Explore the vast range of titles available.

Indigenous knowledges are being increasingly recognized as fundamental for environmental governance, ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation. However, they tend to be recognized by Western science only when they converge with Western scientific knowledge, while ontological differences are generally treated as irrelevant or unreasonable beliefs. Given this scenario, embracing difference as a productive and fundamental aspect to truly understand these epistemologies is crucial to advance fair and symmetrical epistemological dialogues. Current domestication models are key to interpreting human‐plant‐animal‐landscape entanglements. However, they have been criticized in the Amazonian context for remaining steeped in the Western logic of human control over nature and for neglecting local worldviews, which do not assume a dichotomy between nature and culture. In light of this, we propose a thought‐provoking exercise that aims to broaden ideas on domestication as inspired by Indigenous worldviews. We integrate insights derived from Amazonian Indigenous knowledge systems to construct a conceptual model of domestication. We then engage the synthesis resulting from this approach with concepts and theories from ecology and anthropology. In our model, plants, animals, supernatural beings and humans care for, manage and cultivate their domains. Since, according to Indigenous ontologies, all these beings have agency, intentionality, and human qualities, they all share the status of domesticators in our model. The outcome of the combined actions of these beings is an entirely socialized forest, formed by a mosaic of domūs of both humans and non‐humans. Thus, in our model, the forest is fully domesticated by the action of a multiplicity of beings, who possess symmetrical agencies and are constantly interacting socially. By following the reflective path constructed in our approach, we invite the reader to ‘think with’ Indigenous Peoples. Instigated by this framework, we suggest directions to broaden conventional ecological approaches used for studying socio‐ecological systems and promote conservation. We hope to inspire the creativity of current ecological research dynamics to design investigations that go beyond the anthropocentric perspective and the nature/culture dichotomy. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Resumo Os conhecimentos Indígenas estão sendo cada vez mais reconhecidos como fundamentais para a governança ambiental, o manejo de ecossistemas e a conservação da biodiversidade. Entretanto, estes tendem a ser reconhecidos pela ciência ocidental somente quando convergem com o conhecimento científico ocidental, enquanto as diferenças ontológicas são geralmente tratadas como crenças irrelevantes ou irracionais. Diante deste cenário, considerar as diferenças como um aspecto produtivo e fundamental para entender de fato estas epistemologias é crucial para promover diálogos epistemológicos justos e simétricos. Os modelos atuais de domesticação são fundamentais para interpretar os emaranhados humano‐planta‐animal‐paisagem. No entanto, eles têm sido criticados no contexto amazônico por permanecerem impregnados da lógica ocidental de controle humano sobre a natureza e por negligenciarem as visões de mundo locais, que não pressupõem uma dicotomia entre natureza e cultura. Diante disso, propomos um exercício reflexivo que visa expandir as ideias sobre domesticação, inspirado pelas visões de mundo Indígenas. Integramos insights derivados dos sistemas de conhecimento Indígena da Amazônia para construir um modelo conceitual de domesticação. Em seguida, dialogamos a síntese resultante dessa abordagem com conceitos e teorias da ecologia e da antropologia. Em nosso modelo, plantas, animais, seres sobrenaturais e humanos cuidam, manejam e cultivam seus domínios. Como, de acordo com as ontologias Indígenas, todos esses seres têm agência, intencionalidade e qualidades humanas, todos eles compartilham o status de domesticadores em nosso modelo. O resultado das ações combinadas desses seres é uma floresta totalmente socializada, formada por um mosaico de domūs de humanos e não humanos. Assim, em nosso modelo, a floresta é totalmente domesticada pela ação de uma multiplicidade de seres, que possuem agências simétricas e estão constantemente interagindo socialmente. Ao seguir o caminho reflexivo construído em nossa abordagem, convidamos o leitor a “pensar com” os povos Indígenas. Instigados por essa perspectiva, sugerimos direções para expandir as abordagens ecológicas convencionais usadas para estudar os sistemas socioecológicos e promover a conservação. Esperamos inspirar a criatividade da atual dinâmica de pesquisa ecológica para elaborar investigações que vão além da perspectiva antropocêntrica e da dicotomia natureza/cultura. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

World conservation discourse concentrates on forests of high naturalness, which are variously termed intact forest landscapes, primary forests, pristine forests, and wilderness. In this essay, we bring Amazonian Indigenous perspectives to this discussion, both because Amazonian Indigenous Peoples have the right to be in the discussion and because they have a lot to teach us about naturalness. It is essential to understand that Indigenous ontologies do not distinguish culture from nature, since all beings, humans and non-humans, are part of a network of social-ecological interactions. Hence, forests are not natural, but the domus of different beings who inhabit, care for and cultivate them. Each part of the forest mosaic in different stages of social-ecological succession has different owners: when people open swiddens, they must respect other – non-human – forest residents to do so, and when they fallow their swiddens, these other forest residents reassume their original roles as managers and conservers of that part of the mosaic. Each stage of the succession also contains cultivated and domesticated plant populations, so we can think of a different kind of conservation: that of genetic resources. From this perspective, swidden-fallow represents on farm conservation, while less anthropogenic parts of the forest mosaic represent in situ conservation. We believe that reframing forest conservation and learning from Indigenous People can inspire innovative conservation science and policies.