ethnoecologyRPlease remember to cite the ethnoecologyR package if you
use it in your publications. Use citation("ethnoecologyR")
to get a citation for the latest version.
To cite package ‘ethnoecologyR’ in publications use:
Marwan Setiawan (2026). ethnoecologyR: Quantitative Ethnoecology Analysis and Landscape Knowledge Modeling. R package version 0.1.2.
Quantitative ethnoecology is the study of the use and importance of landscape units and ecosystems in human cultures, using statistical and analytical methods to quantify and interpret data. This approach has emerged as a key tool for understanding the cultural and ecological significance of landscape units, and for evaluating the impact of human activities on ecosystems.
While widely used in the literature, traditional ethnoecology indices have significant limitations that researchers should consider:
The field of ethnoecology has a long history, with roots dating back to the early 20th century when researchers began to systematically study the relationships between humans and their environments. In recent decades, advances in statistical and computational techniques have enabled researchers to more rigorously and systematically analyze and interpret ethnoecological data, leading to a greater understanding of the complex and diverse ways in which landscapes are used and valued in different cultural and ecological contexts.
Today, quantitative ethnoecology is an interdisciplinary field that draws on a range of methods and approaches from the natural and social sciences, including anthropology, ecology, geography, and sociology. It is a rapidly growing field that is making significant contributions to our understanding of human-environment relationships, and to the conservation and management of ecosystems.
ethnoecologyR packageThe ethnoecologyR package offers quantitative tools to
assess the cultural significance of landscape units based on informant
consensus. The package closely follows several key papers on
ethnoecology indices (Tardío and Pardo-de-Santayana 2008; Friedman et
al. 1986; Reyes-García et al. 2006; Toledo 2002). The goal is to provide
an easy-to-use platform for ethnoecologists to perform quantitative
ethnoecology assessments.
Users are highly encouraged to familiarize themselves with ethnoecology theory (Berkes 2012; Toledo 2002) and social-ecological systems theory (Ostrom 2009). An overview of this theoretical background will be helpful in understanding approaches in ethnoecology and formulating useful research questions.
An example data set called ethnoecology_data is provided
to show how standard quantitative ethnoecology data should be formatted
to interface with the ethnoecologyR package. This is an
ethnoecology data set including one column of 15 knowledge holder
identifiers informant and one of 6 landscape unit names
landscape_unit. The rest of the columns are the identified
ethnoecology use categories. The data in the use categories is populated
with counts of uses per person (should be 0 or 1 values).
data(ethnoecology_data)
head(ethnoecology_data)
#> informant landscape_unit use_forest use_water use_agriculture use_hunting
#> 1 Info_1 Landscape_1 1 1 0 0
#> 2 Info_1 Landscape_2 1 0 1 0
#> 3 Info_1 Landscape_3 1 0 1 0
#> 4 Info_1 Landscape_4 1 1 0 1
#> 5 Info_1 Landscape_5 1 0 0 0
#> 6 Info_1 Landscape_6 0 1 1 1
#> use_fishing use_gathering
#> 1 0 0
#> 2 0 0
#> 3 0 1
#> 4 0 1
#> 5 0 0
#> 6 0 1Many of the functions in ethnoecologyR make use of
select() and filter() functions of the
dplyr package (Wickham et al. 2026) and pipe functions
%>% from the magrittr package (Bache and
Wickham 2025). The intention is that these should be easy to understand
and use, and that they should allow users the chance to pull the code
for these functions and change anything they see fit.
Ethnoecology indices are numerical measures that are used to quantify the importance of landscape units in different cultural or ecological contexts. Some common ethnoecology indices are included here. These indices are often used to analyze ethnoecological data and to compare the relative importance of different landscape units within a particular culture or ecosystem.
The standard quantitative ethnoecology indices are probably too narrow a tool for a proper assessment of human and ecological interactions of interest. Still, they can be a useful entry way into understanding some aspects of human populations and how they interact with nature. The steps required to calculate these indices offer a way to quantify intangible factors of how human communities interact with the world. They can come in handy as additive pieces for more holistic assessments and analyses.
The Landscape Use (LU) index is a measure of the overall importance of a landscape unit based on the total number of use reports. It is calculated as:
LU = sum of use reports for a landscape unit
The Cultural Importance in Ecology (CIE) index is a normalized measure of use intensity. It is calculated as:
CIE = LU / N, where N is the number of informants.
The Frequency of Citation (FC) is the number of informants who mention a landscape unit for any use.
The Fidelity Level (FL) is the percentage of informants who mention a landscape unit for a specific use category. It is calculated as:
FL = (number of informants mentioning the unit for a specific use / total number of informants mentioning the unit for any use) × 100
FLs_eco(ethnoecology_data, "use_forest")
#> # A tibble: 6 × 4
#> landscape_unit total_informants specific_informants FL
#> <chr> <int> <int> <dbl>
#> 1 Landscape_1 15 13 86.7
#> 2 Landscape_3 15 13 86.7
#> 3 Landscape_2 15 12 80
#> 4 Landscape_5 15 11 73.3
#> 5 Landscape_6 15 11 73.3
#> 6 Landscape_4 15 6 40The Number of Uses (NU) is the total number of distinct use categories reported for each landscape unit.
The Cultural Value of Ecolandscape (CVe) is a composite index combining LU and FC. It is calculated as:
CVe = (LU / N) × (FC / N)
Figures can help to visually represent the main ideas or key results
of ethnoecology work. Here we walk through a few of the functions within
the ethnoecologyR package for generating figures.
The following chord plots are made using functions from the
circlize package (Gu 2022). An example of the application
of chord plots in ethnoecology is described in a study on
agrobiodiversity in Uganda (Whitney, Bahati, and Gebauer 2018).
The ethno_landscape_chord() function creates a chord
diagram of ethnoecology uses and landscape units.
The function can also be used to create a chord diagram of ethnoecology uses and informants.
The ethno_landscape_alluvial() function creates an
alluvial diagram showing flows between informants, landscape units, and
ecological uses.
The landscape_radial_plot() function creates a radial
bar plot to visualize multiple ethnoecology indices per landscape
unit.
landscape_radial_plot(ethnoecology_data, list(LUs, CIEs, FCs_eco))
#> Warning: Unknown or uninitialised column: `index`.
#> Unknown or uninitialised column: `index`.
#> Unknown or uninitialised column: `index`.
#> Warning: Removed 12 rows containing missing values or values outside the scale range
#> (`geom_col()`).The ethnoecologyR package provides a Bayesian model
(ethno_bayes_land) to estimate consensus among informants
regarding landscape use and ecological knowledge. The model is fitted
using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo via rstan (Stan Development
Team 2024).
Quantitative ethnoecology offers a way to study the use and importance of landscape units in human cultures, using statistical and analytical methods to quantify and interpret data. This approach can be useful in a variety of contexts, including:
One of the main benefits of quantitative ethnoecology is that it allows researchers to rigorously and systematically analyze and interpret data, providing more reliable and objective insights into the role of landscape units in different cultural and ecological settings.
Overall, the ethnoecologyR package provides a
comprehensive set of tools for researchers and practitioners working in
ethnoecology and related fields. By using these standardized methods and
statistical analyses, researchers can more accurately compare and
contrast the importance of different landscape units and evaluate the
significance of their findings.
This work was inspired by the pioneering contributions of: - Cory
Whitney and the ethnobotanyR package - Tardío and
Pardo-de-Santayana (2008) on cultural importance indices - Friedman et
al. (1986) on fidelity level - Reyes-García et al. (2006) on cultural
value - Berkes (2012) on sacred ecology
The vignette was written and formatted using the handy tools provided
by the knitr package (Xie 2025).
Bache, Stefan Milton, and Hadley Wickham. 2025. Magrittr: A Forward-Pipe Operator for R. https://magrittr.tidyverse.org.
Berkes, F. 2012. Sacred Ecology. 3rd ed. Routledge.
Friedman, J., Z. Yaniv, A. Dafni, and D. Palewitch. 1986. “A Preliminary Classification of the Healing Potential of Medicinal Plants, Based on a Rational Analysis of an Ethnopharmacological Field Survey Among Bedouins in the Negev Desert, Israel.” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 16(2-3): 275-287.
Gu, Z. 2022. circlize: Circular Visualization. R package version 0.4.15.
Ostrom, E. 2009. “A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems.” Science 325(5939): 419-422.
R Core Team. 2025. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Reyes-García, V., T. Huanca, V. Vadez, W. Leonard, and D. Wilkie. 2006. “Cultural, Practical, and Economic Value of Wild Plants: A Quantitative Study in the Bolivian Amazon.” Economic Botany 60(1): 62-74.
Stan Development Team. 2024. RStan: The R Interface to Stan. R package version 2.32.6.
Tardío, J., and M. Pardo-de-Santayana. 2008. “Cultural Importance Indices: A Comparative Analysis Based on the Useful Wild Plants of Southern Cantabria (Northern Spain).” Economic Botany 62(1): 24-39.
Toledo, V. M. 2002. “Ethnoecology: A Conceptual Framework for the Study of Indigenous Knowledge of Nature.” In Ethnobiology and Biocultural Diversity, edited by J. R. Stepp, F. S. Wyndham, and R. K. Zarger, 511-522. University of Georgia Press.
Whitney, C. W., J. Bahati, and J. Gebauer. 2018. “Ethnobotany and Agrobiodiversity: Valuation of Plants in the Homegardens of Southwestern Uganda.” Ethnobiology Letters 9(2): 1-12.
Wickham, H., et al. 2026. dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation. R package version 1.1.0.
Wickham, H., and L. Henry. 2026. purrr: Functional Programming Tools. R package version 1.0.0.
Wickham, H., D. Vaughan, and M. Girlich. 2025. tidyr: Tidy Messy Data. R package version 1.3.0.
Xie, Y. 2025. knitr: A General-Purpose Package for Dynamic Report Generation in R. R package version 1.45.