Upland Rice: Cultural Keystone Species in a Philippine Traditional Agroecosystem

Abstract

This paper examines rice biocultural diversity in Sarangani province, southern Philippines through a socio-anthropological lens. Participatory rural appraisal highlighted the cultural importance of upland rice and the entire suite of farming rituals practiced by ethnic communities in the area. Further unveiled by the study were concomitant rice varietal losses, a highly eroded indigenous knowledge system, or IKS, as well as major driving forces that have significantly impacted biocultural diversity on-farm. Sociological analysis of Sarangani tribal community and resources identified upland rice as a potential cultural keystone species (CKS) whose loss can severely compromise cultural integrity and food security. However, halting biocultural erosion while ensuring human wellbeing can become complicated and constrain conservation initiatives. The CKS model, albeit potentially subjective and controversial, can provide valuable insights for the development of sustainable conservation strategies specifically suited to the Sarangani upland situation. Strengthening of awareness among stakeholders about the link between traditional culture, conservation, and food security is necessary if significant results are to be achieved.

Full text

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 93
Upland Rice: Cultural Keystone
Species in a Philippine Traditional
Agroecosystem
Florence L. Zapicoab, Josena T. Dizonac, Edwino S. Fernandoad, Teresita H. Borromeoae,
Kenneth L. McNallyf, and Jose E. Hernandezag
aUniversity of the Philippines Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines; borence.zapico@gmail.com; cjtdizon@up.edu.ph;
dedwino.fernando@gmail.com; ethborromeo@yahoo.com; fInternational Rice Research Institute, Laguna, Philippines,
kmcnally@irri.org; gjoehernandez56@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This paper examines rice biocultural diversity in Sarangani province, southern
Philippines through a socio-anthropological lens. Participatory rural appraisal
highlighted the cultural importance of upland rice and the entire suite of
farming rituals practiced by ethnic communities in the area. Further unveiled
by the study were concomitant rice varietal losses, a highly eroded indigenous
knowledge system, or IKS, as well as major driving forces that have signicantly
impacted biocultural diversity on-farm. Sociological analysis of Sarangani tribal
community and resources identied upland rice as a potential cultural keystone
species (CKS) whose loss can severely compromise cultural integrity and food
security. However, halting biocultural erosion while ensuring human wellbeing
can become complicated and constrain conservation initiatives. The CKS model,
albeit potentially subjective and controversial, can provide valuable insights for
the development of sustainable conservation strategies specically suited to the
Sarangani upland situation. Strengthening of awareness among stakeholders
about the link between traditional culture, conservation, and food security is
necessary if signicant results are to be achieved.
Key words: upland rice, cultural keystone species, traditional agro-ecosystem,
biocultural diversity
JEL Classication: Z0, Q1
Contact Florence L. Zapico orence.zapico@gmail.com https://doi.org/10.37801/ajad2020.17.2.6
Foreign Labor Shortages in the
Malaysian Palm Oil Industry:
Impacts and Recommendations
Megan Zellers Crowley
Rice Value Chain Analysis
in the Philippines: Value Addition,
Constraints, and Upgrading
Strategies
Alice B. Mataia, Jesusa C. Beltran,
Rowena G. Manalili, Betzaida M.
Catudan, Nefriend M. Francisco,
and AdrielleC. Flores
Sustaining Rice Productivity,
SoilFertility, and Income from
Prawn-Rice Joint Culture in the
Gher System in Bangladesh
Basanta Kumar Barmon
and Sanzidur Rahman
Impact of Climate Change
on Paddy Production:
Evidence from Nepal
Niranjan Devkota and Nirash Paija
Emergence of Producer
Companies as Innovative
Institutions for Agriculture
Development in India: Issues and
Challenges
S K Shilpa
Upland Rice: Cultural Keystone
Species in a Philippine
Traditional Agroecosystem
Florence L. Zapico, Josena T. Dizon,
Edwino S. Fernando, Teresita H.
Borromeo, Kenneth L. McNally,
and Jose E. Hernandez
Non-timber Forest Products
Value Chain Toward Sustainable
Livelihood: Exploring Linkages
and Trends Using Visual
Optimization Network Analysis
Ravi Sharma and Nisha Bharti
Check the complete lineup
ofthe Asian Journal of
Agriculture and Development
(AJAD)17.2

94 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
INTRODUCTION
Growing recognition of the inextricable
link between cultural and biological
diversity (Maffi 2001; Loh and Harmon
2005; Dunn 2008; Gavin et al. 2015)
has given rise to a concept known as biocultural
diversity, which is dened as the “relationship
among traditional knowledge, biological diversity
and cultural diversity” (Hladik et al. 1993; Stepp,
Wyndham, and Zarger 2002; Johns and Sthapit
2004). By drawing insights from the social sciences,
practitioners can better understand human
dimensions of conservation whereas ignoring
inputs from this discipline can seriously undermine
conservation eorts (Bennet et al. 2016). In the
Philippines, the Globally Important Agricultural
Heritage Systems (GIAHS)-prescribed rice
terraces in Kiangan, Ifugao is one example of
such biological-cultural coupling. Local Ifugao
communities benet from this culture-nature
integration through the agroecosystem’s provision
of goods and services while the Ifugaos maintain
the terraces via the upkeep of terrace walls and
ancient waterways (Aguilar 2018).
The harmonious link between biological
and cultural diversity, however, is presently being
threatened by the homogenizing eects of
globalization and climate change, among other
pressures (Liu et al. 2002; Nabhan, Pynes, and Joe
2002). Genetic erosion, the concomitant losses
of crop landraces, is accelerated by demographic,
economic and technological changes associated
with modernization (Brush 1986). This situation
is reected in Sarangani province in southern
Philippines where upland tribes, who rely on
subsistence rice farming using age-old farming
methods, regularly experience chronic food
shortages. Although the crop is closely interwoven
with tribal culture, genetic erosion in the
rice landraces is a reality (Zapico et al. 2020).
Nevertheless, the tribal farmers still maintain
remaining varieties because of cultural values
and individual preferences. Farming knowledge,
however, seems to be rapidly eroding because of
the ingress of agricultural modernization and a
mindset change among the local peoples (Zapico
et al. 2015). Even up to this time, geographic and
technological isolation are notable challenges
for resource conservationists and people in these
remote areas.
In ecology, a keystone species is dened
by Paine (1966) as the “keystone of biological
community structure” and that “community
integrity and unaltered persistence through time
are determined by its activities and abundance.”
Like the ecological keystone species, the cultural
keystone species (CKS) is a metaphorical concept
dened as the “culturally salient species that shapes
in a major way the cultural identity of a people”
(Garibaldi and Turner 2004). A CKS is identied
by its ubiquity in language, cultural practices and
traditions, diet, history, subsistence, and other aspects
of community life (Cristancho and Vining 2004) .
Oftentimes, a community or tribe identies with
an animal or plant species for cultural, spiritual, or
economic reasons. The plant-people relationship,
therefore, becomes vital in ensuring the wellbeing
of the community, the ecosystem, and the local
culture. Knowledge on the potential applications
of the CKS model, especially in biodiversity
conservation in the Philippines, will augur well
for forestalling the continued genetic erosion of
the rice landraces and will nd wider application
for other crops and biocultural landscapes in
the country. This study was therefore carried
out to (a) determine the cultural importance of
Sarangani upland rice and the IKS associated with
it, (b) identify causes and correlates of biocultural
losses, and (c) identify the CKS in the Sarangani
upland farms. As the study is approached from
a socio-anthropological perspective, it does not
undertake a systematic economic analysis, which
is an important limitation of the study, and which
could be the subject of further research to enrich
the present analysis.
METHODOLOGY
This cross-sectional study was conducted in
14 rice farming villages (i.e., Datal Bukay, Kari,
and New Aklan in Glan; sitio Mutu Ladal, Nomoh
in Maasim, Kihan, and Kinam in Malapatan; sitios

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 95
Ihan, Cabnis, Glamang in Datal Anggas, Alabel;
sitio Lamlifew in Datal Tampal and Malabod in
Malungon; sitio Lampong in Upo and Angko
in Batian, Maitum and Malayo in Kiamba) in
the Sarangani uplands in southern Philippines.
Researchers visited the abovementioned villages
from October 2015 to October 2018.
Based on the emic (insider’s view) approach,
researchers employed participatory rural appraisal
(PRA) techniques such as focus group discussions
(FGDs), key informant interviews (KIIs), semi-
structured questionnaires, community immersion,
and eld observation. Eighty-ve rice farmers
who were over 30 years old, who had 10+ years
of farming experience, and who gave explicit
consent were chosen as respondents for the study.
Detailed information about rice varietal diversity,
utilization, cultural importance and losses,
traditional farming rituals, and major pressures to
the Sarangani upland agroecosystem were elicited.
Descriptive information was classied according
to thematic content while questionnaire data were
collated, interpreted, and subjected to descriptive
statistics.
RESULTS
Sarangani: The Province and Its Peoples
An oddly-shaped province located in the
southernmost fringe of Mindanao island, southern
Philippines, Sarangani lies between latitude of
about 5°3341’’ to 6°32’4’’ and longitude of
about 124°21’39’’ to 125°35’11’’. The province is
composed of seven municipalities (i.e., Malapatan,
Alabel, Glan, Malungon, Maasim, Kiamba, and
Maitum), which ank General Santos City at
its eastern and western fronts (Figure 1). With
45 percent of the population composed of an
admixture of groups with varying ethnicities,
Sarangani exhibits a high degree of cultural
diversity. Collectively known as lumad (tribes with
non-Muslim ethnicity), these tribal groups mainly
reside in far-ung and dispersed villages that
are dicult to access. Among the lumad, Blaans
predominate in the Sarangani uplands, followed
by Tbolis and Kaolos. Owing to their remoteness,
these villages are practically unreached by basic
social services and the people live under conditions
of hardship and extreme poverty. Furthermore,
these tribal peoples engage in upland rice
cultivation as part of their cultural heritage using
Figure 1. Location map of Sarangani province and its seven municipalities
Source: www.mapsoftheworld.com (2019)

96 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
traditional farming practices passed on to them by
their ancestors. Shown in Table 1 is the proles
of farmer respondents from the Sarangani uplands.
The Sarangani Rice Resource:
CulturalImportance
In the Sarangani upland communities, the
vital role of rice landraces (RLs) in ensuring
household food security and survival of the tribal
families is undeniable. In 2016, a seven-month
Table 2. Rice varieties with cultural signicance
Tribe of
Farmer Name of Variety Meaning of Name
(if any) When/How Used Other Remarkable
Features/Comments
Tboli
Bisol Marriage/for unity Very sticky
Tang Marriage/for unity Very sticky
Mal-an Rice president Should always be present in elds Very important
Tulon Used for pest control Used to improve seed
quality
Uyayang Special occasions, visitors Special rice
Luwaro Special occasions, visitors Special rice
Satiman One of a kind Special occasions, visitors Special rice
Blaan
Kanlen Rice ancestor Always planted rst in the eld Considered as an ancient
variety
Lagsan Rice soldier Planted along rice eld borders
Given as rst solid food to babies
Used as dowry for weddings
Protects crop from
pestilence
Makes babies smart
Sugen Looks like a beehive Consumption Very big panicles
Abtu Kulang Shatters clay pot Consumption High volume expansion
Bulawan Golden grains Consumption Very aromatic; upsets
stomach
Bae Sheltered/protected
woman
Special rice Panicle almost covered by
leaves
Kaolo Amihan Rice medicine Reconcile conicting families Wards o death, illness, or
bad luck
Source: Zapico et al. (2020)
Demographic Characteristics
Gender (%) Male 64.7
Female 35.3
Marital Status (%) Married 97.6
Single 2.4
Average farming experience (years) 20.6
Average age of farmers (years) 43.7
Table 1. Prole of farmer respondents from the Sarangani uplands (n=85)
Demographic Characteristics
Ethnicity (%)
Blaan 57.1
Tboli 16.3
Kaolo 9.3
Education (%)
Primary 49.0
None 27.0
Secondary 24.0
Household Income Source (%) Rice Farming 95.4
Others 4.6
long drought forced the provincial government
to send sacks of rice to starving people in these
areas (Zapico et al. 2019). Thus, tribal groups in
the Sarangani uplands face a bleak future with the
extinction of RLs.
Such is the importance of these landraces
that their potential loss will aect not only food
security but also have dire consequences for the
tribal culture. Presented in Table 2 are culturally
important rice varieties and their manifold uses

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 97
and features. Moreover, in-depth conversations
with farmers during FGD and KII revealed deep
attachment to rice varieties as shown by their
utterances (Table 3).
Conversations with farmers revealed that
traditional farming rituals are deeply ingrained in
Blaan culture and belief systems. Shown hereunder
are the traditional farming rituals of the Blaans,
the predominant ethnic group in the Sarangani
uplands.
Kaingin (slash-and-burn). Prior to planting,
the farmer selects a patch of forest land (elnigo) ,
cuts down bigger trees, sets re to understory
vegetation, and clears the area of burnt debris. He
then lets the soil rest for several weeks. Culturally
essential to the tribes, kaingin is believed to rid
the soil of pests and makes it fertile through the
nutrient-rich ash.
Amlah (planting). The coming of the wet season
during the month of April heralds the start of rice
planting. Before the day’s activities start, a tribal
elder chants a malem to invoke the presence of
a supreme being, summon the spirit of the rice
plant, and make it dwell on the crop while it
grows. A day before the scheduled planting, the
farmer and his wife construct a botne (makeshift
wooden altar) in the center of the elnigo. Early
during the next day, everyone goes to the farm
Table 3. Utterances by Sarangani farmers about their traditional rice varieties
English Blaan
We are not used to lowland rice. La’ me’ maye’ di mseh di dungan.
If our rice will disappear, what will happen to us? Ku lande’ nu’n fale’ me’ det ti nimo ne?
Rice grown by the tribes is more nutritious than lowland
rice
To o fye ne’m mseh I da’d Blaan.
Rice that is milled loses avor. Lana’ I fye Ne’m I Fale’ Ku Gniling.
Even though you are dear to us, we will not give you our
seeds to be used for planting (when asked about samples
of rice seeds)
Balo’ det kakdo Go Di Gamo La Go Ble’ Mseh para a’
Our rice constitutes our tribal identity. En’ fale me’ enen I aldam me
Rice is life for us. Mseh I Kinabuhi to.
If our rice will be gone, we will also be gone. Ku lana’ I fale’ di gami’ lana du gami
A day without eating rice will weaken us. Lungay’ gami kula’ gamka’an dis do.
and planting commences with the chanting of
the lamgi (planting song). The tempo of the lamgi
is synchronized with dibbling by male farmers
using an ahak (sharpened pole). Following closely
behind, women-farmers drop rice seeds into the
dibbled holes and cover these with soil with a
sweep of the foot (Zapico et al. 2015). Interviewed
farmers disclosed that singing the lamgi makes an
otherwise tedious activity a joyous one. Lamgi is
sung by the farmers until all seeds are planted.
Tuke fali (harvesting). Once the rice plants are
heavy with grain, the men constr uct a fol (traditional
rice granary) for storage of rice seeds (Figure 2).
Among the Blaans, harvesting rice is exclusive to
women since it is believed that they imbue the crop
with female qualities of productivity and fertility.
Women farmers excise individual panicles using
hand knives (bansong fali) and place them inside a
baen, a traditional basket they carry on their backs
(Zapico et al. 2015). The baen must be lled to the
brim because when unlled, food shortages will
plague the household during the coming year. The
rice grains are then put inside a hollow bamboo
receptacle known as tiral (Figure 3), which in turn,
is subsequently placed inside the fol. Menstruating
women (considered to be unclean) are prohibited
from setting foot in the elds so as not to dele
the rice crop.

98 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
Figure 2. Fol or traditional rice granary
Tuke Fali Festivals
The centrality of upland rice to community
life, culture, and traditions of the indigenous peoples
is manifested through the annual celebration of
tuke fali festivals in several areas of the province. The
repertoire of songs, stories, and legends about the
crop and the perpetuation of age-old seed-keeping
and -selection by women farmers also attest to the
cultural importance of the crop. Organized by the
barangay (village) council, this weeklong festival
involves reenactment of traditional farming rituals,
dances, and other community activities. Farmers
display their rice harvests, crops, and other items
for sale in thatched huts (Figure 4). A replica of
the fol is usually constructed for visitors to see. In
Banlas, Malapatan, female farmers cook dierent
rice varieties for everyone to taste. An annual event
in Kinam, Malapatan, tuke fali festival attracts many
visitors and even had extensive media mileage
during the past year. On the other hand, some
scheduled tuke fali festival did not push through
Figure 3. Tiral bamboo receptaclefor storing
rice seeds
Figure 4. Rice panicles displayed during
tuke fali festival
in some areas because of crop failure or peace and
order problems.
Traditional Rice: A Cultural Keystone Species
in the Sarangani Uplands
In 2004, Garibaldi and Turner proposed the
Index of Identied Cultural Inuence of Cultural
Keystone Species to identify a CKS based on
garnered points for each of the specied categories.
Among the Blaans, the three major carbohydrate
staples, enumerated according to decreasing levels
of importance, are upland rice, corn, and sweet
potato. When rice supplies run out, farmers
turn to native corn varieties for their caloric
needs. Primarily a subsistence crop, native corn
is currently being displaced by recycled roundup
ready (sige-sige) corn, which is cultivated by
farmers as a cash crop (Espina 2015). Sweet potato
on the other hand, is a crop of last resort when all

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 99
Table 4. Index of the identied cultural inuence of cultural keystone species
Elements that Indicate a Cultural Keystone Species
Ratings
Upland
Rice
Native
Corn
Sweet
Potato
1. Intensity, Type and Multiplicity of Use
Is the species used intensively (routinely, and/or in large quantities?
Does the species have multiple uses?
5
5
3
2
3
1
2. Naming and Terminology in language, including use as seasonal and phenological
indicators, etc.
Does the language incorporate names and specialized vocabulary relating to the
species? 5 3 3
3. Role in Narratives, ceremonies, or symbolism
Is it prominently featured in narratives and/or ceremonies, dances, songs or as a
symbol? 5 1 1
4. Persistence and Memory of Use in relationship to cultural change
Is the species ubiquitous in the collective cultural consciousness and frequently
discussed? 5 2 1
5. Level of Unique Position in Culture
Would it be hard to replace this species with another available native species? 5 32
6. Extent to which crop provides opportunities for resource acquisition from beyond the
territory
Is the species used as a trade item for other groups? 3 5 2
Total 33 19 13
Source: Adapted from Garibaldi and Turner (2004)
Notes: Scores are based on the owing rating scale: 5 (yes, very high), 4 (yes, high), 3 (yes, moderate), 2 (yes, low), 1 (yes, very low or infrequent), 0 (no,
not used). The highest possible score is 35 and the higher score a species obtains from this rating scheme, the higher the probability that it is a cultural
keystone species (Garibaldi and Turner 2004).
make decisions as to the number and kinds of rice
varieties to plant, respectively. Farming duties were
still allocated according to the genders with male
farmers doing land preparation, kaingin, dibbling
during planting, and fol construction, while women
farmers were responsible for seed selection and
storage, planting, harvesting, weeding, threshing,
and pounding rice grains for cooking. Farmers
emphasized the important role of female farmers
as traditional seed keepers/custodians.
Males were more inclined to discard
traditional rice varieties for sige-sige corn (Figure
5) and other cash crops. Furthermore, younger
farmers signied their readiness to discard
traditional varieties while education and farmers’
ethnicity did not gure signicantly in farmers’
decisions to discard rice varieties. Female farmers
and those with no formal education showed a
distinct propensity to continue practicing farming
rituals, owing to the following reasons: upholding
other food sources are depleted. It is, therefore, a
subsistence crop associated with poverty-stricken
households in the area (Suarez 2017).
Shown in Table 4 is the CKS rating scale
for upland rice, corn, and sweet potato based on
farmers’ perceptions and knowledge gleaned from
FGD and administered questionnaires. Rice scored
highest points owing to its myriad uses, pragmatic
nomenclature scheme and its overall signicance
to tribal culture, indicating that it is a probable
CKS for the Sarangani traditional agroecosystem.
Farmers’ Perceptions About Rice
Bio-cultural Losses
Discussed hereunder are correlates of
biocultural losses based on farmers’ perceptions and
knowledge. Fifty-eight percent of respondents said
that the couple jointly determine the number and
kind of varieties to plant. Only 27 percent and 30
percent of the respondents divulged that husbands

100 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
DISCUSSION
Cultural Keystone Species: Connecting
Cultural and Biological Systems
As the farmers revealed, upland rice plays a
unique role in shaping the cultural identity of the
Sarangani ethnic groups. That RLs are interwoven
into the fabric of Sarangani community life
is shown by the maintenance of traditional
gender roles (i.e., land preparation by men and
seed keeping/handling by women farmers), the
continued observance of traditional farming
rituals/tribal festivities, and the diverse utilization
of these traditional rice varieties. Furthermore,
the unique nomenclature scheme devised by
farmers for traditional rice reects rich cultural
symbolism. On the pragmatic side, RLs constitute
a very important role in ensuring food security
and survival of the tribes, especially in these
marginal areas. Unfortunately, both indigenous
RLs and the indigenous knowledge system (IKS)
associated with their cultivation are currently
being threatened by pressures, thereby constraining
food security eorts for the Sarangani upland
tribes. This is especially true since IKS are, by their
very nature, not static but rather dynamic and
susceptible to various inuences.
In the remote Sarangani uplands, rice
is undoubtedly the most important crop for
tribal farmers and their families. Rice scored
highest points owing to its myriad uses, unique
nomenclature scheme and its overall signicance
to tribal culture, indicating that it is a probable
CKS for the Sarangani traditional agroecosystem.
It is, however, sad to note that this putative
CKS is currently being threatened by genetic
erosion. Winter and McClatchey (2009) similarly
reported that CKS in dierent ecosystems
worldwide are dwindling in numbers (or even
disappearing) because of the homogenizing eects
of globalization. If the rice crop were to become
extinct, Sarangani tribal culture and traditional
agroecosystem will be radically altered. The
Sarangani upland households will most likely shift
to either corn or root crops as basic carbohydrate
staples, resulting in damaging cascade eects on
Blaan culture.
of cultural identity, for better plant growth, more
aromatic rice, and for better harvest. In contrast,
younger farmers expressed their unwillingness
to continue practicing tribal rituals, which they
regarded as outmoded, irrelevant, more suited
to the elderly, and because they (young farmers)
are already educated, Christianized, and modern.
According to the farmers, a common language is
more reective of tribal culture than antiquated
farming rituals.
Younger farmers and those who had formal
education did not consider tribal culture relevant
in the present. Furthermore, women and Blaan/
Tboli farmers responded similarly to this query on
relevance. Notably, younger farmers revealed that
farming rituals had been completely forgotten
with the passing on of tribal elders. Other farmers
were seemingly apathetic to rice varietal losses and
the culture associated with the crop. In contrast,
Blaan and older farmers expressed that they
will personally be aected by biocultural losses.
Furthermore, a signicant number of farmers
(46%) disclosed that since they have no cash with
which to purchase lowland rice, they will surely
starve if upland rice were to disappear from their
farms.
Figure 5. Sige-sige corn eld
Source: Zapico et al. (2015)

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 101
By and large, the CKS concept provides
bases for conservation initiatives especially in
traditional agroecosystems. Several studies have,
however, pointed out innate limitations of this
model. Platten and Henfry (2009) postulated that
a predominant species might not be endemic
to an area but could have been deliberately or
inadvertently introduced. This study further
maintains that this species became adapted and
assumed an integral role in the local ecosystem and
culture due to utilitarian and economic reasons. A
case in point is the introduction of potato from
Peru to Ireland in 1589. This exotic crop has since
then spread to the rest of Europe to become a
primary caloric source (Capella 1988).
Second, the inherent unreliability of peoples’
memories is another point of contention against
the CKS model. Olick and Robbins (1998)
argued that peoples’ memories change through
time and are aected by many factors. Alves
(2012) reiterated these views by pointing out
that historical interactions of local people with a
certain species may vary within the same area and
may not be a valid information source. Third, the
model does not clearly explain how a CKS diers
from species that are “simply culturally salient or
economically important” (Davic 2004). It might
thus be erroneously accorded a status it does
not rightfully deserve. Fourth, some studies have
remarked on the subjective nature of the CKS
scoring scheme. In defense of the model, Garibaldi
and Turner (2004) conceded that while “absolute
quantication of a particular CKS is not possible,”
one should not completely discount its potential
contributions to biocultural conservation. Instead,
Platten and Henfrey (2009) proposed that the CKS
should be considered not as a single species, but
complex made up of various system components
(i.e., plant/animal species, IKS, environment,
among others).
Sarangani Biocultural Diversity:
Problems and Prospects
In Sarangani province, the cultural
importance of upland rice is manifested through
its continued cultivation, the persistence of
traditional farming practices especially in remote
farms, the annual commemoration of harvest
festivals, and diverse utilization of rice for rituals
and other important uses. Through personal
conversations with farmers, their deep attachment
to this priceless genetic resource is also expressed.
Recent eld expeditions to the Sarangani
uplands, however, revealed concomitant losses of
rice varieties (a phenomenon known as genetic
erosion) in farmers’ elds. Among the identied
causes of genetic erosion were mindset change, pest
infestation, weakening seed supply systems, market
integration, natural calamities, environmental
degradation, government programs, and peace and
order problems (Zapico et al. 2020). Furthermore,
personal conversations with farmers revealed some
correlates of genetic erosion among the Sarangani
ethnic groups. Among the identied correlates
were gender, age, education, religion, and tribe,
which were noted to aect decisions of farmers to
discard varieties as well as to continue practicing
traditional farming rituals.
A related study revealed that modern
agriculture, encroachment of recycled transgenic
corn (sige-sige) and other cash crops, changing
preferences of upland farmers, climate change,
and environmental degradation are major driving
forces that had eected signicant changes to
the Sarangani agricultural landscape and upland
rice diversity (Zapico et al. 2019). Kaingin (slash-
and-burn farming) is generally known to cause
wide scale environmental degradation and agri-
biodiversity losses in the upland environments
(Dove 1983; Saito et al. 2006; Southgate 1990)
while the shift to sige-sige corn resulted in the
displacement of RLs and soil quality deterioration.
Sige-sige corn, which was nowhere to be seen
in 2014, has become a conspicuous feature of
Sarangani upland farms because it obviated the
need for manual weeding, according to the farmers.
Kaingin, on the other hand, worked well when
upland forests were lush since it allowed for the
regeneration of aging forest trees. With extensive
forest denudation in the Sarangani uplands due
to unregulated resource extraction through time,
kaingin is no longer sustainable and has come to be
identied as contributory to ecological deg radation.
Furthermore, agricultural modernization in

102 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
wellbeing. A recent approach that involves
incorporating the social sciences into conservation
initiatives has gained credence as a feasible solution
to the biodiversity/ landscape preservation-human
wellbeing debate. This strategy is a signicant
departure from the “strict preservationist or
fortress conservation view” which had been
the prevailing thought in past years (Minteer,
Thaddeus, and Miller 2011). It is widely believed
that this biocultural approach to conservation will
have better chances of mitigating biodiversity and
cultural losses at both the local and global levels.
CONCLUSION
In the Sarangani uplands, genetic erosion
of traditional rice is primarily attributable to a
paradigmatic shift among upland tribes toward
agricultural modernization, among other factors.
Unfortunately, Sarangani upland communities
appear incapable of addressing drivers of rice
biocultural losses due to lowered resilience.
Conservation eorts are also hampered by important
considerations involving resource/landscape
preservation on the one hand and food security
on the other. Intractable problems such as this
necessitate making hard choices and compromises,
and occasionally involve trade-os to accomplish
set goals. Identifying upland rice as a CKS will
aid in the crafting of an eective conservation
strategy that will be acceptable to advocates of
resource conservation and of human welfare
and wellbeing. This can be done by developing
bottom-to-top consultative approaches, which
are envisioned to conserve tribal resources while
improving the quality of life of the upland tribes.
The establishment of a community-managed gene
bank will ensure that the farmers will not run out
of planting materials, thereby helping strengthen
food security in these areas. With the identication
of niche markets for tribal crop resources,
household income of farmers could be increased.
Furthermore, indigenous knowledge transmission
especially in relation to upland rice farming can
be done through its incorporation in the primary
school curriculum. Other strategies include the
Sarangani province supplanted the age-old sahul
(volunteerism) farming scheme with paid labor.
At the time of the study, the farm wage was
PHP 150/day (or approximately USD 3/day), a
price that farmers could ill aord. With soaring
prices of labor and chemical inputs, as well as
the declining quality of the soil, younger farmers
migrated to the lowlands or took on non-farming
jobs. This tribal diaspora (especially of working age
males) to the lowlands resulted in the abandonment
of upland farms in these areas. Consequently, the
upland population presently consists mostly of
middle-aged and aging farmers, a fact that does
not bode well for the future of agriculture in these
areas. All these emerging realities have resulted in
lowered resilience and in impaired capacities of the
Sarangani tribes to adapt to climate change and
other major pressures confronting them (Rellon
2018).
Another timely and controversial issue
is the resource conservation-food security
conundrum, which has fueled years of debate
among modern-day conservationists. In the
Sarangani uplands, conservation is primarily done
through continuous cultivation of rice landraces
in farmers’ elds. Because of declining soil quality,
yields are generally low, and farming is done at the
subsistence level. To augment household income,
many farmers turned to the cultivation of sige-sige
corn as a cash crop, thereby displacing traditional
rice in the elds. Moreover, the Special Areas
of Agricultural Development (SAAD) project
of the Philippine Department of Agriculture,
which was instituted in 2017 to address
food security problems in the impoverished
Sarangani uplands, actually exacerbated rice
varietal losses and forest denudation (Zapico
et al. 2019). These unfortunate circumstances
happen when biocultural conservation is
pitted against demands for food security and human
wellbeing. Consequently, win-win solutions that
ensure resource conservation and food security are
dicult to attain and trade-os and compromises
are usually the norm (McShane et al. 2011).
Minteer, Thaddeus, and Miller (2011) reported a
similar dilemma involving biodiversity/landscape
protection versus poverty alleviation and human

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development Volume 17 | Number 2 | 103
empowerment of women as traditional seed
keepers and incentivizing traditional rice farming
so that the younger generation will remain in the
farms. It is important to consider that the success
of biocultural conservation is strongly predicated
on local support of the Sarangani upland tribes.
Eorts should therefore be expended to preserve
and revitalize IKS especially since humankind
will be rendered more impoverished by its loss
especially in the face of the homogenizing eects
of modernization. Finally, awareness about the
link between traditional knowledge, resource
conservation, and food security should be
strengthened so that the continued presence of the
Sarangani upland tribes will be assured in these
areas for a very long time.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Southeast Asian Regional Center for
Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture or
SEARCA, the Philippine Council for Agriculture,
Aquatic, and Natural Resources Research and
Development or PCAARRD, the Commission on
Higher Education or CHED, and the International
Rice Research Institute or IRRI provided
nancial grants and other forms of assistance for
this research.
REFERENCES
Aguilar, C.H. 2018. “Assessment of Globally Important
Agricultural Her itage Systems (GIAHS) In
Kiangan, Ifugao: Implications for Dynamic
Conservation and Sustainable Management.”
Unpublished Master’s Thesis. University of the
Philippines Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines.
Alves, R.R.N. 2012. “Relationships Between Fauna and
People and the Role of Ethnozoology in Animal
Conservation.” Ethnobiology and Conservation 1(2):
1–69. DOI: 10.15451/ec2012-8-1.2-1-69
Bennet, N.J., R. Roth, S.C. Klain, et al. 2016.
“Conservation Soil Science: Understanding and
Integrating Human Dimensions to Improve
Conservation.” Biological Conservation 205(2017):
93–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
biocon.2016.10.006
Brush, S.B. 1986. “Genetic Diversity and Conservation
in Traditional Farming Systems.” Journal of
Ethnobiology 6(1): 151–167. https://ethnobiology.
org/sites/default/files/pdfs/JoE/6-1/
Brush1986.pdf
Capella, W.D. 1988. Pasos Cordilleranos, grupos sociales
y procesos hegemonicos en norpatagonia hacia nes
del siglo XIX. Revista de Historia-Universidad de
Concepci &#0243n 7: 215–228. (In Spanish)
Cristancho, S., and J. Vining. 2004. “Culturally Dened
Species.” Research in Human Ecology 11(2): 153–
164. https://www.humanecologyreview.org/
pastissues/her112/cristanchovining.pdf
Davic, R.D. 2004. “Epistemology, Cultural and Keystone
Species.” Ecology and Society 9(3): r1. http://www.
ecologyand society.org/vol9/iss3/resp1/
Dove, M.R. 1983. “Theories of Swidden Agriculture,
and the Political Economy of Ignorance.”
Agroforestry Systems 1: 85–99.
Dunn, C.P. 2008. “Biocultural Diversity Should be
a Priority for Conservation.” Nature 456: 315.
https://doi.org/10.1038/456315c
Espina, P.G. 2015. “Status of Corn Diversity in the
Marginal Uplands of Sarangani Province:
Implications for Conservation and Sustainable
Use.” Unpublished undergraduate thesis,
Mindanao State University, General Santos City,
Philippines.
Garibaldi, A., and N. Turner. 2004. “Cultural Keystone
Species: Implications for Ecological Conservation
and Restoration.” Ecology and Society 9(3): 1. DOI:
10.5751/ES-00669-090301
Gavin, M.C., J. McCarter, A. Mead, et al. 2015.
“Dening Biocultural Approaches to
Conservation.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution
30(3): 140–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tree.2014.12.005
Hladik, C.M., A. Hladik, O.F. Linares, H. Pagezy,
A. Semple, and M. Hadley, eds. 1993. Tropical
Forests, People, and Food: Biocultural Interactions and
Applications to Development (Man and the Biosphere
Series, Vol. 13). Paris: UNESCO.

104 | Florence L. Zapico, Josefina T. Dizon, Edwino S. Fernando, et al.
Iskandar, J., and R. Ellen. 1999. “In situ Conservation of
Rice Landraces among the Baduy of West Java.”
Journal of Ethnobiology 19(1): 97–125. https://
ethnobiology.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/
JoE/19-1/Iskandar.pdf
Johns, T., and B.R. Sthapit. 2004. “Biocultural Diversity
in the Sustainability of Developing-Country
Food Systems.” Food and Nutrition Bulletin 25(2):
143–155. doi: 10.1177/156482650402500207
Liu, H.M.Z., F. Xu, Y.K. Xu, and J.X. Wang. 2002.
“Practice of Conserving Plant Diversity Through
Traditional Beliefs: A Case Study in Xishuang-
Banna, Southwest China.” Biodiversity &
Conservation 11: 705–713.
Loh, J., and D. Harmon. 2005. “A Global Index
of Biocultural Diversity.” Ecological Indicators
5(3): 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ecolind.2005.02.005
Ma, L., ed. 2001. On Biocultural Diversity: Linking
Language, Knowledge, and the Environment.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
McShane, T.O., P.D. Hirsch, T.C. Trung, et al. 2011.
“Hard Choices: Making Trade-os Between
Biodiversity Conservation and Human Well-
Being.” Biological Conservation 144: 966–972.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.038
Minteer, B.A., R. Thaddeus, and T.R. Miller. 2011. “The
New Conservation Debate: Ethical Foundations,
Strategic Trade-Os and Policy Opportunities.”
Biological Conservation 144: 945–947. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.07.027
Nabhan, G.P., P. Pynes, and T. Joe. 2002. “Safeguarding
Species, Languages and Cultures in the Time of
Diversity Loss: From the Colorado Plateau to
Global Hotspots.” Annals of the Missouri Botanical
Garden 89: 164–175. DOI: 10.2307/3298561
Olick, J.K., and J. Robbins. 1998. “Social Memory
Studies: From ‘Collective Memory’ to the
Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices.”
Annual Review of Sociology 24(1): 105–140.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/223476
Paine, R.T. 1966. “Food Web Complexity and Species
Diversity.” The American Naturalist 100: 65–75.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2459379
Platten, S., and T. Henfrey. 2009. “The Cultural
Keystone Concept: Insights from Ecological
Anthropology.” Human Ecology 37: 491–500.
DOI: 10.1007/s10745-009-9237-2
Rellon, V.C. 2018. “Resilience Assessment of the
Selected Upland Communities in Sarangani
Province.” Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis.
Mindanao State University, General Santos City,
Philippines.
Saito, K., B. Linquist, B. Keobualapha, K. Phanthaboom,
T. Shiraiwa, and T. Horie. 2006. “Cropping
Intensity and Rainfall Eects on Upland Rice
Yields in Northern Laos.” Plant Soil 284: 175–
185.
Stepp, J.R., F.S. Wyndham, and R.K. Zarger. 2002.
Ethnobiology and Biocultural Diversity: Proceedings of
the Seventh International Congress of Ethnobiology.
October 2000, Athens, Ga. USA: International
Society of Ethnobiology and University of
Georgia Press.
Southgate, D. 1990. “The Causes of Land Degradation
along Spontaneously Expanding Agricultural
Frontiers in the Third World.” Land Economics 66:
93–101. DOI: 10.2307/3146686
Suarez, G.J. 2017. “Genetic Diversity and Indigenous
Knowledge Associated with Non-Rice
Carbohydrate Sources of Selected
Blaan Communities in Sarangani Province.”
Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis. Mindanao
State University, General Santos City, Philippines.
Winter, K.B., and W. McClatchey. 2009. “The Quantum
Co-evolution Unit: An Example of Awa (Piper
methysticum G. Foster) in Hawaiian Culture.”
Economic Botany 63: 353–362. DOI: 10.1007/
s12231-009-9089-0
Zapico, F.L., J.T. Dizon, T.H. Borromeo, K.L.
McNally, E.S. Fernando, and J.E. Hernandez.
2020. “Genetic Erosion in Traditional Rice
Agroecosystems in Southern Philippines: Drivers
and Consequences.” Plant Genetic Resources
18(1): 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/
S1479262119000406
_____. 2019. “Traditional Agro-ecosystems in
Southern Philippines: Vulnerabilities, Threats and
Interventions.” International Journal of Disaster
Resilience in the Built Environment 10(4): 289–300.
Zapico, F.L., C.H. Aguilar, A. Abistano, J.C. Turner,
and L.J. Reyes. 2015. “Biocultural Diversity
of Sarangani Province, Philippines: An Ethno-
Ecological Analysis.” Rice Science 22(3): 138−146.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsci.2015.05.018