Transferring ethnopharmacological results back to traditional healers in rural indigenous communities – The Ugandan greater Mpigi region example [original]

brill.com/vjep

Transferring Ethnopharmacological Results

Back to Traditional Healers in Rural Indigenous

Communities – The Ugandan Greater Mpigi Region

Example

Research Translation

Fabien Schultz (corresponding author) | ORCID: 0000-0003-1904-2430

Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty III – Process Sciences, Technical

University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Department of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Neubrandenburg University

of Applied Sciences, Neubrandenburg, Germany

fabien.schultz@mailbox.tu-berlin.de

Inken Dworak-Schultz

ARUDEVO, Lwengo, Uganda

Alex Olengo

Department of Plant Sciences, Microbiology and Biotechnology,

Makerere University, Kampala,

Godwin Anywar | ORCID: 0000-0003-0926-1832

Department of Plant Sciences, Microbiology and Biotechnology,

Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Leif-Alexander Garbe

Department of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Neubrandenburg University

of Applied Sciences, Neubrandenburg, Germany

ZELT – Neubrandenburg Center for Nutrition and Food Technology gGmbH,

Neubrandenburg, Germany

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy

(2021) 1-15

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.

Heruntergeladen von Brill.com11/02/2021 08:10:55AM

via free access

Abstract

In ethnopharmacology, scientists often survey indigenous communities to identify

and collect natural remedies such as medicinal plants that are yet to be investigated

pharmacologically in a laboratory setting. The Nagoya Protocol provided international

agreements on financial benefit sharing. However, what has yet only been poorly

defined in these agreements are the non-financial benefits for local intellectual

property right owners, such as traditional healers who originally provided the

respective ethnomedicinal information. Unfortunately, ethnopharmacologists still

rarely return to local communities. In this video article, the authors present a method

for transferring results back to traditional healers in rural indigenous communities,

taking the authors’ previous studies among 39 traditional healers in Uganda as an

example. The authors’ approach is based on a two-day workshop, and the results are

presented as original footage in the video article. The authors’ work demonstrated

a successful method for ensuring bidirectional benefit and communication while

fostering future scientific and community-work collaborations. The authors believe it

is the moral duty of ethnopharmacologists to contribute to knowledge transfer and

feedback once a study is completed. The workshop method, as an example for science

outreach, might also be regarded as a valuable contribution to research on education

theory and science communication.

Keywords

research translation – ethnopharmacology – traditional medicine – traditional healers

– workshop – Mpigi – transfer of results – Uganda – medicinal plants

Feature This article comprises a video, which can be viewed here.

10.1163/23644583-bja10018 | schultz et al.

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy (2021) 1-15

Heruntergeladen von Brill.com11/02/2021 08:10:55AM

via free access

1 Introduction

Across the globe and throughout history, plants have been used by humans

as a source of medicine and natural remedies (Bussmann et al., 2018; Kigen

et al., 2019). The World Health Organization defines traditional medicine as

“the knowledge, skills and practices based on the theories, beliefs and experi-

ences indigenous to different cultures, used in the maintenance of health and

in the prevention, diagnosis, improvement or treatment of physical and men-

tal illness.” (who, 2019) Traditional medicine continues to be of great impor-

tance to all human beings (Yuan et al., 2016). In the developing world, over

80% of the population still relies on medicinal plants as their primary source

of healthcare (Bussmann et al., 2018; Kigen et al., 2019; F. Schultz et al., 2020;

who, 2010). Even in the modern Western pharmaceutical industry, traditional

medicine still plays a key role in drug discovery (Atanasov et al., 2015; Balunas

& Kinghorn, 2005; Heinrich et al., 2015; Porras et al., 2020; Fabien Schultz,

Godwin Anywar, Huaqiao Tang, et al., 2020). For instance, nearly 50% of all

drugs that are currently fda-approved in the US have been derived directly or

indirectly from natural sources (Li et al., 2019; Veeresham, 2012).

Here, the science of ethnopharmacology seeks to investigate the medic-

inal use of plants, animals, macrofungi, microorganisms, and minerals

through pharmacological, socio-cultural, and anthropological methods.

Ethnopharmacology is a highly interdisciplinary field of research (Heinrich,

2014; Heinrich & Jäger, 2015), encompassing a) field studies (such as ethno-

botanical studies in local communities, interviews, surveys, and the first

time documentation of medicinal use, ritual use, or religious aspects), b) the

pharmacological assessment of recorded and collected medicinal species in

a laboratory setting (so-called “bioactivity studies”), and c) drug discovery of

pharmacologically active natural products via pharmacognostic approaches.

These activities may be expanded to include community work, as we believe

ethnopharmacologists should also act as advocates for the respective indige-

nous communities with whom they collaborate.

Throughout history, the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples

have not been recognized, and questions concerning the ownership of bio-

diversity following the development and commercialization of pharmaceu-

ticals have arisen. The Nagoya Protocol and the Convention on Biological

Diversity provided international agreements on financial benefit sharing and

recognized each nation’s sovereignty over the biodiversity resources within

its borders (Alexiades & Sheldon, 1996; Balick & Cox, 2020; Heinrich & Jäger,

2015; Heinrich et al., 2018). But what about non-monetary benefits? What

about the transfer of knowledge in both directions? Unfortunately, even today,

TRANSFERRING RESULTS BACK | 10.1163/23644583-bja10018

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy (2021) 1-15

Heruntergeladen von Brill.com11/02/2021 08:10:55AM

via free access

ethnopharmacologists rarely return to the local communities after a study has

been completed and published (Maregesi et al., 2007; Fabien Schultz, Godwin

Anywar, Barbara Wack, et al., 2020). Thus, the successful collection of plant

samples and ethnopharmacological information from traditional healers and

other community members often marks the end point of this one-sided col-

laboration, despite the fact that this data will still be analyzed, interpreted, and

published (see Figure 1). This problem was previously addressed in a book by

Herman et al. (Herman et al., 2018).

Laboratory studies may follow, leading to unique significant discoveries that

would certainly be of interest to the local study participants and could even

empower them locally while fostering an equal partnership (Cordell, 1995;

Unander et al., 1995; Vandebroek et al., 2011). If the scientists ever return, then

in many cases it is only because of an entirely new study, aimed at extract-

ing new information for their research. We believe that ethnopharmacologists

therefore have the great responsibility of keeping this collaboration and the

communication with their local informants bidirectional. Information and

knowledge should be shared, creating a benefit for both the scientists and the

local study participants.

1.1 Previous Ethnopharmacological Studies

In this video article, we would like to introduce a method for transferring the

results of laboratory analyses and ethnobotanical surveys back to traditional

healers. Our approach is based on a two-day workshop, using our previous

figure 1 Objectives of ethnopharmacological research, showing the fieldwork and

laboratory steps. But what comes next?

10.1163/23644583-bja10018 | schultz et al.

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy (2021) 1-15

Heruntergeladen von Brill.com11/02/2021 08:10:55AM

via free access

studies from the Greater Mpigi region in Uganda as an example. A total of 16

medicinal plant species were investigated as part of an ethnobotanical survey

among 39 traditional healers from the Greater Mpigi region. This past study

has recently been published in the Journal of Ethnopharmacology (Fabien

Schultz, Godwin Anywar, Barbara Wack, et al., 2020). Traditional healers from

29 different villages, including one from a small island in Lake Victoria, were

interviewed. The study involved the first-time documentation of preparation

and administration methods and the identification of a total of 75 medical dis-

orders that are treated with these medicinal plants. In this study, information

was obtained using questionnaires that were specifically designed to collect

in-depth data on each species. Figure 2 shows three photographs from this

field study, giving examples of local plant diversity.

In another follow-up study that was published, we applied the Degrees of

Publication (DoP) method as a novel tool for literature assessment in ethno-

pharmacological research (F. Schultz et al., 2020). There are numerous field

assessment tools in use today. However, none of these tools are able to help

researchers determine which species merit the costly laboratory studies that

would be required for their further investigation, e.g., pharmacological assays

and the isolation of bioactive natural product compounds. The introduction

of the DoP method has filled this gap. In the context of the aforementioned

ethnobotanical survey, the DoP method made it possible to classify six of the

16 medicinal plant species as “highly understudied” and three as “understud-

ied.”(F. Schultz et al., 2020)

figure 2 Illustrations of Ugandan plant diversity and traditional African community life

TRANSFERRING RESULTS BACK | 10.1163/23644583-bja10018

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy (2021) 1-15

Heruntergeladen von Brill.com11/02/2021 08:10:55AM

via free access

Loading more pages...