Shared parenting, law and policy: considering power within the framework of autopoietic theory

This paper uses the last few decades’ developments in the area of shared parenting to explore power within the framework of autopoietic theory. It traces how, prompted by turbulence from the political subsystem, family law has made several unsuccessful attempts to solve the perceived problem of post-separation dual-household parenting. It agrees with Luhmann and Teubner that closed autopoietic systems’ developments are limited by their normative and cognitive frameworks, and also argues that changes, which have occurred in family law, show that closed social systems do not function in total isolation. It considers power as ego’s ability to limit alter’s choices. In our functionally differentiated society, with its recent proliferation of communication, power appears more diffuse and impossible to plot into causal one-way relationships.

Phylogenies reveal predictive power of traditional medicine in bioprospecting

There is controversy about whether traditional medicine can guide drug discovery, and investment in ethnobotanically led research has fluctuated. One view is that traditionally used plants are not necessarily efficacious and there are no robust methods for distinguishing the ones that are most likely to be bioactive when selecting species for further testing. Here, we reconstruct a genus-level molecular phylogeny representing the 20,000 species found in the floras of three disparate biodiversity hotspots: Nepal, New Zealand and the Cape of South Africa. Borrowing phylogenetic methods from community ecology, we reveal significant clustering of the 1,500 traditionally used species, and provide a direct measure of the relatedness of the three medicinal floras. We demonstrate shared phylogenetic patterns across the floras: related plants from these regions are used to treat medical conditions in the same therapeutic areas. This strongly suggests independent discovery of plant efficacy, an interpretation corroborated by the presence of a significantly greater proportion of known bioactive species in these plant groups than in a random sample. Phylogenetic cross-cultural comparison can focus screening efforts on a subset of traditionally used plants that are richer in bioactive compounds, and could revitalise the use of traditional knowledge in bioprospecting.