well as more work by interdisci- can be achievedbefore it is too late.

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 613

Crystal D. 2000. Language Death. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 615

Zent S. 1999. The quandary of conserving ethnoecological knowledge: a Piaroa example. In

www.annualreviews.org Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity 617

Linguistic Diversity and Biodiversity

Volume 34, 2005

Sally Falk Moore p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xvi

Comparisons: Possible and Impossible

Archaeology, Ecological History, and Conservation

Early Modern Humans

Linguistics and Communicative Practices

New Directions in Pidgin and Creole Studies

Michael Walsh p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 293

International Anthropology and Regional Studies

Caste and Politics: Identity Over System

The Cultural Politics of Body Size

An Excess of Description: Ethnography, Race, and Visual Technologies

Immigrant Racialization and the New Savage Slot: Race, Migration,

Citizenship and Belonging in Africa and Europe

Theme 1: Race and Racism

Race and Ethnicity in Public Health Research: Models to Explain

Mark P. Leone, Cheryl Janifer LaRoche, and Jennifer J. Babiarz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 575

Theme 2: Indigenous Peoples

The Effect of Market Economies on the Well-Being of Indigenous

Linguistic, Cultural, and Biological Diversity

Subject Index p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 757

An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Anthropology chapters

You might also like