Uses and Cultural Relevancy of Wild Foods in Northeast Thailand

Abstract   

This research paper looks into the ways wild foods are used and how they affect the culture of communities in Northeast Thailand. Through academic research and one interview, this paper thoroughly analyzes each aspect of wild foods, including the transfer of knowledge between the old and the young, the dynamics of the matriarchal ownership system, the marketing system, and a comparison between land use in Northeast Thailand and farming food systems in the Brazilian Amazon, from a study by Ryan Adams. This report contains a review of five different pieces of literature. Each of these pieces of literature hones in on a specific part of the wild food system in Northeast Thailand. Along with this literature review is a section of research, in which I mention and analyze several different studies from the literature in context. I break it into four parts as previously mentioned: knowledge, gender, marketing, and land use. I use Adams’ work on land use in the Brazilian Amazon to further flesh out the culture of land use, and provide possible future context for an increase in demand for wild foods. By comparing the five different pieces of literature and analyzing land use with Adam’s work, I develop a full understanding of the culture surrounding wild foods and exactly how it fits into the communities of Northeast Thailand.

Introduction

        Imagine taking a hike in the woods in late summer. Green surrounds you in leaves of all shapes and sizes. You see a small plant full of clusters of bright red berries, wildflowers dancing in the sunlight, and insects crawling, hopping, and moving about their day. The trees open up to reveal a large stream cutting through the woods. The sound of the water soothes you as you watch fish darting between rocks and plants. Down the streambank, a collection of cattails bow in a slight breeze. As you move along on your adventure, your stomach begins to rumble. You have not eaten lunch, and you neglected to bring any food with you. Could you eat something here in the woods? Those berries certainly looked delicious. What you do not know is of all the things you have seen today, the berries are the only inedible choice. They are called baneberries and are extremely poisonous. Without knowledge of wild edible plants, animals, and insects, you could easily succumb to eating the poisonous baneberries or any other dangerous wild foods.

In Northeast Thailand, knowledge of wild or non-domesticated foods is common. Wild foods are any food that a person may hunt or gather rather than farm or raise. These foods make up almost half of the local diet. Typical wild foods found in Northeast Thailand include a wide variety of herbs, insects, snails, fish, and small animals. Most commonly, these foods are used for basic nutrition, but procurers market certain items as medicine as well. Since Thai culture connects so strongly to this way of life, locals use wild foods as a form of self-expression and cultural identity. Beyond consumption, the process of gathering wild foods creates an entire food system separate from that of farmed and imported foods. With this food system comes issues of politics, marketing, and land use.

To put the system of wild foods in context, one must also understand the production of farmed foods. Ryan Adams, assistant professor of anthropology at Lycoming College, is no stranger to the production side of farmed foods. The majority of his scholarship consists of studies about food and land use in the Brazilian Amazon. The politics that exist in Adam’s encounters with ranchers and farmers vaguely mirror the politics of land and gathering rights in Northeast Thailand. Comparing the two systems of production accentuate some of the unique challenges that exist in the world of wild foods as well as define the uses and cultural relevancy of wild foods within the food system of Northeast Thailand.

Review of Literature

        In Northeast Thailand, hunting and gathering are just as important as domesticated farming and harvesting crops. In the literature, authors define hunted and gathered foods as “wild” or “non-domesticated.” To clarify the meaning of “wild foods,” one author states, “The research in Thailand shows that the adjective ‘wild’ should not be interpreted as haphazard, unregulated, or accidental. There are (unwritten) rules about gathering rights, of whom and where, which also indicates that wild food resources are monitored and managed (Niehof 2010, 66).” This clarification provides only a small glimpse into the complexity of wild foods in Thai culture. Each piece of literature encompasses a different facet of production or consumption of these wild foods, and shares a unique perspective on this important part of Thai food culture.

        Wild food sources count for almost half of the diet of local populations during the rainy season, and a third of their diet during the dry seasons. (Niehof 2010, 66). Because of their popularity, locals use wild foods as a commodity as well as a form of sustenance. One might find wild foods in marketplaces, and some use these foods as bartering tools in place of monetary sales (Moreno-Black, et. al. 1996, 102). Much of the knowledge about wild foods in Northeast Thailand are rooted in gender and generation. Due to matrilineal inheritance of land and matriarchal family structures, adult females take the lead on production and distribution of the non-domesticated product (Price 1997, 209).

        Because each individual piece of literature is on a different facet of wild foods in Northeast Thailand, the authors disagree very little on major themes or facts. One occasion of disagreement regards generational knowledge of wild foods. While one author writes that interest in traditional knowledge of wild foods is lost on youth who prefer to be distracted by urban life (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 211), the other cites a study in which children were able to identify just as many wild foods as adult women within the community (Niehof 2010, 66). However, the latter source does not specifically state whether youth were commonly educated or interested in traditional practices of gathering wild foods. Regardless, the issue is important to several authors. Not only does the issue of retention or loss of knowledge about wild affect communities, it affects researchers who concern themselves with maintaining biodiversity, cultural diversity, and ethnobiological knowledge. Cultural researchers are also interested in the ways in which wild foods provide a source of meaningful cultural expression (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 210).

        Three of the five sources mention the importance of women in relation to wild foods. Matriarchal ties are strong within Thai communities, and so women are highly involved in the selecting, gathering, and marketing of wild foods (Price 1997, 209). In these communities, women tend to have more knowledge of the foods around them, with one study finding that, compared to men, women were more likely to be able to identify plants (1.38 times), insects (1.38 times) and fish (1.07 times) (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 208). Women also tend to be the primary landowners and decision makers in Thai communities. They even determine which foods are edible and marketable versus which foods the community must consider “forbidden” (Price 1997, 211). Women are also the primary sellers of wild foods. In a survey of 11 markets, one study found that of the 5,909 participating vendors, “94% were women, 4% were men, and 2% were men and women working together” (Moreno-Black, et. al. 1996, 105).

        One thing that almost every single author agrees to is the boom in popularity of wild foods. Certain foods, such as insects, are becoming a delicacy in regions outside of Northeast Thailand. Specifically, locals could easily sell insects at high prices, which would benefit local economy if sustainably collected and sold (Siriamornpun and Thammapat 2008, 9). One author was not as positive about the increase in popularity because commercialization of goods could strip traditional values from the hunting and gathering culture (Moreno-Black, et. al. 1996, 115). Another author spoke to the complexities of the issue, taking no sides in the future of the market by noting that, “The possibilities and opportunities for profitable farming are determined by the quality of the ecological and institutional environment, the connection with markets, and by the household’s access to other resources, such as knowledge (through agricultural extension) and finance (micro credit) to support agricultural activity” (Niehof 2010, 70). The future of the market is very dependent on how these communities proceed with the export of these items. If any one of the factors mentioned goes awry, it could affect the local economy on a massive scale.

        Because each author wrote about different aspects of wild food, they contradicted each other very little on their major discussions. Each author provides an important viewpoint of a very important part of the food system in Thailand. The issues discussed, politics, knowledge, food diversity, marketing, and wild foods as a delicacy are all very relevant to anthropologists and cultural scholarship. Together they paint an entire landscape of information about non-domesticated foods in the Northeast region of Thailand.

Methods

        The majority of information found in this paper derived from a selection of studies and research papers about different aspects of the wild food system in Northeast Thailand. These pieces of anthropological and sociological scholarship originated on paper, but the sources used in the construction of this paper were online databases such as EBSCOhost and AnthroSource. In order to develop a wide understanding of wild foods in Northeast Thailand, I tried to find scholarship about several different aspects of the subject. After I collected a variety of sources, I compared and contrasted overlapping viewpoints and created an outline of information to assist in my own comprehension of the culture. In order to bring Ryan Adams into the research, I found an article that could relate to a part of the main subject of study. I discovered the article about farming food systems in the Brazilian Amazon through a simple google search of the title and name of the author.

        Along with scholarly sources, I conducted a short phone interview with Ryan Adams, the author of the article about farming food systems in the Brazilian Amazon. In order to prepare for the interview, I read as much of Adams’ work as I could find as well as the sources used to collect information about wild foods. I wrote a list of ten questions regarding Adams’ work and experiences in the field of anthropology. In order to record the interview for later transcription and use, I downloaded an application to my phone called RMC: Android Call Recorder. Using this application, I was able to record both parties involved in the conversation and transcribe them later with Express Scribe Translation Software. Express Scribe is a program available for personal computers that aides in transcribing by slowing down, speeding up, and navigating an audio file. With the transcription of my interview with Adams, the article he wrote about farming food systems in the Brazilian Amazon, and the sources for wild foods in Northeast Thailand, I was able to analyze and compare information about two separate food systems and describe the ways in which wild foods affect Northeastern Thai culture.

Research and Discussion

        People do not come by culture inherently. Elders who pass down information to their juniors, and show them the rituals and traditions of their village, tribe, city or town are how culture passes through time. Traditional ecological knowledge or indigenous knowledge transfers within the household. Strong family connections and adherence to traditional values foster cultural information and knowledge within the future generations. Typically, the information differs depending on the gender of the person taught (Setalaphruk & Price 2007, 2). In a study of knowledge and attitudes about wild foods conducted in the province of Khon Kaen, adults showed greater knowledge of most foods. The results showed that, “When the children and the adults were compared concerning their ability to identify the wild items, the odds ratio showed that adults were 1.31 times more likely to identify plants and 2.35 times more likely to correctly identify insects. But the adults were less likely to identify fish correctly (odds ratio = 0.78)” (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 209). However, knowledge of these wild foods is declining. Several tribe elders in the Northeast region of Thailand have expressed concern over the recent pattern. They worry that the younger generations are looking to cities for employment and entertainment rather than learning about hunting and gathering as well as preparing and marketing wild foods. (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 210-211).

        Knowledge travels differently through gender, regardless of age. Although Thailand still abides by mostly patriarchal rules and values, the wild food system is matriarchal. Women typically carry the most knowledge about wild foods. In the Khon Kaen province of Thailand, “adult women and girls outperformed their male counterparts in identification of wild food items. Girls were 1.07 times more likely to identify the total three groups of wild food than boys, and adult women were 1.34 times more likely to identify all three groups correctly than the men” (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 210-209). Gathering rights and land ownership passes to families through the most senior woman in the family, and are preserved in trust for generations of daughters and granddaughters (Price 1997, 211). Women are also the head marketers and decision makers within the food system, as one study of markets in Thailand shows, “Women from the province Kalasin compromised 94% of marketers, with their wild foods sales providing statistically significant income to their household” (Price 1997, 209). These women even decide which foods the community can or cannot gather and sell. Decisions about what foods are “forbidden” occur through a collective of women in the community as these women learn more about the specific species. Enforcement of this decision happens in two ways. For one, the fear of losing status in the community causes locals to refrain from gathering and selling in public. Two, the state recognizes the legal ownership of land and the animals and plants on that land as private property. If someone were to gather or hunt what the women forbade on another property, the judicial system may come into play. (Price 1997, 211).

        Wild foods themselves make up a large part of Thai culture in the Northeast, and sellers seem to have an easy time marketing them to local populations. Preferences of wild foods are based on taste, smell, texture, and health properties (Moreno-Black, et. al. 1996, 112). In a study conducted in the Khon Kaen province of Northeast Thailand, “The majority of villagers indicated they liked to eat wild food, often preferring wild food to cultivated food and food from the market. Only 3 people (5%) reported they did not like wild food, while only 3 people felt that they like wild food as much as cultivated food. The villagers believe that wild food is necessary and that it is the most important food for everyday life” (Somnasang & Moreno-Black 2000, 205). One necessary food item that is gaining traction outside of Thailand is insects. When locals cannot afford fish or meat as a source of protein, they look to insects to fulfill their nutritional needs. Insects contain large amounts of protein, with one source showing 38% in queen castes to 54% in dung beetles (Siriamornpun & Thammapat 2008, 3). However, with the exportation of wild foods, such as insects like weaver ants and silk worms (Siriamornpun & Thammapat 2008, 7-8), comes a fear of exploitation and industrial takeover. Increase in demand could deplete the resource base (Moreno-Black, et. al. 1996, 115), and cause forest fragmentation and habitat loss (Siriamornpun & Thammapat 2008, 9). Although increases in exported goods would temporarily increase the economy, long-term increases could potentially destroy the environment and take away from the foods on which locals of Northeast Thailand depend.

        Part of gathering wild foods is understanding which spaces a person may collect from. A person’s right to land use depends on ownership of the land and the forbidden status of the foods (Price 1997, 213). At times, a landowner may allow outsiders to collect forbidden or non-forbidden foods from their land for small and private consumption (Price 1997, 217). Many of these rules are socially based, and are upheld on a community level rather than a judicial level. These rules are similar to those that Ryan Adams studied from the communities in the Brazilian Amazon. The “rural elites” from his land use study are synonymous with the senior women landowners in Northeast Thailand. However, the “rural elites” are big dogs with big problems compared to small landowners in Thailand. Adams described them in an interview, “These were big landowners and they were concerned about getting in trouble for deforestation and having the police investigate them.” Procurers in Thailand are similar to the Gaúchos in Adams work. Adams states, “Gaúcho farmers moved to the Amazon and have formed an alliance with local elite landowners based on a shared vision of the region’s future and the importance of productivity” (Adams 2015, 73). This relationship mirrors that of the procurers and landowners of Thailand. Landowners in Thailand recognize the need for increased economy, and create rules to protect themselves from over-collection. They each take on responsibilities to maintain their lifestyles and cooperate on a community level. As Adams stated in an interview, “People are very similar around the world, so the same kinds of daily concerns and family drama. Trying to get ahead in a difficult economy. The same things are happening everywhere.” However, Thailand and the Brazilian Amazon differ due to the advancements in farming in Brazil. The wild food system in Thailand is still in its early years.

Landowners are still in poverty, rather than considered “elite” like the ranchers and farmers in Adams’ study. In the Brazilian Amazon, relationships between the Gaúchos and the elite from due to “local elite ownership of farm equipment stores, tractor dealerships, fuel depots, and various other retail and wholesale businesses that the Gaúchos frequented (Adams 2015, 70). In Thailand, relationships between landowners and procurers exist through necessity. In order for a community to survive, landowners share land use and gathering rights with families and small groups of procurers and marketers. In a way, the Brazilian Amazon’s system of land use is similar to that of Northeast Thailand. The differences lie in scale and economy, of which Thailand has little at this point in time.

Conclusion

        Wild foods are necessary for the survival of communities of Northeast Thailand. The necessity exists on cultural, nutritional, economical, and agricultural levels. Wild foods are a major portion of the information passed through generations and make up part of most communities’ daily activities. These foods keep lower-economic communities fed, and provide sustenance when other foods are not available or affordable. The marketing system for these wild foods provides a small amount of money to local families and is projected to increase as interest in wild foods increases around the world. The relationship between procurers and landowners also creates a sense of community and camaraderie, such as that between the farmers and Gaúchos in the Brazilian Amazon. The wild food system in Northeast Thailand is not only extremely relevant, but it makes up much of the food culture and working culture in those communities.

Bibliography

Adams, Ryan Thomas

   2015 "An Emerging Alliance of Ranchers and Farmers in the Brazilian Amazon." Tipití:

      Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America 13(1): 63-78.

Adams, Ryan.

2015 "Interview with Ryan Adams." Telephone interview by author.

Moreno-Black, Geraldine, Watanaakanan, Prapimporn Somnsang, Sompong Thamathawan, and Paul Brozvosky

1996 Non-Domesticated Food Resources in the Marketplace and Marketing System of    

       Northeastern. Journal of Ethnobiology 16(1):99-117.

Niehof, Anke

2010  Food, Diversity, Vulnerability and Social Change: Research Findings from Insular

Southeast Asia. Wageningen (NL): Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Price, Lisa

1997 Wild Plant Food in Agricultural Environments: A Study of Occurrence, Management,

and Gathering Rights in Northeast Thailand. Human Organization 56(2):209-221.

Setalaphruk, Chantita, and Lisa Price.

   2007 "Children's Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Wild  

      Food Resources: A Case Study in a Rural Village in Northeast Thailand." J Ethnobiology

      Ethnomedicine Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 33(3):1-11.

Siriamornpun, Sirithon, and Pornpisanu Thammapat

2008 “Insects as a Delicacy and a Nutritious Food in Thailand.” In Using Food Science and

Technology to Improve Nutrition and Promote National Development.  Gordon Robertson,

John Lupien, eds. Pp.1-12. Toronto (ON): International Union of Food Science &

Technology.  http://www.iufost.org/iufostftp/Revd%20Sirithon%20Chapter%2016.pdf.

Somnsang, Prapimporn, and Geraldine Moreno-Black

2000 Knowing Gathering, and Eating: Knowledge and Attitudes about Wild Food in an

Isan Village in Northeastern Thailand. Journal of Ethnobiology 20(2):197-216.