Historical Evolution and Multidimensional Characterisation of the Butia Palm Landscape: A Comprehensive Conservation Approach

Abstract

The Butia odorata palm grove in southeast Uruguay forms a particular landscape of the Pampa biome, which has been inhabited and transformed since the early Holocene. The forms and meanings of this contemporary landscape are the result of the historical interaction between culture and nature. The conservation of its natural and cultural heritage has been compromised by anthropic activities, leading to conservation proposals from different disciplinary perspectives that are partial and do not consider the landscape’s integrity. In this article, we propose a comprehensive approach, integrating the ecological, cultural and socioeconomic aspects through a historical look at the domestication process of this landscape. This approach is based on a transdisciplinary narrative aimed at generating a multidimensional and diachronic characterisation of the palm grove landscape on which to base a participatory definition of the most appropriate instrument for conservation through sustainable use.

Full text

Citation: Rivas, M.; Dabezies, J.M.;
del Puerto, L. Historical Evolution
and Multidimensional
Characterisation of the Butia Palm
Landscape: A Comprehensive
Conservation Approach. Land 2023,
12, 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/
land12030648
Academic Editors:
Cruz Ferro-Vázquez and Antonio
César González-García
Received: 14 December 2022
Revised: 24 February 2023
Accepted: 6 March 2023
Published: 9 March 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
land
Article
Historical Evolution and Multidimensional Characterisation
of the Butia Palm Landscape: A Comprehensive
Conservation Approach
Mercedes Rivas 1, 2, *, Juan Martín Dabezies 1and Laura del Puerto 1
1Department of Agricultural Systems and Cultural Landscapes, Eastern Regional University Centre,
University of the Republic, Route 9 and Route 15, Rocha CP 27000, Uruguay
2Department of Plant Biology, School of Agronomy, University of the Republic, Garzón 780,
Montevideo CP 12900, Uruguay
*Correspondence: mrivas@fagro.edu.uy
Abstract:
The Butia odorata palm grove in southeast Uruguay forms a particular landscape of the
Pampa biome, which has been inhabited and transformed since the early Holocene. The forms
and meanings of this contemporary landscape are the result of the historical interaction between
culture and nature. The conservation of its natural and cultural heritage has been compromised by
anthropic activities, leading to conservation proposals from different disciplinary perspectives that
are partial and do not consider the landscape’s integrity. In this article, we propose a comprehensive
approach, integrating the ecological, cultural and socioeconomic aspects through a historical look at
the domestication process of this landscape. This approach is based on a transdisciplinary narrative
aimed at generating a multidimensional and diachronic characterisation of the palm grove landscape
on which to base a participatory definition of the most appropriate instrument for conservation
through sustainable use.
Keywords:
Butia odorata; Pampa biome; domesticated landscape; biocultural landscape; in situ
conservation; sustainable use
1. Introduction
Palms of the Butia genus occur in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, a region
where the 24 species of this genus of the Arecaceae family are distributed [
1
–
4
]. Some of
these species form clusters of individuals called palm groves, palmares or butiazais. In par-
ticular, the palm grove of B. odorata (Barb. Rodr.) Noblick, locally called ‘butia palm grove’,
is distributed in the Pampa biome [
5
,
6
], in the southeast of Brazil and Uruguay, which
is the southernmost of the genus [
7
]. In Uruguay, two large palm grove territories stand
out in the Department of Rocha, in Castillos and San Luis, which extend approximately
70,000 hectares (Figure 1) [
8
–
10
]. It is found in the mid plains of the Bañados del Este
Biosphere Reserve and forms part of the Bañados del Este Ramsar site [
11
]. This palm grove
has varying palm densities—from a few dozens to more than 500 palms per hectare [
12
].
They are found mostly in natural grasslands and form diverse environments according to
the type of surrounding vegetation and land use [
13
]. This landscape (Figure 2), marked by
the presence of the butia palm grove, consists of diverse agroecosystems located on private
land used for agriculture and livestock activities. The local identity is strongly linked to the
butia culture through artistic expressions and local symbolism [14].
The butia palm community is at serious conservation risk as a consequence of some
anthropic activities that have led to a structure of centenarian palms and a lack of younger
individuals [
15
]. This problem is included in the national and regional environmental
agenda, and there has been progress in proposing and implementing different types
of conservation and sustainable management alternatives [
13
,
16
–
19
]. However, these
Land 2023,12, 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12030648 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/land

Land 2023,12, 648 2 of 22
proposals are partial, formulated from specific disciplinary perspectives that do not consider
the integral conservation of this landscape’s natural and cultural heritage. The conservation
of the palm grove must necessarily be a focal point, as it structures and gives meaning to
the landscape, but on their own, they have not considered the multiple dimensions and
historical evolution of the landscape.
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 23
Figure 1. Geographical location of the Butia odorata palm grove in Rocha, Uruguay.
Figure 2. Diversity of butia palm groves.
The butia palm community is at serious conservation risk as a consequence of some
anthropic activities that have led to a structure of centenarian palms and a lack of younger
individuals [15]. This problem is included in the national and regional environmental
agenda, and there has been progress in proposing and implementing different types of
conservation and sustainable management alternatives [13,16–19]. However, these pro-
posals are partial, formulated from specific disciplinary perspectives that do not consider
Figure 1. Geographical location of the Butia odorata palm grove in Rocha, Uruguay.
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 23
Figure 1. Geographical location of the Butia odorata palm grove in Rocha, Uruguay.
Figure 2. Diversity of butia palm groves.
The butia palm community is at serious conservation risk as a consequence of some
anthropic activities that have led to a structure of centenarian palms and a lack of younger
individuals [15]. This problem is included in the national and regional environmental
agenda, and there has been progress in proposing and implementing different types of
conservation and sustainable management alternatives [13,16–19]. However, these pro-
posals are partial, formulated from specific disciplinary perspectives that do not consider
Figure 2. Diversity of butia palm groves.

Land 2023,12, 648 3 of 22
The butia palm grove has been inhabited and transformed since precolonial
times [
20
–
22
], so that culture has shaped the landscape and the ways of inhabiting it
over time. Humans have domesticated this landscape for various purposes through dif-
ferent practices, building cultural niches and giving rise to contemporary landscapes that
are the result of a mosaic of multiple human–environment interactions [
23
–
25
]. From that
perspective, this landscape has changed by adding ‘layers’ that over time have made it
more complex. However, these layers are constantly integrated and resignified, which gives
life to the landscapes and transforms them into a kind of palimpsest [
26
,
27
]. It is therefore
relevant to understand the historical trajectory and the different human–environment
interactions that have contributed to the current configuration of this particular landscape.
The general objective is to understand these dynamic and dialectical interactions in
temporal depth and the underlying cultural models of nature to gauge the complexity
of this landscape and propose alternatives for its conservation and sustainable use. The
specific objectives we propose are to collect and systematise existing information on the
multiple dimensions of the landscape, to construct a transdisciplinary narrative that gener-
ates a multidimensional and diachronic characterisation of the palm grove landscape, to
develop a socioenvironmental conceptual model and to analyse and discuss the adequacy
of management tools and instruments for conservation and sustainable use.
2. Methodology
Using the theoretical frameworks of historical ecology and environmental history,
we take a comprehensive and transdisciplinary approach that integrates ecological,
cultural and socioeconomic dimensions through the historical trajectory of landscape
domestication [28].
The methodology involves a scoping literature review [
29
] for recovering and syn-
thesising indexed publications and grey literature. This review aims at developing an
integrated narrative that considers environmental, sociocultural, agronomic, economic
and symbolic elements, showing the landscape’s historical change. The historical periods
chosen for this analysis are somewhat arbitrary; this decision aims to show the main ele-
ments that define the landscape, from the Upper Pleistocene to the present. We pay special
attention to the main biophysical and cultural elements concerning climatic changes and
the diversity of anthropic actions throughout history. Specifically, we consider the variation
in sea level, changes in the water network, vegetation and fauna, the effects of fire, the
construction of mounds, subsistence activities, the main changes that have occurred during
colonisation and the impact of modern production systems, as well as the diversity of ways
of inhabiting the landscape and the material and immaterial legacies.
From the qualitative analysis of the information, we develop an interpretative model
of the socioenvironmental trajectory of the butia landscape. From a group discussion
between the work’s authors and a design and illustration specialist, we produce a graphic
representation of this model summarising the butia landscape’s main aspects.
Finally, using an argumentative literature review [
29
], we also discuss different conser-
vation strategies for the butia palm grove.
3. Results
When the Butia Palm Grove was a pristine landscape
Although its age is still unknown, the butia palm grove has been present in the
region since long before the arrival of the first human settlers. The earliest records in
eastern Uruguay date back to the Upper Pleistocene, some 30,000 years before present [
30
].
However, this chronology could be accepted as a minimum age, as we lack older pale-
oenvironmental records that could provide new evidence. On the other hand, the present
distribution of butia palm groves in Uruguayan territory is associated mostly with the mid
plains linked to Pleistocene transgressive deposits in which the sea would have reached
10 (Castillos palm grove) and 20 (San Luis palm grove) metres above its current level. These
events have been dated to some 30,000 and 110,000 years before present [
31
], which could

Land 2023,12, 648 4 of 22
be assumed as maximum ages, at least for its present distribution in Uruguay. However,
the palm grove might have varied its distribution, density, extension and layout during the
last glacial period (117,000–11,000 years ago), accompanying glacioeustatic and climatic
variations, that is, retreating to refuges and riparian hills during maximum cooling while
expanding during warmer and more-humid interstadials on substrates generated by the
transgressive–regressive cycles.
These climatic oscillations also impacted these landscapes’ fauna during the last
glacial period. The fossil record shows the typical representatives of the South American
megafauna of the Lujaniense age (such as glyptodonts, mastodons, toxodons, megatheres,
ground sloths and sabre-toothed tigers, among others) and other mammals. Some of
them currently have a tropical to temperate distribution in South America, suggesting a
possible relationship with some favourable climatic moment (last interstadial or even the
last interglacial cycle). However, the presence of some forms that have adapted to dry and
arid environmental conditions has also been verified, these being typical of the conditions
prevailing in the Late Pleistocene [32].
A landscape under construction since the Holocene—The coevolution of human
communities and ecosystems
The first human settlers arrived in the region about 11,000 years ago, according to the
oldest records available [
33
]. This initial settlement occurred during the
Pleistocene–Holocene
transition, with climatic and environmental conditions typical of the beginning of the inter-
glacial period, i.e., a gradual increase in temperature and humidity and sea level rise [
34
,
35
].
It is feasible that many valuable archaeological and paleoenvironmental records corre-
sponding to this period are currently submerged given that, albeit rising, the sea was still
about 30 metres below its current level at the beginning of the Holocene and reached its
present level only about 7000 years ago [36].
The scarce paleoenvironmental records for southern Brazil and eastern Uruguay indi-
cate that the butia palm grove already existed when the first human groups arrived in the
territory, although very little is still known about its extension, density and layout. Along
with other woody species, the climatic improvement of the Holocene would have allowed
the expansion of butia palms from riparian forests and other Pleistocene refuges [37].
The human inhabitants that settled in the area developed strategies based on hunting
and gathering, incorporating butia into their subsistence. Direct evidence of this use was
obtained at the Los Indios site, the earliest site in the Department of Rocha [
33
]. The
first dates obtained for the early occupation were made on carbonised palm endocarps,
with chronologies of 9500 years before the present [
38
]. Although the records of these
early occupations are very scarce, they show that palms were harvested and transported
and that their fruits and seeds were eaten. Even though this type of subsistence implies
forms of human–environment interaction of low intensity and with little visibility in
the archaeological record, sustained over millennia, they could have caused important
modifications that shaped the early palm grove landscape: fruit selection and spreading,
favouring of specimens, transplanting of propagules and fire management, among others.
These interactions intensified towards the mid Holocene, with warmer and more-
humid conditions (Optimun climaticum), and the beginning of a new transgressive phase
(Holocene Transgressive Maximum), in which the sea would have reached between
4 and 5 metres above its current level [
39
]. The obstruction of drainages due to the
change in slope resulted in extensive areas of permanent wetlands in the middle plains
(elevation > 10 MASL), while the low plains were invaded by the sea [
40
]. In these condi-
tions, one of the greatest anthropic modifications in the prehistory of the South American
lowlands began, leading to the formation of true domesticated landscapes. Thousands of
anthropogenic earthen monolithic structures, known as ‘cerritos de indios’ (Figure 3), were
built as from the mid Holocene (5500–200 BP) in the plains, ridges and hills adjacent to this
wetland [
38
,
41
]. These mounds are the materialisation of singular and ancient experiences
of intensive environmental management, which involved soil and drainage management,
favourably affecting biodiversity and often pursuing or promoting specific productive

Land 2023,12, 648 5 of 22
purposes [
42
,
43
]. These anthropogenic soils are a clear example of environmental manage-
ment through which, by altering edaphic conditions and incorporating nutrients, habitats
conducive to the growth and production of useful species are created [
42
,
44
]. On the other
hand, species management and cultivation, earthen architecture (including mounds, plat-
forms and ridges), hydraulic engineering works (the channelling and either maintenance
or reactivation of small bodies of water) and the controlled use of fire are also common
archaeological manifestations in the region from the mid Holocene onwards [21,42,43].
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 23
began, leading to the formation of true domesticated landscapes. Thousands of anthropo-
genic earthen monolithic structures, known as ‘cerritos de indios’ (Figure 3), were built as
from the mid Holocene (5500–200 BP) in the plains, ridges and hills adjacent to this wet-
land [38,41]. These mounds are the materialisation of singular and ancient experiences of
intensive environmental management, which involved soil and drainage management,
favourably affecting biodiversity and often pursuing or promoting specific productive
purposes [42,43]. These anthropogenic soils are a clear example of environmental man-
agement through which, by altering edaphic conditions and incorporating nutrients, hab-
itats conducive to the growth and production of useful species are created [42,44]. On the
other hand, species management and cultivation, earthen architecture (including mounds,
platforms and ridges), hydraulic engineering works (the channelling and either mainte-
nance or reactivation of small bodies of water) and the controlled use of fire are also com-
mon archaeological manifestations in the region from the mid Holocene onwards
[21,42,43].
Figure 3. Indigenous mound.
The role of butia palms was recognised early on by regional archaeology thanks to
archaeological records, the ethnographic analogy and the current importance of these re-
sources for local populations [22,45]. Palms are constantly present throughout the archae-
ological records of the Indigenous mounds, to a full spatial and time extent and in differ-
ent manifestations. The charred endocarps of palms have been frequently found, as well
as specialised lithic instruments for fracturing the endocarps and recovering the seeds,
locally known as rompecoquitos [22]. The micropaleoethnobotanical record has also pro-
vided evidence of the importance of palms in the subsistence of these native peoples
[20,21,45]. On the one hand, the presence of the plant micro remains (opal phytoliths) of
butia fruits in sediments, inside ceramic vessels, on the active surface of grinding instru-
ments and in the dental plaque of individuals exhumed in the Indigenous mounds is di-
rect evidence of the fruit’s collection, processing and consumption. On the other hand, the
frequent finding of opal phytoliths produced in palm leaves, involucres and stems indi-
cates the broader subsistence role of this resource, which is linked to construction, indus-
try and even burial rituals [21]. Indirect evidence has also been provided from bioanthro-
pology: dental indicators (caries) have been attributed to the possible incidence of exten-
sive palm fruit consumption [46], and trace elements (Sr/Zn) have been associated with
the consumption of palm seeds [47].
Although there is no direct evidence of intensive palm management or domestication
practices, it is indisputable that the palm grove landscape’s domestication began from the
mid Holocene. This domestication involved different soil, drainage and species manage-
ment practices, including hunting, fishing, gathering and horticultural practices, with the
Figure 3. Indigenous mound.
The role of butia palms was recognised early on by regional archaeology thanks to
archaeological records, the ethnographic analogy and the current importance of these
resources for local populations [
22
,
45
]. Palms are constantly present throughout the archae-
ological records of the Indigenous mounds, to a full spatial and time extent and in different
manifestations. The charred endocarps of palms have been frequently found, as well as
specialised lithic instruments for fracturing the endocarps and recovering the seeds, locally
known as rompecoquitos [
22
]. The micropaleoethnobotanical record has also provided
evidence of the importance of palms in the subsistence of these native peoples [
20
,
21
,
45
].
On the one hand, the presence of the plant micro remains (opal phytoliths) of butia fruits
in sediments, inside ceramic vessels, on the active surface of grinding instruments and in
the dental plaque of individuals exhumed in the Indigenous mounds is direct evidence
of the fruit’s collection, processing and consumption. On the other hand, the frequent
finding of opal phytoliths produced in palm leaves, involucres and stems indicates the
broader subsistence role of this resource, which is linked to construction, industry and even
burial rituals [
21
]. Indirect evidence has also been provided from bioanthropology: dental
indicators (caries) have been attributed to the possible incidence of extensive palm fruit
consumption [
46
], and trace elements (Sr/Zn) have been associated with the consumption
of palm seeds [47].
Although there is no direct evidence of intensive palm management or domestication
practices, it is indisputable that the palm grove landscape’s domestication began from
the mid Holocene. This domestication involved different soil, drainage and species man-
agement practices, including hunting, fishing, gathering and horticultural practices, with
the incipient development of agroecosystems as early as 4600 years before the present. It
involved domesticated species such as squashes, maize and beans and managed species
such as Canna glauca (aquatic Canna), Thypha spp. (cattails), Bromelia spp., Oryza spp. (wild
rice) and other wild rice relatives (Leersia spp. and Luziola spp) [
20
,
21
,
48
]. Once established,
these new forms of interaction and environmental management did not stagnate in the face
of the successive climatic and environmental changes of the mid and late Holocene, but
they constituted a dynamic and active form of successful adaptation to the environment.

Land 2023,12, 648 6 of 22
With the gradual lowering of the sea level and the establishment of a more-temperate
and subhumid to seasonal climate towards the end of the mid Holocene (4000 BP), the
occupation of the higher wetlands grew with the construction of more and larger mounds;
this was the highest mound density recorded in the whole area of the Merin Lagoon
Basin [
43
]. It was not until 3000–2500 years before the present, with the sea close to its
current level and climate conditions similar to the present, that the construction of mounds
expanded towards low wetlands, including the coastal lagoon environment on both sides
of the Merin Lagoon Basin [
40
,
49
]. Watercourses riparian and hilly forests would have
spread once the climate had stabilised and the base level had decreased, while the palm
grove expanded over the geoforms linked to the last transgression [40].
At the regional level, the same period corresponds to the beginning of mound con-
structions in the lowlands of northeastern Uruguay (from ca. 3200 to 14C BP), in the Paraná
Delta (ca. 1600 to 14C BP) and in the lower reaches of the Uruguay River (ca. 1800 to
14C BP), e.g., [
50
,
51
]. This denotes an expansion of the construction of burial mounds as a
technological feature and, mainly, the increasing anthropisation of the landscape.
Beyond these climate-environment changes and their impact on the configuration of
the territory, no significant variations have been found in the forms of human–environment
interaction over almost 5000 years of the construction, maintenance and use of the Indige-
nous mounds. Although there was an increase over the past 2500 years in the production
and consumption of cultivated resources (particularly maize), including specific techno-
logical developments for their processing and perhaps storage (e.g., ceramic vessels and
grinding tools), crops continued to represent a secondary and complementary element in a
ductile, wide-ranging subsistence [52,53].
Contemporary to the final period of mound construction in the lowlands and to the
arrival of the first European groups (16th and 17th centuries), other material manifestations
that witnessed the cultural imprint of the butia landscapes appeared. On the tops of
the sierras and high ridges, stone accumulations known locally as cairns or vichaderos
began to be erected. These constructions are made of stone blocks located in high sites
and encompass a variety of forms, including mounds and rings, both closed and open.
Historical sources and recent archaeological research have revealed that these structures
were used for multiple purposes: as burial sites, ceremonial sites, territorial markers and
hunting structures, among others [
54
,
55
]. From a landscape standpoint, they are found in
places of high altitude and good visibility which have good connectivity with the middle
plains, the palm grove, coastal lagoons and associated wetlands.
These landscapes, which had already been heavily anthropised by centuries of recur-
rent construction practices (in earth and stone), environmental management and resource
and niche production, received the first European expeditions in the territory and witnessed
the earliest contact with the Indigenous groups who inhabited it. However, there are very
few chronicles and accounts for that early period because of the limited incursions into
the territory [
56
]. For eastern Uruguay, no references to contact with mound and/or cairn
builders have been found, even though they were still occupying the Merin Lagoon Basin
at that time. The lack of precious metals delayed the interest of colonial authorities in the
eastern Uruguayan territory, with very few incursions and descriptions until the second
half of the 17th century. This began to change when Colonia del Sacramento was founded
and thanks to the spread of European livestock [
57
], upon the discovery of the nonmineral
wealth the territory had to offer: grasslands.
Changes during the Spanish/Portuguese colonisation
During this period, there was an enormous abundance of open-range cattle. Around
1677, there were around four million cattle in this area, presumably domestic cattle that
had escaped from the Jesuit missions on the Uruguay River and then became feral cattle.
These herds of feral cattle were called Vaquerías del Mar (literally, ‘herds from the sea’),
constituting the main cattle reservoir for the Jesuit missions of the Uruguay and Paraná
rivers [
58
]. Illustrations from that period in the memoirs of Jesuit priest Florián Paucke [
59
],
and the diary of Father Juan María Pompeyo and Brother Silvestre González of 1705, refer

Land 2023,12, 648 7 of 22
to cattle drives of more than 400,000 heads of cattle [
60
]. Both sources also mention that
Indigenous people participated in these gigantic drives.
In the large grasslands of the region, these cattle were mixed with cervids (Ozotoceros
bezoarticus,Mazama gouazoubira and Blastocerus dichotomus), which had been exploited over
thousands of years by local Indigenous groups. These herds of native herbivores shaped
the landscapes of grasslands that today make up the Pampa biome, in which the butia palm
groves are found. This new animal setting made up of cattle and deer became a new object
of economic management for the Indigenous populations of the region [
61
]. Cattle, deer,
horses and Indigenous people began to interact in this new geopolitical context, trading
with the military who settled or transited across the border area and the new settlers who
were living in the first settlements near the border [
62
]. To better estimate the economic
relevance of this trade, in the 1790s, more than half of the hides brought into Montevideo’s
port were unbranded cattle [
63
], while [
64
] reported that two million deer hides were
legally exported from the ports of Buenos Aires and Montevideo between 1870 and 1880.
This abundance of cattle, as well as the associated logistics and different forms of
management, must be interpreted not only from an environmental perspective but also in
light of the colonial border disputes between the Portuguese and Spanish empires. These
were political buffer areas that influenced both human and animal mobility and contributed
to defining the population structure linked to the palm grove and the use of resources. As
part of a series of treaties and border disputes, mostly linked to the First Treaty of San
Ildefonso, in 1777, the territory of the Neutral Fields (Campos Neutrales) was created, a
buffer zone between the two empires where neither fixed settlements nor demarcating
border markers were allowed. In the areas surrounding the Campos Neutrales, several
fortifications and population centres were set up in what is now Uruguayan territory in
order to stop the westwards Portuguese expansion. Within this framework of population
consolidation near the border, two systems which granted land to settlers for productive
use were implemented: suertes de estancia (‘land favours’) and farm agriculture. This
population structure characterised the type of land ownership and use around the town of
Castillos at the time of its foundation, in 1866 [
65
], which would influence the configuration
of human relations with the Butia odorata palm grove. For the new settlers, the palm grove
was a very accessible source of food and raw materials for various construction purposes.
At the same time, its monumental presence began to be incorporated into Castillos’s culture,
forging a strong identity link between the palms and the inhabitants of the town of Castillos
and the new settlers who began to use the palm grove as a recreational site [66,67].
The butia palm groves became a key element of this framework: the leaves, and
sometimes the trunks, were used to build permanent and temporary housing, as well
as sheds and shade shelters. The palms were transplanted to form palm pens (Figure 4)
that have been associated with the origins of cattle ranching in Uruguay, which resulted
from the fusion of different worlds (Indigenous peoples and new settlers, plus introduced
species and native species). According to [
62
], the first pens were probably built by the
Guenoa-Minuan Indigenous groups that lived in the area, who quickly adapted to cattle
management and colonial trade. These cattle management strategies were preceded by
previous experiences in the management of cervid herds, and that knowhow was adapted
to the new environmental and political context.
Although some of the first pens were likely built by these groups, they would have
continued to be built later in association with more-specific cattle management tasks to
establish permanent settlements near the border. However, other hypotheses propose that
pens were also used to support long-distance cattle drives, connecting southern Brazil with
Colonia del Sacramento (some 1000 km away). This route, which crosses the palm grove, is
part of a network of historical cross-border roads connecting distant places such as Colonia
del Sacramento and São Paulo [
68
]. In this framework, the territory defined by the Neutral
Fields played a crucial role in that it constituted a portion of territory between both empires
without active military surveillance or a fixed population and through which there was a
very fluid transit of cattle drives and smugglers [69].

Land 2023,12, 648 8 of 22
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 23
Figure 4. Palm and stone pen.
Although some of the first pens were likely built by these groups, they would have
continued to be built later in association with more-specific cattle management tasks to
establish permanent settlements near the border. However, other hypotheses propose that
pens were also used to support long-distance cattle drives, connecting southern Brazil
with Colonia del Sacramento (some 1000 km away). This route, which crosses the palm
grove, is part of a network of historical cross-border roads connecting distant places such
as Colonia del Sacramento and São Paulo [68]. In this framework, the territory defined by
the Neutral Fields played a crucial role in that it constituted a portion of territory between
both empires without active military surveillance or a fixed population and through
which there was a very fluid transit of cattle drives and smugglers [69].
The border played a key role in defining the butia palm grove landscape. Indigenous
and colonial settlements promoted trade between worlds and cattle movements across the
border and the Neutral Fields. The troperismo (cattle drives) or the explicit need to avoid
such movement (the fixed activities of cattle management on private properties where the
pens were located) are hypotheses that depend on colonial disputes over the border. In
this framework of border disputes and new economic, political, environmental and cul-
tural contexts, the incipient development of cattle ranching associated with the palm
grove was another important element. However, the growing settlement of the area
through large estates and small properties was associated with the development of a form
of livestock production based on slavery.
The establishment of large estates in the border led to one of the largest concentra-
tions of slaves in the country [70], making up a slave-owning cattle system. These slave-
holding estates formed a rural landscape with no other settlements until Castillos was
founded, in 1866, and Santa Vitória do Palmar, in present-day Brazil, in 1872 [71]. This
cattle system, which focused mainly on leather production, evolved into a meat industri-
alisation system in places known as saladeros (meat-curing industries), which proliferated
in 18th-century Uruguay, where most of the tasajo (dried beef) production was sold to
feed slaves in the region [72]. Once slavery had been abolished in the mid 19th century,
many of the former slaves continued in a regime of de facto slavery, or, as some authors
have put it, second slavery [73]. The long distances to the most populated centres, years
of structural and symbolic violence, material dispossession and social destructuring,
among other factors, meant that many slaves continued in this regime of second slavery.
In fact, in the estancias, slaves began to be hired under very unfavourable conditions, with
20-year and inheritable contracts. In spite of this new form of slavery, around 1860, several
of these new ‘workers’ (or ‘peons’) slowly began to flee the estates and built small villages
where they met again and developed independent life projects. Many of these settlements,
now abandoned, are in the area around the Castillos palm grove (as is the case of the
Portera Negra settlement) and are traces of a past that bore witness to a productive and
exploitative system.
By then, the Indigenous groups in the area had largely disintegrated, acculturated
and hybridised into the culture of the new settlers, and they became part of the local pop-
ulation together with freed slaves and new settlers who did not own any land. This had
an impact on the use of the palm groves, which constituted a readily available resource
Figure 4. Palm and stone pen.
The border played a key role in defining the butia palm grove landscape. Indigenous
and colonial settlements promoted trade between worlds and cattle movements across the
border and the Neutral Fields. The troperismo (cattle drives) or the explicit need to avoid
such movement (the fixed activities of cattle management on private properties where the
pens were located) are hypotheses that depend on colonial disputes over the border. In this
framework of border disputes and new economic, political, environmental and cultural
contexts, the incipient development of cattle ranching associated with the palm grove was
another important element. However, the growing settlement of the area through large
estates and small properties was associated with the development of a form of livestock
production based on slavery.
The establishment of large estates in the border led to one of the largest concentrations
of slaves in the country [
70
], making up a slave-owning cattle system. These slave-holding
estates formed a rural landscape with no other settlements until Castillos was founded, in
1866, and Santa Vitória do Palmar, in present-day Brazil, in 1872 [
71
]. This cattle system,
which focused mainly on leather production, evolved into a meat industrialisation system
in places known as saladeros (meat-curing industries), which proliferated in 18th-century
Uruguay, where most of the tasajo (dried beef) production was sold to feed slaves in the
region [
72
]. Once slavery had been abolished in the mid 19th century, many of the former
slaves continued in a regime of de facto slavery, or, as some authors have put it, second
slavery [
73
]. The long distances to the most populated centres, years of structural and
symbolic violence, material dispossession and social destructuring, among other factors,
meant that many slaves continued in this regime of second slavery. In fact, in the estancias,
slaves began to be hired under very unfavourable conditions, with 20-year and inheritable
contracts. In spite of this new form of slavery, around 1860, several of these new ‘workers’
(or ‘peons’) slowly began to flee the estates and built small villages where they met again
and developed independent life projects. Many of these settlements, now abandoned, are
in the area around the Castillos palm grove (as is the case of the Portera Negra settlement)
and are traces of a past that bore witness to a productive and exploitative system.
By then, the Indigenous groups in the area had largely disintegrated, acculturated
and hybridised into the culture of the new settlers, and they became part of the local
population together with freed slaves and new settlers who did not own any land. This
had an impact on the use of the palm groves, which constituted a readily available resource
for these marginalised populations. In addition, the consolidation of human settlements
resulted in different forms of delimiting properties and land, mainly for more-intensive
land management. In this process, palm pens, which were still regularly built, and other
types of enclosures made of earth, thorny plants or just by opening clearings in the forest
played key roles [
74
]. In this process of the spatial appropriation of territory and resources,
several native vertebrate species were displaced and overexploited.
Modernisation
At the end of the 19th century and during the first decades of the 20th century, with
the newly independent nations, the region began to seek its own forms of economic
development. Between 1872 and 1882, the countryside was revolutionised by the wire
fencing of the land, not only because of how fast it happened but also because of the

Land 2023,12, 648 9 of 22
profound changes it brought about. Fencing reduced labour costs, improved the quantity
and quality of production and secured the herds, reinforcing the idea of private property.
Another important change was the introduction of sheep [
75
]. In this context, a process
of changes in the grasslands’ structure and the composition of the vegetation had begun,
which may have led to overgrazing and which therefore would have affected palm grove
regeneration, as [76] indicated.
From 1915, the government began to promote agriculture, which led to the creation
of a belt of small farms around the town of Castillos and other smaller settlements. The
palm grove played a key role in shaping the population structure thanks to the palms’
industrial exploitation, which started in the first half of the 20th century. In 1943, a butia
oil factory called Cocopalm was set up to ‘wholly industrialise’ butia palm fruits. The oil
produced from the seeds was used for a variety of nonfood purposes, such as to make
engine lubricant or even soap [10].
Palm fibre factories, or ‘vegetable horsehair factories’, as they were locally known,
were the most spatially and temporally widespread in the area. There were between 5 and
10 factories: some of them coexisted, while others changed owners [
77
]. The industriali-
sation of butia leaves initially took place in southern Brazil (near Santa Vitória do Palmar
and Rio Grande do Sul) at the beginning of the 20th century [
78
]. In Rocha, all the factories
were first in Paso del Bañado, about 5 km from the town of Castillos, but some later moved
into town. Paso del Bañado, a village that is in the middle of the palm grove and that is
nowadays in ruins, saw a big population growth with the arrival of these factories, as they
provided work for several people. The leaves were harvested in the nearby palm grove,
although they were sometimes harvested in other areas. In total, these factories employed
hundreds of people who lived in the area. There were technical specialisations such as leaf
harvesters, as well as commercial intermediaries for multiple uses such as filling mattresses
and cushions, espadrille soles and brooms [
67
]. The harvested leaves were transported
in wagons and trucks to the factories where they were ‘fiberised’. These factories thrived
thanks to what was known as the Import Substitution Model, which marked Uruguay’s
economic policy from 1930 to 1960. In general terms, the model discouraged the imports of
First-World products and promoted national industrial production, bringing down customs
barriers and favouring the exchange rate policy [
79
]. When this model collapsed, the
factories disappeared because they could not compete with the price of imported synthetic
raw materials.
This industrial exploitation of the palm grove evidenced what the palm grove repre-
sented from an economic perspective for the inhabitants of Castillos and its surroundings.
In fact, since the beginning of the 20th century, several authors have highlighted the eco-
nomic potential of this ecosystem [
80
]. Industrialisation was part of a process of interactions
that was affected by centuries of very varied uses.
A series of traditional uses such as the elaboration of sweets, liqueurs, jams, jellies and
coffees made with butia seeds and the fruit with aguardiente known as ‘cane with butia’ [
67
]
were already very common among the local population and were also commercialised.
The ban on ‘palm honey’, a drink made from the sap of the palms that required draining
the palm and ended up killing it, was established by Act 9872 of 1939. This use, which
was a traditional and basically domestic use, was part of the relations between palm trees
and people. The high level of imbrication between people and the palm grove was the
socioenvironmental and cultural context that led to the strengthening of the local identity,
based on several traditional uses and local artistic expressions.
The second half of the 20th century to the present day
The 1950s brought significant changes in the country, which also led to the evolution
of the landscape of the butia palm grove. In 1951, the rural population was at its highest,
coinciding with a stage of agricultural expansion and a high number of estates of no
more than 100 hectares [
75
]. However, from then on, a continuous process of rural–urban
migration began, which has lasted until the present day, with a consequent ageing of the
rural population. These processes are largely due to factors such as land concentration, an

Land 2023,12, 648 10 of 22
increased corporate presence and reduced family production. Large families leave very
small plots of land to their children, which is compounded by a shortage of jobs [
81
]. Butia
fibre factories closed in the second half of the 20th century, changing the tangible and
symbolic landscape of an entire era.
Meanwhile, the Castillos palm grove is used for livestock in the larger paddocks,
together with small agricultural farms and family horticultural production (Figure 5).
Although livestock systems have incorporated some technological changes throughout
the 20th and 21st centuries, their magnitude has been low, and they have hardly altered
the landscape. However, changes have occurred thanks to the forestry industry, which
introduced some exotic plant species into the higher lands and sierras that make up the
palm grove, and thanks to the drying up of some wetland areas [82].
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 23
This use, which was a traditional and basically domestic use, was part of the relations
between palm trees and people. The high level of imbrication between people and the
palm grove was the socioenvironmental and cultural context that led to the strengthening
of the local identity, based on several traditional uses and local artistic expressions.
The second half of the 20th century to the present day
The 1950s brought significant changes in the country, which also led to the evolution
of the landscape of the butia palm grove. In 1951, the rural population was at its highest,
coinciding with a stage of agricultural expansion and a high number of estates of no more
than 100 hectares [75]. However, from then on, a continuous process of rural–urban mi-
gration began, which has lasted until the present day, with a consequent ageing of the
rural population. These processes are largely due to factors such as land concentration, an
increased corporate presence and reduced family production. Large families leave very
small plots of land to their children, which is compounded by a shortage of jobs [81]. Butia
fibre factories closed in the second half of the 20th century, changing the tangible and
symbolic landscape of an entire era.
Meanwhile, the Castillos palm grove is used for livestock in the larger paddocks, to-
gether with small agricultural farms and family horticultural production (Figure 5). Alt-
hough livestock systems have incorporated some technological changes throughout the
20th and 21st centuries, their magnitude has been low, and they have hardly altered the
landscape. However, changes have occurred thanks to the forestry industry, which intro-
duced some exotic plant species into the higher lands and sierras that make up the palm
grove, and thanks to the drying up of some wetland areas [82].
Figure 5. (a) Palm grove used for cattle breeding, (b) palm grove with rice crop, (c) palm grove with
horticultural crops.
This period is also marked by the arrival of the Green Revolution, which had a par-
ticular impact on the start and development of rice agriculture in the palm grove region
of northern Rocha (Figure 5). This led to the drying and canalisation of wetlands and the
use of agrochemicals, which radically changed the landscape of this palm grove. Although
there is a legal prohibition against damaging the palm trees, they are subjected to cycles
of flooding and are exposed to aerial spraying, a situation that affects regeneration, the
vigour of the palms and probably fruit production [83]. In the San Luis palm groves, there
are also livestock producers on natural grasslands that form patches on a matrix of rice–
livestock rotations on sown pastures.
Figure 5.
(
a
) Palm grove used for cattle breeding, (
b
) palm grove with rice crop, (
c
) palm grove with
horticultural crops.
This period is also marked by the arrival of the Green Revolution, which had a
particular impact on the start and development of rice agriculture in the palm grove region
of northern Rocha (Figure 5). This led to the drying and canalisation of wetlands and the
use of agrochemicals, which radically changed the landscape of this palm grove. Although
there is a legal prohibition against damaging the palm trees, they are subjected to cycles of
flooding and are exposed to aerial spraying, a situation that affects regeneration, the vigour
of the palms and probably fruit production [
83
]. In the San Luis palm groves, there are also
livestock producers on natural grasslands that form patches on a matrix of rice–livestock
rotations on sown pastures.
Now, in the 21st century, different models of inhabiting these butia palm groves coexist:
family farming, corporate agriculture and forestry companies. In recent years, there have
also been some individuals and families who have migrated from the city to the countryside
in search of a more natural environment.
In this context, the diversity of the butia palm groves is not determined only by the
differences between the Castillos and San Luis areas or only by the differences in palm
grove densities. This landscape presents a rich and intricate net in which palm groves
coexist with diverse types of wetlands, forests and grasslands; flora and fauna which are
characteristic of these environments; and vast plant genetic resources [
13
,
84
–
88
]. Palm
groves provide various ecosystem services such as food for associated wildlife, domestic
animals and humans; fibre for local crafts; honey; and fodder, shelter and shade for livestock.
Ecosystem regulating services include erosion control and the maintenance of soil fertility,
the regulation of the hydrological cycle and microclimate, and pollination services [
85
,
88
].

Land 2023,12, 648 11 of 22
The palm grove provides multiple tangible and intangible cultural services, both from
an aesthetic point of view (as a source of inspiration in preserving social relations and
ties to the community for ecotourism and recreational services) and for education and
science [7,19].
In these landscapes, hundreds of family farmers raise livestock and, in some cases,
small-scale agriculture, especially horticulture for self-consumption, for animal feed and
occasionally for selling purposes. It is these families who conserve the agrobiodiversity
of both landraces and wild species. In the Castillos palm grove, 149 landraces belonging
to 33 cultivated species have been identified, including Cucurbitaceae,Phaseolus beans and
a variety of sweet potatoes, corn and bell peppers, among other crops [
89
]. Traditional
knowledge associated with the use of native wild species has also been surveyed, recording
106 species in the Castillos palm grove, which are used mainly for food, medicinal and
construction purposes, although they have also been used for ornamental, aromatic and
fuel purposes, among others [
90
]. Local knowledge associated with the use of this agro-
biodiversity refers to different types of practices and uses that are passed down within
families, especially by women and, to a lesser extent, between neighbours.
Regarding the different uses of butia, in addition to fresh consumption, traditional
products such as liqueurs, coffee seeds (gradually disappearing), jams and jellies are still
made. These products are consumed by the families or marketed on a small scale in an
area called Vuelta del Palmar (Figure 6). In the first decade of the 21st century, some
locals were trained in food handling and processing. Technological research was also
conducted on product innovation and seeking to develop specific equipment to process
butia fruits [
91
]. The main products included different types of juices, nectars, sauces,
pastries, ice creams, sugar-coated almonds (kernels), chocolates and candies [
67
,
91
], which
are marketed by family microenterprises. A couple of years ago, the local government
implemented a tourism programme called Flavours of Rocha, which aimed to promote
gastronomy from local produce and in which butia fruits played a prominent role [
19
]. A
participatory proposal for an ecotourism route was developed in parallel [
92
], but it has
not yet been implemented. There have also been efforts to provide training to local artisans
and support to visual artists to promote art and crafts linked to butia [
19
]. Among these
many challenges, it is also intended to valorise traditional knowledge, literature, music and
painting linked to the palm grove.
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 23
Figure 6. Stall where artisanal products are sold.
4. Discussion
Interpretative model of the butia palm forest landscape
Through a transdisciplinary analysis, as proposed by [25,93] to understand the hu-
man history of past and present landscapes, it is postulated that the current landscape of
the butia palm grove in the southeast of Uruguay is a domesticated or biocultural land-
scape [24,94]. It resulted from human–environment interactions and climate changes that
have occurred since the beginning of the Holocene [95–98]. Nature–culture coevolution,
as an integrating concept [99], allows us to understand the current landscape and to value
the legacies for current and future generations [25,100,101]. The current landscape shows
that in the domestication process of the butia palm grove, the intensity of interventions
has varied over time. Promoted, managed, cultivated, swidden/fallow and settlement
landscapes [24,95] have succeeded one another and coexisted in the palm grove. Because
of the nutritional, social and cultural importance of palms [102], they are indicative of
domesticated landscapes [103–107], as we propose for the butia palm grove.
The use and management practices of different resources to achieve safe and produc-
tive environments transformed the landscape of the butia palm grove, as shown in Figure
7. Figure 7a represents a pristine landscape which, according to available data, could be
dated to at least 30,000 years ago. Figures 7b,c correspond to the arrival of the first human
settlers until the encounter between Indigenous and European cultures, accounting for
approximately 95% of the time elapsed since the arrival of the first human settlers. Figure
7d represents the colonisation stage, which basically took place between the second half
of the 17th century and the 19th century; Figure 7e shows the modernisation that began
in the early 20th century; and Figure 7f represents the current situation.
Figure 6. Stall where artisanal products are sold.

Land 2023,12, 648 12 of 22
4. Discussion
Interpretative model of the butia palm forest landscape
Through a transdisciplinary analysis, as proposed by [
25
,
93
] to understand the hu-
man history of past and present landscapes, it is postulated that the current landscape
of the butia palm grove in the southeast of Uruguay is a domesticated or biocultural
landscape [
24
,
94
]. It resulted from human–environment interactions and climate changes
that have occurred since the beginning of the Holocene [
95
–
98
]. Nature–culture coevolution,
as an integrating concept [
99
], allows us to understand the current landscape and to value
the legacies for current and future generations [
25
,
100
,
101
]. The current landscape shows
that in the domestication process of the butia palm grove, the intensity of interventions
has varied over time. Promoted, managed, cultivated, swidden/fallow and settlement
landscapes [
24
,
95
] have succeeded one another and coexisted in the palm grove. Because
of the nutritional, social and cultural importance of palms [
102
], they are indicative of
domesticated landscapes [103–107], as we propose for the butia palm grove.
The use and management practices of different resources to achieve safe and pro-
ductive environments transformed the landscape of the butia palm grove, as shown in
Figure 7. Figure 7a represents a pristine landscape which, according to available data,
could be dated to at least 30,000 years ago. Figure 7b,c correspond to the arrival of the first
human settlers until the encounter between Indigenous and European cultures, accounting
for approximately 95% of the time elapsed since the arrival of the first human settlers.
Figure 7d represents the colonisation stage, which basically took place between the second
half of the 17th century and the 19th century; Figure 7e shows the modernisation that began
in the early 20th century; and Figure 7f represents the current situation.
The transition from a pristine to a promoted landscape [
24
] began with the arrival
of the first humans in the region (Figure 7b). Anthropogenic fires were frequent starting
from the early Holocene [
108
,
109
], which, added to wildlife grazing, caused changes
in the physiognomy and composition of the vegetation, favouring grasses and herbs
in the grasslands [
110
–
112
]. Hunting and gathering activities were favoured [
113
], and
greater security was obtained in inhabited environments, among other benefits. As already
mentioned, there are records of butia fruit consumption dating from as early as the arrival of
humans to the palm grove territory, which could lead us to suppose that butia palms have
been promoted since then. Adult palms are not affected by fire [
114
], and this disturbance
is probably a promoter of butia seedlings. Regarding the extinction of megafauna, the
available regional information is not conclusive in relation to whether it was caused mainly
by hunting activities or whether it had multiple causes [115,116].
In Figure 7c (mid Holocene), promotion activities are maintained, but the management
of the environment is already evident through the construction of thousands of Indigenous
mounds that speak not only of a managed landscape but also of a settlement landscape [
24
].
An increase in human populations was recorded, also coinciding with an increase of riparian
forests 5170 cal yr BP under warmer and wetter climate conditions [
107
]. In the case of
the butia palm, the records of fruit and seed consumption are abundant for this period,
and it can be presumed that promoting this species was an important factor in its spread.
On the other hand, controlled fires and changes in the dominant vegetation probably
led to a marked increase in the numbers of certain animals, such as the Pampas deer
(Ozotoceros bezoarticus) [
117
]. Hunter-gatherers would have built relatively stable niches
that would have allowed them to maintain this way of life for thousands of years [
112
].
Rather than specialising in specific management, cultivation and domestication practices at
the species level (although they did use them), mound builders developed environmental
management strategies that had repercussions on resource concentration, niche construction
and domestication at landscape scale. The success of this ductile and resilient strategy
explains 5000 years of the perpetuation of this dialectic interrelationship between humans
and the environment, which was the precursor of the butia biocultural landscape.

Land 2023,12, 648 13 of 22
Land 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 23
Figure 7. Conceptual model representing the environmental evolution and landscape dynamics of
the palm grove region. The diagrams are illustrative for different times and do not represent quan-
titative data: (a) Upper Pleistocene; (b) Pleistocene–Holocene Transition; (c) mid Holocene; (d) co-
lonial age; (e) modern age; and (f) present time. Chronologies are expressed in calibrated years be-
fore the present (yr BP) and calendar age. No spatial scale.
The transition from a pristine to a promoted landscape [24] began with the arrival of
the first humans in the region (Figure 7b). Anthropogenic fires were frequent starting from
the early Holocene [108,109], which, added to wildlife grazing, caused changes in the
Figure 7.
Conceptual model representing the environmental evolution and landscape dynamics
of the palm grove region. The diagrams are illustrative for different times and do not represent
quantitative data: (
a
) Upper Pleistocene; (
b
) Pleistocene–Holocene Transition; (
c
) mid Holocene;
(
d
) colonial age; (
e
) modern age; and (
f
) present time. Chronologies are expressed in calibrated years
before the present (yr BP) and calendar age. No spatial scale.
Figure 7d shows the encounter between Indigenous and colonial cultures, a period
marked by interimperial logics, commercial interests and processes of active and passive
border claims and by new configurations between native and introduced herbivores such
as cattle and horses. Cattle introduction was key to affirming the pastoral destiny of the

Land 2023,12, 648 14 of 22
Pampa biome and, in particular, the Butia landscape, where the coevolution of grasses
and herbivores shaped the landscape of the grasslands, or campos. In colonial times, the
cattle were semifreely managed, driven by troperos. The campos had no fences and were
open areas, except for the palm pens. On the other hand, this troperismo could also have
caused the spread of butia seeds [
86
,
118
]. The settlement of European populations also
brought along European crops that became integrated with native American crops in small,
cultivated areas.
The modern age (Figure 7e) shows substantial changes, many of which are maintained
in the present. Cattle ranching on natural grasslands is the predominant activity in mod-
elling the landscape, but the fencing of paddocks started to change the grazing ecology,
particularly affecting the regeneration of the palm grove. The cultivated and industrial
landscape (with the butia fibre factories) was added to the livestock, which promoted
well-managed, small-scale agriculture and settlement landscape, which increased agrobio-
diversity, the rural population and the heterogeneity of the forms of inhabiting the butia
palm grove.
The present age (Figure 7f), which is the shortest in the 10,000 years of the construction
of this biocultural landscape, has seen the greatest conservation changes and risks. A
transition towards corporate agriculture, particularly for rice and soybean plantations
in the San Luis palm grove, and forestation in higher lands for the cellulose industry,
along with the new pastures and grassland improvements, constitute the main causes
of the loss of the natural campos and therefore of plant genetic resources and ecosystem
services [
119
,
120
]. This situation is aggravated by the overgrazing of natural grasslands [
121
],
which is the main cause of the low regeneration in the palm grove [
16
,
84
,
122
]. The world-
wide devaluation of grassland ecosystems is argued to be the cause of the lack of con-
servation policies, particularly in the case of the Pampa/grasslands biome in the Rio de
la Plata [5,85,123].
In the present age, changes in the production systems have worsened the palm grove’s
regeneration, compromising the conservation of agrobiodiversity, associated traditional
knowledge, the material legacy of its rich cultural past and the diversity in the ways of
inhabiting it. Other activities, such as the creation of networks, the development of butia
products and their use in gastronomy, and the potential development of ecotourism and
handicrafts have become more prominent over this period. This situation confronts us with
challenges and opportunities to conserve the palm grove landscape within the framework
of sustainable use.
Conservation problems and strategy
Herter in 1933 proposed the creation of a reserve or natural monument for the palm
groves of Rocha, arguing that all the formations and associations of the country are found
there: sierras, grasslands, palm groves, wetlands, sandy areas, streams, freshwater lagoons
and oceanic coasts [
8
]. Even though a long time has passed since then, the only existing
legal protection is the National Act of 1987, which prohibits cutting or otherwise damaging
the palms, but it fails to contemplate the regeneration of the palm grove, let alone the
biocultural integrity of the landscape. The palm grove landscape’s being in a Biosphere
Reserve and in a Ramsar area has not resulted in specific legislation or the implementation
of concrete measures. Meanwhile, the butia palm was added to the list of priority species for
conservation in Uruguay [
124
], although it is the palm grove community that is endangered,
not the species.
This vulnerability is due to the centenarian age structure of the palms and the lack of
regeneration in lands used for agriculture, the main causes being livestock overgrazing
and crops, mainly rice [
83
]. Cattle grazing management has been proposed to develop
a conservation strategy that allows the palm grove to regenerate within the framework
of sustainable livestock production. It is based on grazing exclusions during the winter
season, instead grazing the rest of the year with young cattle classes adjusting the stocking
rate according to forage production, preferably in areas of lower palm density or even in
surrounding areas [
16
,
17
,
88
]. This alternative has the virtue of enabling the regeneration of

Land 2023,12, 648 15 of 22
the palm grove and the conservation of the natural grasslands, and it does not decrease
but instead can increase meat production [
125
,
126
]. By integrating producers, academia
and local public institutions, it has been possible to inform producers about this form of
cattle management through training and dissemination programmes. As a result, seven
demonstrative areas were established on private properties, in addition to a pioneer area
established in 2015. However, the overall area is small (82.5 hectares), so the challenge
is not only to continue monitoring and validating this practice but also to incorporate
larger conservation areas in the 18 cattle ranches that comprise 70% of the Castillos palm
grove [
13
]. Other initiatives propose the reintroduction of young palms through transplants,
although they have so far made no progress [126].
The palm grove’s conservation does not refer exclusively to butia palms; from the
ecosystem’s point of view, it means conserving a variety of flora and fauna in which
pollinators and dispersers stand out, as well as the environmental services provided by the
ecosystem [
85
,
86
]. Conserving the spatial configuration of palm groves is crucial to ensure
the viability of palm populations, avoiding the effects of environmental fragmentation
on their reproduction and genetic diversity, in addition to the conservation of associated
biodiversity [88].
In this context, the reduced generational turnover in family production is a worrying
situation that threatens the conservation of agrobiodiversity and associated local knowl-
edge, as well as other forms of intangible cultural heritage such as the local negritude
heritage and the heritage of stories, legends, poetry, songs and paintings. Although this
topic is rarely included in conservation proposals, we understand that it is essential to
continue supporting public policies linked to family agriculture, rural women and youth.
In the same sense, policies to valorise agrobiodiversity are relevant, both by generating
value chains and through agroecological certifications [88,127,128].
The tangible cultural heritage such as the Indigenous mounds, palm pens, cairns,
the landscape of old vegetable fibre factories and old estancias, among others, remains
unprotected. In the 1980s, the Commission for the Archaeological Rescue of the Merin
Lagoon Basin was created in order to recover and save from destruction as much material
evidence of the Indigenous mounds as possible [
38
]. This led to a slow process whereby
Indigenous mounds were being recognised as heritage, requiring major academic efforts to
promote their conservation [
38
,
47
]. Although a slow regulatory change regarding heritage
has recently taken place in Uruguay (Act 18,068 on the Safeguarding and Promotion of
the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and the adoption of UNESCO’s Convention for the
Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage), the main legal norm in force regarding
cultural heritage in Uruguay is Act 14,040 on Tangible Cultural Heritage, which was
passed in 1972. This protects the Indigenous mounds as individual entities and in a very
generic way, with an obsolete heritage approach that shows discrepancies with the new
socioterritorial needs [
129
]. Regarding palm pens, several local organisations have been
concerned with their study and conservation [
62
], but there is currently no legal figure that
safeguards these archaeological structures.
In legal terms, Uruguay has two laws that could be applied to the conservation of
the butia palm grove landscape, one concerning protected areas and another concerning
land-use planning. The Act for the Creation of the National System of Protected Areas
(2000) and its Regulatory Decree N
◦
52/005 establishes different categories of protected
areas, among which protected landscapes and protected areas with managed resources are
the most plausible alternatives to be applied to the conservation of the butia palm landscape.
However, these categories do not address landscapes in the sense that we propose in this
paper. For instance, the recent creation of the Laguna de Castillos protected landscape
within the framework of the National System of Protected Areas includes only a small
area of the palm grove territory, being marginal and not representative of the landscape
as a whole. In general, archaeological and cultural heritage conservation is conceived
independently from environmental conservation and management [
130
], although some
progress has recently been made in identifying, recognising and protecting cultural values

Land 2023,12, 648 16 of 22
in the management plans of protected areas where these are present [
131
–
134
]. On the
other hand, agrobiodiversity conservation has not been incorporated as a specific object
when designating protected areas. Although these conceptions are slowly being reversed,
we understand that they would not be the most appropriate solution, mainly because of
the need for a participatory governance [
135
] of the palm grove landscape. The current
participation mechanism consists of a specific commission of local public and private actors
coordinated by the Ministry of Environment, which is relatively poor as it is only advisory.
Act 18,308 (2008) on Land Management and Sustainable Development defines ‘land
management’ as ‘the set of cross-cutting actions of the state that aim to maintain and
improve the quality of life of the population, social integration in the territory, and the
environmentally sustainable and democratic use and exploitation of natural and cultural
resources’. It is a public function that is carried out through guidelines, programmes,
plans and actions of the state institutions with competence in the subject. This legal tool is
binding for both public entities and private entities, and its scope comprises the definition
of strategies for sustainable development, land use and management; a set of criteria on the
location of economic and social activities; and identifying and defining areas under a special
protection regime thanks to their ecological, heritage, landscape, cultural, environmental
and natural resource conservation interests, among other objectives. Its guiding principles
include environmentally sustainable planning with social equity and territorial cohesion;
coordination between the public and private sectors; decentralising land-use planning;
promoting local development by enhancing the natural, built and social resources found
in the territory; citizen participation at all stages; and reconciling economic development,
sustainability and social equity. This norm, especially because of its biocultural approach
and its intention to decentralise decision-making and foster citizen participation, represents
an interesting option to propose a land-use-planning and sustainable development plan for
the butia palm grove landscape.
This standard had already been included in a decree enacted by the Departmental
Board of Rocha in 2020, which created an interinstitutional commission that is entrusted
with ‘the final drafting, in coordination with the Departmental Executive Branch, of a
land planning instrument to establish a statute for the protection and management of
the existing butia palm grove in the Department of Rocha, based on appropriate grazing
management practices to regenerate the palm grove and conserve the natural grasslands’.
This instrument represents a big step forward; however, it clearly does not aim at conserving
the butia palm grove landscape from an integral perspective, regardless of the positive
mechanisms that it provides.
Landscape-level approaches are those that reconcile production, conservation and
other uses in rural landscapes. The proposition of 10 principles for the implementation
of this type of approach [
136
] largely coincide with the guiding principles set out in the
Act on Land-Use Planning and Sustainable Development. As key aspects, they highlight
multifunctionality, the multiple interests of stakeholders and the establishment of duties
and responsibilities for stakeholders. This approach entails a series of challenges, such as
integrating disciplines and sectors in order to bring together policies related to land use,
agricultural production, tourism, education, science, access to services and the development
of specific markets, among others. A collaborative governance approach that allows rural
communities to be integrated into the different sectors (and political-administrative levels)
in land-use and management policymaking would contribute to cocreating solutions that
involve experts and local knowledge, building strong social networks [137].
In terms of actively including the private sector in conservation, voluntary conserva-
tion by the private sector is an interesting alternative that has recently been explored in
Uruguay [
138
,
139
]. A good example of this has been the livestock management demonstra-
tive areas that have been established.
Applying the concept of biocultural landscape promotes the notion that conservation
and use are not dissociated, but rather, they are parts of the very genesis and evolution of
landscapes. This contributes to developing solutions that value and include the experience

Land 2023,12, 648 17 of 22
and knowledge of local communities and farmers, which is a key element in any type of
conservation proposal that factors in agrobiodiversity [
93
,
140
–
142
]. This concept’s integral
nature facilitates the inclusion of tangible and intangible cultural heritage in conservation
proposals and instruments within the framework of UNESCO’s conventions on cultural
diversity and the safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage. In a conservation area of
these characteristics, the three conventions agreed to at the Earth Summit (1992) would
also be implemented (i.e., the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Climate Change
Convention and the Convention to Combat Desertification) while also contributing to
achieving Sustainable Development Goal 15 and other SDGs.
5. Conclusions
The transdisciplinary approach presented in this paper allowed us to support the inter-
pretation of the butia palm landscape as the result of different intensities of domestication
and forms of inhabitation that occurred and continue to occur from thousands of years
ago to the present. The proposed model showed that past and present legacies must be
preserved, especially to be valued by current and future generations.
Considering the existence of the landscape, as presented in this article, implies thinking
about conservation categories in which time and space are intertwined with biophysical,
socioeconomic and cultural aspects, defining a complex mesh whose density calls for an
appropriate conservation strategy. To this end, we have relied on the concept of biocultural
landscape, whose strength lies in how it considers cultural and natural variables in an
integral way and from a diachronic perspective. It is also a concept that can bridge academia,
the private sector, local communities and conservation policies. In this sense, the approach
presented reconciles the multifunctionality of landscapes, collaborative governance and
sustainable use.
Author Contributions:
All the authors have taken part in the conceptualisation, methodology, analy-
sis, review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding:
This article was partially financed by the ECCOSUR URU/16/G32 project, titled ‘Integrat-
ing producers, academia and public institutions: the palm grove and sustainable cattle breeding’.
Acknowledgments:
We thank the Agricultural Council of Rocha, the Departmental Board and the
agricultural producers who have taken ownership of the conservation of the butia palm grove. We
also extend our gratitude to Laura Moraiti for her illustrations and to Néstor Rocha, Jesús Perdomo
and Eduardo Pereyra for their support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Noblick, L. Butia: What we think we know about the genus. J. Oil Palm Res. 2014,208, 5–23.
2. Soares, K.P. Le genre Butia.Princeps 2015,1, 12–57.
3.
Deble, L.P.; Keller, H.A.; Alves, F.D.S. Resurrection and epitypification of Butia poni (Arecaceae), a neglected palm micro-endemic
in the grasslands of Misiones, Argentina. Phytotaxa 2017,316, 171–180. [CrossRef]
4.
Velazco, S.J.E.; Insaurralde, J.A. Butia, un género endémico de Sudamérica. In Palmeras NUS al sur de la América Austral; Hilbert,
N.I., Pochettino, M.L., Hernández, J.E., Eds.; Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo; CYTED:
Cambridge, UK, 2020; pp. 117–122. Available online: www.cyted.org (accessed on 8 February 2023).
5.
Overbeck, G.E.; Müller, S.C.; Fidelis, A.; Pfadenhauer, J.; Pillar, V.D.; Blanco, C.C.; Boldrini, I.I.; Both, R.; Forneck, E.D. Brazil
´
s
neglected biome: The South Brazilian Campos. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2007,9, 101–116. [CrossRef]
6.
Rivas, M.; Condón, F. Plant Domestication and Utilization: The Case of the Pampa Biome. In Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies:
Breeding, Biotechnology and Molecular Tools; Al-Khayri, J.M., Jain, S.M., Johnson, D.V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing:
Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 3–24.
7.
Rivas, M.; Barbieri, R.L. Butia odorata (Barb.Rodr.) Noblick. Butiá, Butiazeiro; IICA PROCISUR, Montevideo. 2018, p. 24. Available
online: http://www.procisur.org.uy/adjuntos/300ac8bda0dc_Butia-03a.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2023).
8. Herter, G. Apuntes Sobre el Palmar de Castillos; Departamento de Rocha: Ostenia, Uruguay, 1933; pp. 193–204.
9. Chebataroff, J. Palmeras del Uruguay; Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias: Montevideo, Uruguay, 1974; p. 31.
10. PROBIDES. El palmar, la palma y el butiá. In Fichas Didácticas; PROBIDES: Rocha, Uruguay, 1995; p. 23.

Land 2023,12, 648 18 of 22
11. PROBIDES. Plan Director. Reserva de Biosfera Bañados del Este/Uruguay; Probides: Rocha, Uruguay, 1999; p. 159.
12.
Zaffaroni, C.; Rivas, M.; Resnichenko, Y.; Hernández, J. Aporte para la conservación de paisajes singulares: El caso de los palmares
de Butia capitata (Mart.) Becc., en el departamento de Rocha, Uruguay. In Anais do X Encontro de Geógrafos da América Latina;
Universidade de São Paulo: San Pablo, Brazil, 2005; pp. 116611–116622.
13.
Rivas, M.; Filippini, J.; Cunha, H.; Hernández, J.; Resnichenko, Y.; Barbieri, R.L. Palm forest landscape in Castillos (Rocha,
Uruguay): Contributions to the design of a conservation area. Open J. For. 2017,7, 97–120. [CrossRef]
14.
Dabezies, J.M. Heritagization of nature and its influence on local ecological knowledge in Uruguay. Int. J. Herit. Stud.
2018
,
24, 1–15. [CrossRef]
15.
Rivas, M. Desafíos y alternativas para la conservación in situ de los palmares de Butia capitata (Mart.) Becc. Agrociencia
2005
,
IX, 161–168.
16. Rivas, M.; Barbieri, R.L. Boas Práticas de Manejo Para o Extrativismo do Butiá; Embrapa: Brasilia, Brazil, 2014; p. 59.
17.
Sosinski, E.E., Jr.; Barbieri, R.L.; Rivas, M. Pecuária em campo nativo: Uma aliada na restauração dos butiazais. In Palmeras NUS al
sur de la América Austral; Hilbert, N.I., Pochettino, M.L., Hernández, J.E., Eds.; Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología
para el Desarrollo; CYTED: Cambridge, UK, 2020; pp. 181–194. Available online: www.cyted.org (accessed on 8 February 2023).
18.
Dabezies, J.M. Negotiating the Taskscape. Relocating Human—Environmental Relationships in Conservation Proposals around
Palm Forests in Uruguay. Conserv. Soc. 2019,17, 236–249. [CrossRef]
19.
Rivas, M.; Barbieri, R.L.; Marchi, M.; Sosinski, E.E.; Amorim, F. La Red Palmar/Rota dos Butiazais—Una red internacional para la
conservación de los Palmares de Butiámediante su uso sostenible. In Palmeras NUS al sur de la América Austral; Hilbert, N.I.,
Pochettino, M.L., Hernández, J.E., Eds.; Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo; CYTED: Cambridge,
UK, 2020; pp. 195–221. Available online: www.cyted.org (accessed on 8 February 2023).
20.
López Mazz, J.M.; Dabezies, J.M.; Capdepont, I. La Gestión De Recursos Vegetales En Las Poblaciones Prehistóricas De Las
Tierras Bajas Del Sureste Del Uruguay: Un Abordaje Multidisciplinar. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2014,25, 256–277. [CrossRef]
21.
del Puerto, L.; Gianotti, C.; Inda, H. Gestión del medio y producción de recursos en las tierras bajas del noreste de Uruguay:
Análisis paleoetnobotánico del sitio Pago Lindo. Cuad. Do Lepaarq 2016,XIII, 197–222.
22.
Suárez Vespa, D.; del Puerto, L.; Inda, H. 2022. Dónde hubo fuego macrorestos quedan: Paleoetnobotánica de un cerrito de indios
del sitio CH2D01. TESSITURAS 2022,101, 171–202. [CrossRef]
23.
Crumley, C.L. Historical ecology: Integrated thinking at multiple temporal and spatial scales. In The World System and the Earth
System: Global Socioenvironmental Change and Sustainability since the Neolithic; Hornborg, A., Crumley, C.L., Eds.; Left Coast Press:
Walnut Creek, CA, USA, 2007; pp. 15–28.
24.
Clement, C.R.; Cassino, M. Landscape domestication and archaeology. In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology; Smith, C., Ed.;
Springer Nature: Berlin, Germany, 2018. [CrossRef]
25.
Cassino, M.F.; Alves, R.P.; Levis, C.; Watling, J.; Junqueira, A.B.; Shock, M.P.; Ferreira, M.J.; Andrade, V.L.C.; Furquim, L.P.;
Coelho, S.D.; et al. Ethnobotany and ethnoecology applied to historical ecology. In Methods and Techniques in Ethnobiology and
Ethnoecology; Albuquerque, U.P., da Cunha, L.V.F.C., de Lucena, R.F.P., Alves, R.R.N., Eds.; Springer Protocols Handbooks;
Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 187–208.
26.
Balée, W.; Erickson, C.L. Time and Complexity in Historical Ecology: Studies in the Neotropical Lowlands; The Historical Ecology Series;
Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006; p. 432.
27.
Roberts, P.; Hunt, C.; Arroyo-Kalin, M.; Evans, D.; Boivin, N. The deep human prehistory of global tropical forests and its
relevance for modern conservation. Nat. Plants 2017,3, 17093. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28.
Silva, F.; Coward, F.; Davies, K.; Elliott, S.; Jenkins, E.; Newton, A.C.; Riris, P.; Vander Linden, M.; Bates, J.; Cantarello, E.; et al.
Developing transdisciplinary approaches to sustainability challenges: The need to model socio-environmental systems in the
Longue Durée.Sustainability 2022,14, 10234. [CrossRef]
29.
Munn, Z.; Peters, M.D.J.; Stern, C.; Tufanaru, C.; McArthur, A.; Aromataris, E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for
authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2018,18, 1–7. [CrossRef]
30.
Del Puerto, L. Silicofitolitos como Indicadores Paleoambientales. Bases Comparativas y Reconstrucción Paleoclimática a Partir del Pleistoceno
Tardío en el SE del Uruguay; Académica Española: Berlin, Germany, 2011; p. 168.
31.
Montaña, J.; Bossi, J. Geomorfología de los Humedales de la Cuenca de la Laguna Merín en el Departamento de Rocha; PROBIDES: Rocha,
Uruguay, 1995; p. 32.
32.
Martínez, S.; Ubilla, M. El Cuaternario en Uruguay. In Cuencas Sedimentarias de Uruguay: Geología, Paleontología y Recursos Naturales;
Cenozoico, G., Veroslavsky, G., Ubilla, M., Martínez, S., Eds.; UR. FC. DIRAC: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2009; pp. 195–228.
33.
López Mazz, J. Early human occupation of Uruguay: Radiocarbon database and archaeological implications. Quat. Int.
2013
,
301, 94–103. [CrossRef]
34.
Bracco, R.; García-Rodríguez, F.; Inda, H.; del Puerto, L.; Castiñeira, C.; Panario, D. Niveles Relativos del Mar Durante el
Pleistoceno Final—Holoceno en la Costa del Uruguay. In El Holoceno en la Zona Costera del Uruguay; García-Rodríguez, F., Ed.;
UCUR-UdelaR: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2011; pp. 65–94.
35.
del Puerto, L.; García-Rodríguez, F.; Bracco, R.; Blasi, A.; Inda, H.; Mazzeo, M.; Rodríguez, A. Evolución Climática Holocénica
para el Sudeste del Uruguay: Análisis Multi-Proxy en Testigos de Lagunas Costeras. In El Holoceno en la Zona Costera del Uruguay,
García-Rodríguez, F., Ed.; UCUR-UdelaR: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2011; pp. 119–156.

Land 2023,12, 648 19 of 22
36.
Inda, H.; del Puerto, L.; Capdepont, I.; Bracco, R. Formation processes of coastal archaeological sites: A changing prehistoric
scenario on the Atlantic shore of Uruguay. Geoarchaeology 2017,32, 633–645. [CrossRef]
37.
Salgado, E.T.; Pimentel, A.M.; Ferreira Chueng, K.; Gomes Coe, H.; Cardoso Pacheco, A.; Girardi Bauermann, S. Holocene
palaeoenvironmental and palaeoclimatic reconstruction of a native ecosystem on the coastal plain of southern Brazil through
multi-proxy analysis. J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 2021,106, 103067. [CrossRef]
38. López Mazz, J.M. Las estructuras tumulares (cerritos) del Litoral Atlántico uruguayo. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2001,12, 1–25.
39. Bracco, R.; Inda, H.; del Puerto, L.; Capdepont, I.; Panario, D.; Castiñeira, C.; García-Rodriguez, F. A reply to “Relative sea level
during the Holocene in Uruguay”. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2014,401, 166–170. [CrossRef]
40.
Del Puerto, L.; García-Rodríguez, F.; Bracco, R.; Inda, H.; Capdepont, I.; Castiñeira, C.; Blasi, A.; Fort, H.; Mazzeo, N. Historia
ambiental y dinámica cultural para el Holoceno medio y tardío en el este del Uruguay. In En Clave Inter. Procesos, Contexto y
Resultados del Trabajo Interdisciplinario; EI-UdelaR: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2013; pp. 99–110.
41. Bracco, R. Montículos de la Cuenca de la Laguna Merín: Tiempo, Espacio y Sociedad. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2006,17, 511–540.
42.
Del Puerto, L.; Gianotti, C.; Bortolotto, N.; Gazzán, N.; Cancela, C.; Orrego, B.; Inda, H. Geoarchaeological Signatures of
Anthropogenic Soils in Southeastern Uruguay: Approaches to formation processes and spatial-temporal variability. Geoarchaeol.
Int. J. 2021,37, 180–197. [CrossRef]
43.
Gazzán, N.; Cancela-Cereijo, C.; Gianotti, C.; Fábrega-Álvarez, P.; del Puerto, L.; Criado- Boado, F. From Mounds to Villages: The
Social Construction of the Landscape during the Middle and Late Holocene in the India Muerta Lowlands, Uruguay. Land
2022
,
11, 441. [CrossRef]
44.
Bracco, R.; Panario, D.; Gutiérrez, O.; Bazzino, A.; Duarte, C.; Odino, R.; Reina, E. Mounds and Landscape in the Merín Lagoon
Basin, Uruguay. In Advances in Coastal Geoarchaeology in Latin American; Inda, H., García, F., Eds.; The Latin American Studies
Book Series; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 103–129.
45.
Dabezies, J.M.; del Puerto, L.; Gianotti, C. Investigación y gestión de la prehistoria de la Región Este: Nuevos enfoques del pasado
para el presente. In Prehistoria de Rocha. Apuntes sobre Poblamiento Temprano de estas Tierras; Intendencia Municipal de Rocha y
Ministerio de Educación y Cultura: Rocha, Uruguay, 2013; pp. 11–159.
46.
Sans, M.; Solla, H. Análisis de restos óseos humanos del este del Uruguay. In Primeras Jornadas de Ciencias Antropológicas en el
Uruguay; Museo Nacional de Antropología, Ministerio de Educación y Cultura: Montevideo, Uruguay, 1992; pp. 171–175.
47.
Bracco, R.; Fregeiro, M.; Panarello, H.; Odino, R.; Souto, B. Dieta, modos de producción de alimentos y complejidad. In
Arqueología de las Tierras Bajas; Durán, A., Bracco Boksar, R., Eds.; Ministerio de Educación y Cultura: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2000;
pp. 227–248.
48.
Iriarte, J.; Holst, I.; Marozzi, O.; Listopad, C.; Alonso, E.; Rinderknecht, A.; Montaña, J. Evidence for cultivar adoption and
emerging complexity during the mid-Holocene in the La Plata basin. Nature 2004,432, 614–618. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
49.
Bracco, R.; del Puerto, L.; Inda, H.; Panario, D.; Castiñeira, C.; García-Rodríguez, F. The Relationship Between Emergence of
Mound Builders in SE Uruguay and Climate Change Inferred from Opal Phytolith Records. Quat. Int.
2011
,245, 62–73. [CrossRef]
50.
Gianotti, C.; Bonomo, M. De montículos a paisajes: Procesos de transformación y construcción de paisajes en el sur de la cuenca
del Plata. Comechingonia 2013,17, 129–163. [CrossRef]
51.
Bonomo, M.; Politis, G.; Gianotti, C. Montículos, jerarquía social y horticultura en las sociedades indígenas del Delta del río
Paraná(Argentina). Lat. Am. Antiq. 2011,22, 297–333. [CrossRef]
52.
Del Puerto, L. Interrelaciones Humano-Ambientales Durante el Holoceno Tardío en el este del Uruguay: Cambio Climático y
Dinámica Cultural. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay, 2015; p. 289.
53.
Mut, P. Paleodieta de los pobladores prehistóricos del este del Uruguay: Un retrato isotópico. Anu. De Arqueol.
2015
,2015,
147–178.
54.
Sotelo, M. Stone structures in the highlands of Uruguay. In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2018; pp. 1–17. [CrossRef]
55.
Suárez Villagrán, X.; Rodríguez, M.; Bentos Pereira, H.; Gianotti, C.; Sotelo, M.; del Puerto, L. Absence of bones in archaeological
sites from the southeast of Uruguay: Taphonomy or human behavior? Geoarchaeology 2022,37, 694–708. [CrossRef]
56.
Bracco, D. Charrúas, Guenoas y Guaraníes. Interacción y Destrucción: Indígenas en el Río de la Plata; Linardi y Risso: Montevideo,
Uruguay, 2004; p. 398.
57.
López Mazz, J.M.; Bracco, D. Minuanos. Apuntes y Notas para la Historia y la Arqueología del Territorio Guenoa-Minuan (Indígenas de
Uruguay, Argentina y Brasil); Linardi y Risso: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2012; p. 342.
58. Barrios Pintos, A. 400 Años de Historia de la Ganadería en Uruguay; Cruz del Sur: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2011; p. 366.
59.
Paucke, F. Hacia Alláy para Acá: Una Estadía entre los Indios Mocobíes, 1749–1767; Universidad Nacional de Tucumán: Tucumán,
Argentina, 1944; p. 706.
60. Cardiel, J.; González, S. Las vaquerías del mar. In Enciclopedia Uruguaya; Arca: Montevideo, Uruguay, 1968.
61.
Moreno, F. La gestión de los recursos animales en la prehistoria del este de Uruguay (4.000 años AP-siglo XVI). In Departamento de
Prehistoria; Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona: Barcelona, Spain, 2014.
62.
Dabezies, J.M.; Marín Suárez, C.; Bañobre, C.; del Puerto, L.; Rodríguez Iroldi, F. Encierros ganaderos en la frontera colonial de la
Banda Oriental: El caso de los corrales de palmas del sureste del Uruguay. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2022,33, 336–354. [CrossRef]
63.
Moraes, M.I. Las economías agrarias del litoral rioplatense en la segunda mitad del siglo XVII: Paisajes y desempeño. In Historia e
Instituciones Económicas II; Universidad Complutense de Madrid: Madrid, Spain, 2011.

Land 2023,12, 648 20 of 22
64.
Thornback, J.; Jenkins, M. Part 1, Threatened Mammalian Taxa of the Americas and the Australasian Zoogeographic Region
(Excluding Cetacea). In The IUCN Mammal Red Data Book; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 1984.
65. Fajardo, F. Crónicas del Maldonado Antiguo; Torre del Vigía: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2002; 133p.
66.
Dabezies, J.M. Procesando vegetales ayer y hoy: Una aproximación a algunos usos actuales de la palma de Butia capitata para
entender algunos usos pasados. Trama. Rev. De Cult. Y Patrim. 2011,2, 10–21.
67.
Dabezies, J.M.; Rivas, M. Usos de la palma Butia odorata en el sureste del Uruguay. In Palmeras NUS al sur de la América Austral;
Hilbert, N.I., Pochettino, M.L., Hernández, J.E., Eds.; Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo;
CYTED: Cambridge, UK, 2020; pp. 159–180. Available online: www.cyted.org (accessed on 8 February 2023).
68.
Fraga da Silva, A. “Meu avôera Tropeiro!”: Identidade, Patrimônio e Materialidades na Construção da Terra do Tropeirismo—Bom Jesus
(RS); Fundação Universidade Federal do Pampa: Yaguarao, Brazil, 2011.
69. Oliveira, O.; Teixeira, C. Os currais de palmas em Santa Vitória do Palmar RS, Brazil. Biblos 2006,19, 61–73.
70.
Frega, A.; Chagas, K.; Montaño, O.; Stalla, N. Breve historia de los afrodescendientes en el Uruguay. In Población Afrodescendiente y
Desigualdades Étnico-Raciales en Uruguay; Scuro Somma, L., Ed.; Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo: Montevideo,
Uruguay, 2008; pp. 5–50.
71.
Borucki, A.; Chagas, K.; Stalla, N. Rocha en tiempos de escalvitud y abolición. Amos, esclavos y morenos libres en el relato de la
sociedad rochense. Rev. Histórica Rochense 2012,1, 5.
72.
López Mazz, J.M.; Marin, C.; Dabezies, J.M.; Tejerizo-García, C. Arqueología y memoria de la esclavitud africana en la frontera
uruguayo-brasileña: El caso de la Estancia de los Correa (Rocha, Uruguay). Rev. De Arqueol. 2020,26, 181–201. [CrossRef]
73.
Tomich, D. Through the Prism of Slavery: Labor, Capital, and World Economy; Rowman and Littlefields: New York, NY, USA, 2004;
p. 224.
74.
Nahum, B. La estancia alambrada. In Enciclopedia Uruguaya; Rama, A., Ed.; Editores Reunidos y Editorial Arca: Montevideo,
Uruguay, 1968; p. 79.
75.
Moraes, M.I. Mundos Rurales. Nuestro Tiempo 16. Publicación Oficial de Bicentenario Uruguay; IMPO: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2013;
p. 62.
76. Fiebrig, C. Apuntes de una Excursión a Castillos; Departamento de Rocha: Rocha, Uruguay, 1933; pp. 187–192.
77.
Dabezies, J.M. Relaciones históricas entre el Butiáy los seres humanos. De los Constructores de Cerritos a los Corrales de Palmas.
In En tu Imagen; de la Llana, N., Ed.; Intendencia Departamental de Rocha: Rocha, Uruguay, 2015; pp. 23–31.
78.
Puig y Nattino, J. La Palma Butiá. Contribución al Estudio de las Plantas Indígenas Alimenticias. Boletín n
º
16 del Ministerio de Industria;
Inspección Nacional de Ganadería y Agricultura: Montevideo, Uruguay, 1915; p. 18.
79.
Arnábal, R.; Bertino, M.; Fleitas, S. Una revisión del desempeño de la industria uruguaya en el período de sustitución de
importaciones. In Séptimas Jornadas de Investigación de la Asociación Uruguaya de História Económica (AUDHE); UR.FCEA-IE:
Montevideo, Uruguay, 2010.
80. Araujo, O. Diccionario Geográfico del Uruguay; Tipo-Litografía Moderna: Montevideo, Uruguay, 1912.
81.
Castro, P. Distribución Regional de la Producción y Geografía Económica: El Caso del Agro en Uruguay (1870–2008). Master’s
Thesis, Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay, 2017.
82.
Achkar, M.; Brazeiro, A.; Bartesaghi, L. Evaluación de las principales presiones y amenazas a la biodiversidad de Uruguay. In
Eco-Regiones de Uruguay: Biodiversidad, Presiones y Conservación. Aportes a la Estrategia Nacional de Biodiversidad; Brazeiro, A., Ed.;
Facultad de Ciencias, CIEDUR, VS-Uruguay, SZU: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2015; pp. 70–85.
83.
Rivas, M.; Barilani, A. Diversidad, potencial productivo y reproductivo de los palmares de Butia capitata (Mart.) Becc. de Uruguay.
Agrociencia 2004,1, 11–20. [CrossRef]
84. Rocha, N.; Geymonat, G. M’boti: Ecosistema único en el Mundo; Casa Ambiental, Castillos: Rocha, Uruguay, 2009; p. 405.
85.
Rivas, M.; Jaurena, M.; Gutiérrez, L.; Barbieri, R.L. Diversidad vegetal del campo natural de Butia odorata (Barb.Rodr.) Noblick en
Uruguay. Agrociencia 2014,18, 14–27. [CrossRef]
86.
Barbieri, R.L.; Marchi, M.M.; Gomes, G.C.; Barros, C.H.; Mistura, C.C.; Dornelles, J.E.F.; Heiden, G.; Beskow, G.T.; Ramos, R.A.;
Villela, J.C.B.; et al. Vida No Butiazal; Embrapa Clima Temperado: Pelotas, Brazil, 2015; p. 50.
87.
Marchi, M.M.; Barbieri, R.L.; Sallés, J.M.; Costa, F.A.D. Flora herbácea e subarbustiva associada a um ecossistema de butiazal no
Bioma Pampa. Rodriguésia 2018,69, 553–560. [CrossRef]
88.
Sosinski, E.E., Jr.; Marques Urruth, L.; Barbieri, R.L.; Marchi, M.M.; Martens, S.G. On the ecological recognition of Butia palm
groves as integral ecosystems: Why do we need to widen the legal protection and the in situ/on-farm conservation approaches?
Land Use Policy 2019,81, 124–130. [CrossRef]
89.
Rivas, M.; Pereira, S.; Calvete, A. Diversidad de Variedades Criollas Hortícolas y sus Conocimientos Tradicionales Asociados en el Palmar
de Castillos; Centro Universitario Regional del Este y Facultad de Agronomía (UdelaR): Rocha, Uruguay, 2018; p. 42.
90.
Vidal, R.; Rivas, M.; Chiappe, M.; Quintero, D.; Castro, X.; Calvete, A.; del Puerto, L. Relevamiento de los recursos genéticos
vegetales con usos y conocimientos tradicionales asociados en tres zonas rurales. In Conocimientos Tradicionales Asociados a los usos
de los Recursos Genéticos en Uruguay; PNUD: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2021; pp. 17–47.
91.
Crosa, M.J.; Burzaco, P.; Irisity, M.; Gioscia, D.; Sosa, J.; Ayres, C. Valorización del fruto y su procesamiento. In Valorización de
Frutos Nativos como Forma de Promover el Desarrollo Local. Aprovechamiento Agroalimentario del Butiáen Rocha; Barrientos, M., Ed.;
INIA: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2014; pp. 25–40.

Land 2023,12, 648 21 of 22
92.
Portes, N. Aportes para la Valorización del Palmar de Butia odorata de Laguna Negra: Catálogo de Atractivos y Propuesta de Ruta
Ecoturística. Tesis Licenciatura en Gestión Ambiental; Centro Universitario Regional del Este, Udelar: Rocha, Uruguay, 2018.
93.
Lacerda, A.E.B.; Hanisch, A.L.; Nimmo, E.R. Leveraging traditional agroforestry practices to support sustainable and agrobiodi-
verse landscapes in Southern Brazil. Land 2020,9, 176. [CrossRef]
94.
Hong, S.-K. Philosophy and Background of Biocultural Landscapes. In Biocultural Landscapes. Diversity, Functions and Values;
Hong, S.-K., Bogaert, J., Min, Q., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
95.
Clement, C.R. 1492 and the loss of Amazonian crop genetic resources. I. The relation between domestication and human
population decline. Econ. Bot. 1999,53, 188–202. [CrossRef]
96.
Clement, C.R.; Denevan, W.M.; Heckenberger, M.J.; Junqueira, A.B.; Neves, E.G.; Teixeira, W.G.; Woods, W.I. The domestication
of Amazonia before European conquest. Proc. R. Soc. B 2015,282, 20150813. [CrossRef]
97.
Levis, C.; Flores, B.M.; Moreira, P.A.; Luize, B.G.; Alves, R.P.; Franco-Moraes, J.; Lins, J.; Konings, E.; Peña-Claros, M.; Bongers, F.;
et al. How people domesticated amazonian forest. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2018,5, 171. [CrossRef]
98.
Pereira Cruz, A.; GiehlI, E.L.H.; Levis, C.; Machado, J.S.; Bueno, L.; Peroni, N. Pre-colonial Amerindian legacies in forest
composition of southern Brazil. PLoS ONE 2020,15, e0235819. [CrossRef]
99.
Pretty, J.; Adams, B.; Berkes, F.; Ferreira de Athayde, S.; Dudley, N.; Hunn, E.; Maffi, L.; Milton, K.; Rapport, D.; Robbins, P.; et al.
The intersections of Biological Diversity and Cultural Diversity: Towards integration. Conserv. Soc. 2009,7, 100–112.
100.
Crumley, C.L. Historical ecology: A multidimensional ecological orientation. In Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing
Landscapes; Crumley, C.L., Ed.; School of American Research Press: Santa Fe, NM, USA, 1994; pp. 1–16.
101. Erickson, C.L. Historical ecology and future exploration. In Amazonian Dark Earths: Origin, Properties, Management; Lehmann, J.,
Kern, D.C., Glaser, B., Woods, W.I., Eds.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 455–500.
102.
Dransfield, J.; Uhl, N.W.; Asmussen, C.B.; Baker, W.J.; Harley, M.M.; Lewis, C.E. Genera Palmarum: The Evolution and Classification
of Palms; Kew publishing: Richmond, England, 2008; p. 727. [CrossRef]
103.
Clement, C.R.; Rival, L.; Cole, D.M. Domestication of peach palm (Bactris gasipaes Kunth): The roles of human mobility and
migration. In Mobility and Migration in Indigenous Amazonia: Contemporary Ethnoecological Perspectives; Alexiades, M., Ed.; Berghahn
Books: Oxford, UK, 2009; pp. 117–140.
104.
Porro, R. Palms, Pastures, and Swidden Fields: The Grounded Political Ecology of “Agro-Extractive/Shifting-cultivator Peasants”
in Maranhao, Brazil. Hum. Ecol. 2005,33, 17–56. [CrossRef]
105.
Sosnowska, J.; Walanus, A.; Balslev, H. Asháninka Palm Management and Domestication in the Peruvian Amazon. Hum. Ecol.
2015,43, 451–466. [CrossRef]
106. Smith, N. Palms and cultural landscapes. In Palms and People in the Amazon; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 1–8.
107.
Araujo, J.J.; Rojas, J.L.; Keller, H.A.; Hilgert, N.I. Landscape management among the Guarani of the Atlantic Forest of Misiones,
Argentina: The case of the Syagrus romanzoffiana (Cham.) Glassman (Arecaceae) palm tree. Ethnobiol. Conserv.
2021
,10, 22. [CrossRef]
108.
Behling, H.; Pillar, V.D.P.; Orlóci, L.; Bauermann, S.G. Late Quaternary grassland (Campos), gallery forest, fire and climate
dynamics, studied by pollen, charcoal and multivariate analysis of the São Francisco de Assis core in western Rio Grande do Sul
(southern Brazil). Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 2005,133, 235–248. [CrossRef]
109.
Behling, H. Late Quaternary vegetation, fire and climate dynamics of Serra do Aracatuba in the Atlantic coastal mountains of
ParanáState, southern Brazil. Veget. Hist. Archaeobot. 2007,16, 77–85. [CrossRef]
110.
Biggs, R.; Boonstra, W.J.; Peterson, G.; Schlüter, M. The domestication of fire as a social-ecological regime shift. Pages Mag.
2016
,
24, 22–23. [CrossRef]
111.
Bond, W.J.; Parr, C.L. Beyond the forest edge: Ecology, diversity and conservation of the grassy biomes. Biol. Conserv.
2010
,143,
2395–2404. [CrossRef]
112.
Pillar, V.D.P.; Vélez, E. Extinção dos Campos Sulinos em Unidades de Conservação: Um Fenômeno Natural ou um Problema
Ético? Nat. Conserv. 2010,08, 84–86. [CrossRef]
113.
Rowley-Conwy, P.; Layton, R. Foraging and farming as niche construction: Stable and unstable adaptations. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B
2011,366, 849–862. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
114.
Overbeck, G.E.; Scasta, J.D.; Furquim, F.F.; Boldrini, I.I.; Weir, J.R. The South Brazilian grasslands—A South American tallgrass
prairie? Parallels and implications of fire dependency. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 2018,16, 24–30. [CrossRef]
115. Piperno, D.R.; Pearsall, D.M. The Origins of Agriculture in the Lowland Neotropics; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1998.
116.
Prates, L.; Pérez, S.I. Late Pleistocene South American megafaunal extinctions associated with rise of fishtail points and human
population. Nat. Commun. 2021,12, 2175. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
117.
Mellars, P. Fire, ecology, animal populations and man; a study of some ecological relationships in prehistory. Proc. Prehistoric. Soc.
1976,42, 15–45. [CrossRef]
118.
Azambuja, P. Tahim a última Divisa: Geografia e História de uma Região; Polygraph & Stillus Artes Gráficas: Santa Vitória do Palmar,
Brazil, 1978; pp. 236–239.
119.
Ríos, C.; Lezama, F.; Rama, G.; Baldi, G.; Baeza, S. Natural grasslands remnants in dynamic agricultural landscapes: Identifying
drivers of fragmentation. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 2022,20, 205–215. [CrossRef]
120.
Baeza, S.; Vélez-Martin, E.; De Abelleyra, D.; Banchero, S.; Gallego, F.; Schirmbeck, J.; Veron, S.; Vallejos, M.; Weber, E.; Oyarzabal,
M.; et al. Two decades of land cover mapping in the Río de la Plata grassland region: The MapBiomas Pampa initiative. Remote
Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2022,28, 100834. [CrossRef]

Land 2023,12, 648 22 of 22
121.
Tiscornia, G.; Jaurena, M.; Baethgen, W. Drivers, Process, and Consequences of Native Grassland Degradation: Insights from a
Literature Review and a Survey in Río de la Plata Grasslands. Agronomy 2019,9, 239. [CrossRef]
122.
Báez, F.; Jaurena, M. Regeneración del Palmar de Butiá(Butia capitata) en Condiciones de Pastoreo. Relevamiento de Establecimientos
Rurales de Rocha. Serie Documentos de Trabajo N◦27; PROBIDES: Rocha, Uruguay, 2000; p. 34.
123.
Parr, C.L.; Lehmann, C.E.R.; Bond, W.J.; Hoffmann, W.A.; Andersen, A.N. Tropical grassy biomes: Misunderstood, neglected, and
under threat. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2014,29, 205–213. [CrossRef]
124.
Marchesi, E.; Alonso, E.; Brussa, C.; Delfino, L.; García, M.; Haretche, F. Plantas vasculares. In Especies Prioritarias para la
Conservación en Uruguay; Ministerio de Ambiente de Uruguay: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2013; p. 222.
125.
Sosinski, E.E., Jr.; Hagemann, A.; Dutra, F.; Mistura, C.; da Costa, F.A.; Barbieri, R.L. Manejo Conservativo: Bases para a Sustentabili-
dade dos Butiazais; Boletim de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento, Embrapa Clima Temperado: Pelotas, Brazil, 2015; p. 28. Available
online: http://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/handle/doc/1058122 (accessed on 8 February 2023).
126.
Rivas, M.; Vilaró, M.; Sánchez, A.; Sosa, A.; Di Candia, A.; Dabezies, J.M.; Do Carmo, M.; Claramunt, M. Integrando productores,
academia e instituciones públicas para la conservación y uso sostenible de los palmares de butiá. In 10
◦
Encuentro Nacional sobre
Frutales Nativos. Serie de Actividades de Difusión 796; INIA: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2021; pp. 43–48.
127.
Scaramuzzi, S.; Gabellini, S.; Belletti, G.; Marescotti, A. Agrobiodiversity-Oriented Food Systems between Public Policies and
Private Action: A Socio-Ecological Model for Sustainable Territorial Development. Sustainability 2021,13, 12192. [CrossRef]
128.
De Boef, W.S.; Thijssen, M.; Sopov, M. Agrobiodiversity, livelihoods and markets. In Community Biodiversity Management.
Promoting Resilience and the Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources; Boef, W.S.D., Subedi, A., Peroni, N., Thijssen, M., O
´
Keeffe, E.,
Eds.; Routledge: London, UK; Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 177–187.
129.
Barreiro, D.; Gianotti, C.; del Puerto, L. Cerros lindos. De la cadena de Valor del Patrimonio Cultural al Patrimonio como Innovación
Social, Anales de Arqueología y Etnología. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras; Universidad Nacional de Cuyo: Mendoza, Argentina, 2023;
pp. 131–161.
130.
Criado-Boado, F.; Gianotti, C.; López Mazz, J.M. Arqueología aplicada al Patrimonio Cultural: La cooperación científica entre
Galicia y Uruguay. In Actas del II Congreso Internacional de Patrimonio Cultural y Cooperación al Desarrollo; Muñoz, G., Vidal, C., Eds.;
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia: Valencia, España, 2006; pp. 165–186.
131.
Beovide, L. La zonificación arqueológica en la cuenca del río Santa Lucía, Uruguay, como herramienta de gestión territorial:
Sinergias y conflictos en el desarrollo sustentable. Rev. Mem. 2018,5, 112–131. [CrossRef]
132.
Gianotti, C.; Villarmarzo, E.; Piazza, N.; Nin, M.; Rodríguez, L.; Lembo, V. El Paisaje Cultural Laguna de Rocha como objeto focal
de conservación: Propuesta para su integración dentro del plan de manejo de un área protegida. In Paisaje, Patrimonio, Proyecto,
Desarrollo Local. Paisajes Culturales en Uruguay; Medina, M., Ed.; CSIC: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2015; pp. 15–31.
133.
Rodríguez-Gallego, L.; Nin, M.; Suárez, C.; Conde, D. Paisaje Protegido Laguna de Rocha, Propuesta de Plan de Manejo; Futuro
Sustentable SRL: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2012; p. 50.
134.
SNAP. Fortalecimiento de la Efectividad del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas Incluyendo el Enfoque de Paisaje en la Gestión. Documento
Técnico Nº 2, URU/13/G35, DINAMA-MVOTMA; SNAP: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2014; p. 113.
135. Emerson, K.; Nabatchi, T. Collaborative Governance Regimes; Georgetown University Press: Washington, WA, USA, 2015; p. 280.
136.
Sayer, J.; Sunderland, T.; Chazoul, J.; Pfund, J.L.; Sheil, D.; Meijaard, E.; Venter, M.; Boedhihartono, A.K.; Day, M.; García, C.; et al.
Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 2013,110, 8349–8356. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
137.
Primdahl, J.; van Eetvelde, V.; Pinto-Correia, T. Rural landscapes—Challenges and solutions to landscape governance. Land
2020
,
9, 521. [CrossRef]
138.
Cortés-Capano, G.; Tolvonen, T.; Soutullo, A.; Fernández, A.; Dimitriadis, C.; Garibotto-Carton, G.; Di Minin, E. Exploring
landowners
´
perceptions, motivations and needs for voluntary conservation in a cultural landscape. People Nat.
2020
,2, 840–855.
[CrossRef]
139.
Vida Silvestre Uruguay. Available online: https://vidasilvestre.org.uy/gestion-para-la-conservacion/predios-privados/
(accessed on 12 December 2022).
140.
De Boef, W.S.; Peroni, N.; Hanazaki, N. People, biodiversity and landscapes: Introduction. In Community Biodiversity Management.
Promoting Resilience and the Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources; Boef, W.S.D., Subedi, A., Peroni, N., Thijssen, M., O’Keeffe, E.,
Eds.; Routledge: London, UK; Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 125–132.
141.
Peroni, N.; Albuquerque, U.P.D.; Assis, A.L.D.; Lins Neto, E.M.D.F. The domestication of landscapes and cultural keystone
species in a context of community biodiversity management in Brazil. In Community Biodiversity Management. Promoting Resilience
and the Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources; Boef, W.S.D., Subedi, A., Peroni, N., Thijssen, M., O
´
Keeffe, E., Eds.; Routledge:
London, UK; Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 145–150.
142.
Reis, M.S.; Montagna, T.; Mattos, A.G.; Filippon, S.; Ladio, A.H.; Marques, A.D.C.; Zechini, A.A.; Peroni, N.; Mantovani, A.
Domesticated landscapes in Araucaria forests, Southern Brazil: A multispecies local conservation-by-use system. Front. Ecol. Evol.
2018,6, 11. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note:
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.