This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Unfortunately, the measures and scales are often crude, with the most common pattern being to a) measure biodiversity by species richness (# of species of some type in an area, e.g., mammals), b) measure cultural diversity by language richness (# of languages in an area), and c) tabulate both kinds of diversity at the country scale (e.g., Wilcox & Duin 1995) A slightly more sophisticated version is to focus on endemic species and languages (meaning those only found in the given area) (Harmon 1996) A handful of studies measure diversity on a continuous scale (e.g., per unit area) rather than at national or regional scales (e.g., Moore et al. 2002; Sutherland 2003) Thus, the rigorous measurement of biodiversity & cultural diversity correlation is in its infancy; unfortunately, the objects of study are going extinct at an alarming rate (Sutherland 2003; Maffi 2005)...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 11/22/2011 for the course ANT ANT2000 taught by Professor Monicaoyola during the Fall '10 term at Broward College.
- Fall '10