Objective Ethnobotany- Knowledge traditional, approaches modern

摘要

The word 'ethnobotany' was given by Harshberger in the end of 19th century (Harshberger 1896). During last about one hundred years, this subject has expanded and established linkages with many disciplines of knowledge and with numerous aspects of socio-economic development of human race. This widening of the scope and of the interdisciplinary approaches has, on the one hand, made ethnobotany a thrust area of research, particularly in technologically underdeveloped regions of the world, and on the other, not unoften, its practitioners have tended to lose focus and dilute and diffuse the 'purposes of ethnobotany' (the phrase used by Harshberger (l.c.). This dilution has attracted criticism and description of ethnobotany in words like 'soft science', 'mere folklore' or 'just hearsay'. Serious practitioners of this science are feeling concerned and many authors have suggested focus, precision, quantification, statistical bases and objectivity; they have indicated the kind of studies that need to be done (Ford 1994, 2001, Prance 1991, Jain & Srivastava 2001, Peters 1996, Schultes & Von Reis 1995, Lewis 2003). More focused, meaningful and result-oriented work on ethnobotany is needed now, and a term objective ethnobotany is proposed with the hope that researchers will plan and design their literary, field and laboratory research with precise objectives.