Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26077671›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2015

From economic survival to recreation: contemporary uses of wild food and medicine in rural Sweden, Ukraine and NW Russia.

Nataliya Stryamets, Marine Elbakidze, Melissa Ceuterick, Per Angelstam, Robert Axelsson

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nataliya StryametsSwedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Forest-Landscape-Society Research Group, Faculty of Forest Sciences, School for Forest Management, PO Box 43, Skinnskatteberg, SE 73921, Sweden. Natalie.Stryamets@slu.se.
Marine ElbakidzeSwedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Forest-Landscape-Society Research Group, Faculty of Forest Sciences, School for Forest Management, PO Box 43, Skinnskatteberg, SE 73921, Sweden. Marine.Elbakidze@slu.se.
Melissa CeuterickResearch Institute for Nature and Forest, Kliniekstraat 25, Brussels, 1070, Belgium. melissaceuterick@hotmail.com.
Per AngelstamSwedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Forest-Landscape-Society Research Group, Faculty of Forest Sciences, School for Forest Management, PO Box 43, Skinnskatteberg, SE 73921, Sweden. Per.Angelstam@slu.se.
Robert AxelssonSwedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Forest-Landscape-Society Research Group, Faculty of Forest Sciences, School for Forest Management, PO Box 43, Skinnskatteberg, SE 73921, Sweden. Robert.Axelsson@slu.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are many ethnobotanical studies on the use of wild plants and mushrooms for food and medicinal treatment in Europe. However, there is a lack of comparative ethnobotanical research on the role of non-wood forest products (NWFPs) as wild food and medicine in local livelihoods in countries with different socio-economic conditions. The aim of this study was to compare the present use of wild food and medicine in three places representing different stages of socio-economic development in Europe. Specifically we explore which plant and fungi species people use for food and medicine in three selected rural regions of Sweden, Ukraine and the Russian Federation.

methodsWe studied the current use of NWFPs for food and medicine in three rural areas that represent a gradient in economic development (as indicated by the World Bank), i.e., Småland high plain (south Sweden), Roztochya (western Ukraine), and Kortkeros (Komi Republic in North West Russia). All areas were characterised by (a) predominating rural residency, (b) high forest coverage, and (c) free access to NWFPs. A total of 205 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with local residents in the three study areas. The collected NWFPs data included (1) the species that are used; (2) the amount harvested, (3) uses and practices (4) changes over time, (5) sources of knowledge regarding the use of NWFPs as wild food and medicine and (6) traditional recipes.

resultsIn Sweden 11 species of wild plant and fungi species were used as food, and no plant species were used for medicinal purposes. In Ukraine the present use of NWFPs included 26 wild foods and 60 medicinal species, while in Russia 36 food and 44 medicinal species were reported.

conclusionsIn the economically less developed rural areas of Ukraine and Russia, the use of NWFPs continues to be an important part of livelihoods, both as a source of income and for domestic use as food and medicine. In Sweden the collection of wild food has become mainly a recreational activity and the use of medicinal plants is no longer prevalent among our respondents. This leads us to suggest that the consumption of wild food and medicine is influenced by the socio-economic situation in a country.

Indexed as

AdultAgaricalesEthnobotanyFemaleFoodHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMedicine, TraditionalMiddle AgedPhytotherapyPlant ExtractsPlants, EdiblePlants, MedicinalRecreationRural PopulationPlant Extracts

Identifiers

PMID26077671
PMCPMC4474580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.