Ecology of Indonesian Papua Part One. Andrew J. Marshall
Читать онлайн книгу.
other ways, this belief may hinder creativity and innovation. For example, although knowledge of the natural world (e.g., traditional medicine) is substantial in many Papuan cultures, this knowledge is typically limited to a few individuals or ethnic groups and is not developed or refined using modern scientific techniques. This limits the scientific, economic, and health benefits that can be derived from utilization of the natural world. However, this generalization is by no means universally true, as some Papuan cultures (e.g., those in Cenderawasih Bay) do have a history of exploration of the environment and expeditions within and outside of Papua. The tendency towards exploration led to expertise in the technology of shipbuilding and navigation in these cultures, as noted above.
Although many Papuan cultures appear to be relatively passive towards large-scale exploration of nature, they do highly value individual efforts and respect individuals who are industrious and innovative. The cultural value placed on individual effort encourages many Papuans to work harder, which in turn benefits the group as a whole. It also builds a sense of independence and self-confidence in some individuals, and in others builds a sense of responsibility. As mentioned above, this cultural value can be a major asset for community development and improvement.
If we use the traditional leadership systems and cultural values as a "window" into Papua’s culture, we can see that the premium placed on hard work and industriousness is beneficial in many Papuan cultures. For example, as discussed above, in many big man systems (e.g., Meybrat, Me, Muyu, Dani, and Asmat) the leader gains power through personal abilities and achievements (achieved status). In the Meybrat culture, a person is highly respected if he is successful in devising and implementing systems for the exchange of ceremonial cloth. A successful Meybrat man would be called bobot to acknowledge this achievement. Similarly, in the Me people a person who has good diplomatic skills, is kind and honest, and economically successful (i.e., acquires much agricultural land, many pigs and wives, and cowrie shell "money") is highly respected and recognized as the leader of the community. Such a person is known as leader (tonowi) and rich man (sonowi). The Muyu people respect and confer power upon men with talents in organizing large pig feasts and ceremonies. In cultures where warfare is of central economic and ritual importance (e.g., Dani, Asmat), men with courage and strength during battle are respected and become leaders.
Anthropological analysis of Papuan cultures shows that two very different attitudes towards interpersonal relationships are found in Papua. First, some cultures are strongly vertically-oriented. Cultures with the kingdom leadership system (e.g., those on Onin (part of the Bomberai) Peninsula, Kowiai area, the Raja Ampat Islands) strongly exhibit this orientation, as do cultures in northeast Papua that practice the ondoafi leadership system (e.g., Tabla, Skow, Nimboran, Sentani, and the people of Yos Sudarso Bay). In these cultures, the leader is viewed as a descendant of a mythical ancestor who plays a special role as mediator between the real and the supernatural worlds. As these leaders are believed to have magical powers, they are widely respected and consulted by all community members.
Koentjaraningrat (1974) believed that vertically-oriented systems tend to reduce an individual’s sense of independence and self-confidence. He also argued that these systems reduce self-discipline, since individuals can come to feel that they must only obey cultural rules and laws only if they are being watched by more powerful individuals. Finally, leaders having considerable power to dictate the lives of other community members can reduce the sense of responsibility felt by those with little power (Koentjaraningrat 1974). Although some of the byproducts of such systems (e.g., lack of discipline and responsibility, lack of innovation) are detrimental to community development, there are some positive outcomes as well. For example, a strong leader can efficiently organize and motivate community members to participate in development projects.
A second view of interpersonal relationships has a more horizontal orientation, as noted above. In cultures that hold such beliefs (e.g., Biak), the relationships among the community members in a clan are very strong, and group needs are prioritized above individual needs. Among the clan members, solidarity is high, based on the view that "a part is the whole" (pars-prototo). This view creates a sense of security for clan members because they know that they will always be helped in difficult times. However such a system means that community members have a strong obligation to continually maintain good relationships and share resources with neighbors. This obligation to share means that individuals or communities cannot accumulate or save capital for future investment. Thus, a strong horizontal orientation does not facilitate community development.
WORK ETHIC
A community’s work ethic encapsulates the social norms and general attitudes towards work. In common parlance, work ethic can be defined as the level of enthusiasm and industriousness typical of a person or group. As noted above, Papuan cultures tend to value work highly, and work is thought of as something that produces a product that can be enjoyed by oneself and others. In this view, unproductive people have low social status. However, the definition of productivity varies substantially among groups, based on methods required to make a living in different environments.
The work ethic of communities that live collectively in swampy areas and depend on sago for subsistence (e.g., Asmat, Kamoro, Waropen, Bauzi, and Inawatan) is different from the work ethic of other Papuan people who depend on agriculture. In collective societies the work ethic focuses on efforts to fulfill immediate needs (e.g., collecting enough food for a single day) and does not stress work as an investment in the future. People in these groups do not value hard work beyond what is necessary to enjoy life in the present. This view is quite compatible with their social organization and lifestyle, because each family is an element in a production group in which each family does the same work. Collective societies gather products that are immediately available in nature, and do not need to focus on producing or maintaining the resources they utilize. This work ethic is successful and well-adapted to the ecological conditions under which these societies live, but makes collectively-living communities poorly suited to entering the market economy. Such people require support and training in modern technology to allow them to enter the market economy, and empowerment to manage and harvest their resources in a way that will allow the products to be sold at central markets.
In contrast to collective societies, the people who practice agriculture have a work ethic that is more geared towards investment for anticipated future returns. Opening land for agriculture is a long process that includes tree-cutting, planting, tending gardens, weeding, and harvesting. This process can take from six to ten months, sometimes more, depending on the types of the plants being grown. This protracted process requires perseverance and diligence, and indicates that Papuan agricultural societies have a particularly strong work ethic. It should be noted that this strong work ethic not only results in sustenance for the household, it also provides products for the market economy. The emphasis on investment for the future is an asset to agricultural societies as they enter the market economy.
Many Papuan cultures also are highly competitive. Most Papuan ethnic groups (e.g., Meybrat (Ayamaru), Me, Muyu, Biak, Dani, and Waropen and Serui in Cenderawasih Bay) are inherently competitive. Individuals compete to become powerful and successful members of their groups by accumulating wealth or demonstrating diplomatic expertise, proficiency in warfare, organization abilities, or magical abilities. Therefore Papuans are well-endowed with a competitive spirit, which is valued in the modern world and should prove to be an asset as they enter the global economy.
The challenge now is to determine how to help Papuans enhance these cultural assets and apply them for the development of Papua and the rest of Indonesia.
Culturally-and Ecologically-sensitive Development
One important issue is ascertaining how to help develop and empower Papuan people in a climate that is so ethnically and culturally diverse. Clearly, the correct approaches will depend heavily on the particular situation and society, on the ethnic, religious, and economic status of communities, and the type of development program to be conducted.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте