Integrated palaeoecology and archaeology: a powerful approach for understanding pre-Columbian Amazonia

The old paradigm that Amazonia's tropical ecosystems prevented cultural development beyond small-scale shifting agricultural economies, that had little environmental impact, no longer holds true for much of Amazonia. A diversity of archaeological evidence, including terra preta soils, raised fields, causeways, large habitation mounds, geometric earthworks, and megalithic monuments, all point to considerable cultural complexity and environmental impacts. However, uncertainty remains over the chronology of these cultures, their diet and economy, and the scale of environmental impact and land use associated with them. Here, we argue that a cross-disciplinary approach, closely coupling palaeoecology and archaeology, can potentially resolve these uncertainties. We show how, with careful site selection (pairing small and large lakes, close proximity to archaeological sites, transects of soil pits) and choice of techniques (e.g., pollen, phytoliths, starch grains, charcoal, stable isotopes), these two disciplines can be successfully integrated to provide a powerful tool for investigating the relationship between pre-Columbian cultures and their environment.

Biodiversity, cultural pathways, and human health: a framework

Direct contact with biodiversity is culturally important in a range of contexts. Many people even join conservation organisations to protect biodiversity that they will never encounter first-hand. Despite this, we have little idea how biodiversity affects people's well-being and health through these cultural pathways. Human health is sensitive to apparently trivial psychological stimuli, negatively affected by the risk of environmental degradation, and positively affected by contact with natural spaces. This suggests that well-being and health should be affected by biodiversity change, but few studies have begun to explore these relationships. Here, we develop a framework for linking biodiversity change with human cultural values, well-being, and health. We argue that better understanding these relations might be profoundly important for biodiversity conservation and public health.