Cultural Keystone Places and Historical Ecology: Conceptual Benefits and Ethical Impacts

  • Steve Wolverton Department of Geography and the Environment, University of North Texas, Denton, USA
  • Chelsey Geralda Armstrong Historical-Ecological Research Lab, Indigenous Studies, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1969
Keywords: Cultural keystone places, Historical ecology, Ethical sufficiency

Abstract

The papers in this special issue employ cultural keystone places (CKPs) as a concept to engage scholarship about land. The CKP concept is used in contrast to Eurocentric understandings of place and instead acknowledges the deeper meanings of place to local communities. Research employing the concept is increasingly common through the lens of historical ecology, an integrative research paradigm in ethnobiology and archaeology. In this introduction we articulate what the CKP concept has to offer ethnobiology and archaeology, particularly in terms or practices of ethical inquiry about research, which we term ethical sufficiency. Addressing ethical sufficiency of research also requires addressing the limitations of and challenges to disciplines and academic communities steeped in settler-colonial histories.

Author Biographies

Steve Wolverton, Department of Geography and the Environment, University of North Texas, Denton, USA

Steve Wolverton is a professor in the Department of Geography and the Environment at the University of North Texas. His research interests are in zooarchaeology and historical ecology.

Chelsey Geralda Armstrong, Historical-Ecological Research Lab, Indigenous Studies, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada

Chelsey Geralda Armstrong is a historical ecologist and archaeologist specializing in ancient human-landscape dynamics in the Pacific Northwest. She is an assistant professor and director of the Historical-Ecological Research Lab in Indigenous Studies, and associate member in the School of Resource and Environmental Management at Simon Fraser University.

References

Arinyo-i-Prats, A., S. LaTosky, and N. J. Turner. 2025. Rethinking Cultural Keystone Practices: Conflict Resolution Practices as Examples of Salience and Well-Being. Ethnobiology Letters 16:7–19. DOI:10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1909.

Armstrong, C. G., and J. R. Veteto. 2015. Historical Ecology and Ethnobiology: Applied Research for Environmental Conservation and Social Justice. Ethnobiology Letters 6:5–7. DOI:10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.313.

Balée, W. 2013. Cultural Forests of the Amazon: A Historical Ecology of People and Their Landscapes. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Balée, W., and C. L. Erickson. 2006. Time, Complexity, and Historical Ecology. In Time and Complexity in Historical Ecology: Studies in the Neotropical Lowlands, edited by W. L. Balée and C. L. Erickson, pp. 1–18. Columbia University Press, New York.

Cherry, K. 2025. ‘The Kids Don’t Want Reconciliation, They Want Land Back’: Thinking About Decolonization and Settler Solidarity After the Death of Reconciliation. Contemporary Political Theory 24:60–80.

Coulthard, G. S. 2014. Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

Coulthard, G., and L. B. Simpson. 2016. Grounded Normativity/Place-based Solidarity. American Quarterly 68:249–255.

Crumley, C. L., ed. 1994. Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Crumley, C. L. 2021. Historical Ecology: A Robust Bridge Between Archaeology and Ecology. Sustainability 13:8210.

Cuerrier, A., N. J. Turner, T. C. Gomes, A. Garibaldi, and A. Downing. 2015. Cultural Keystone Places: Conservation and Restoration in Cultural Landscapes. Journal of Ethnobiology 35:427–448.

Davis, D. S. 2024. Past, Present, and Future of Complex Systems Theory in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 32:549–596.

Dimdiigibuu, A. W., and C. G. Armstrong. 2025. Threats to Heritage in Cultural Keystone Places: Fitting Western Concepts into Gitxsan Legal Orders and Laws. Ethnobiology Letters 16:20–32. DOI:10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1914.

Dunnell, R. C. 1982. The Harvey Lecture Series. Science, Social Science, and Common Sense: The Agonizing Dilemma of Modern Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Research 38:1–25.

Figueroa, R. M. 2015. Fire in the Rain. In Sushi in Cortez: Interdisciplinary Essays on Mesa Verde, edited by D. J. Taylor and S. Wolverton, pp. 118–147. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake.

Forste, K. M., A. Pérez-Juez, and A. J. Smith. 2025. Expanding Cultural and Natural Heritage Through Archaeology: An Application of Cultural Keystone Places (CKP) in the Medieval Mediterranean. Ethnobiology Letters 16:33–46. DOI:10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1910.

Sachs, N. S., T. G. Martin, and J. Grenz. 2025. Centering Indigenous Cultural Resurgence to Improve Ecological Restoration: Learnings from the Revitalization of Cultural Keystone Places of the Quw’utsun Peoples. Ethnobiology Letters 16:58–73. DOI:10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1920.

Harjo, L. 2019. Spiral to the Stars: Mvskoke Tools of Futurity. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Hua, H., S. Zhou, Z. Ding, and Y. Pan. 2018. The Change Mechanism of Human-environment Interactions from the Perspective of Contextualization: A Case Study of the Honghe Hani Rice Terraces as a World Cultural Heritage Site. Sustainability 10:2230.

Huaman, E. S., and P. Swentzell. 2021. Indigenous Education and Sustainable Development: Rethinking Environment through Indigenous Knowledges and Generative Environmental Pedagogies. Journal of American Indian Education 60:7–28.

Laluk, N. C., L. M. Montgomery, R. Tsosie, C. McCleave, R. Miron, S. R. Carroll, J. Aguilar, A. B. W. Thompson, P. Nelson, J. Sunseri, and I. Trujillo. 2022. Archaeology and Social Justice in Native America. American Antiquity 87:659–682.

Lewontin, R. C. 1974. The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia University Press, New York.

Meskell, L. 2010. Human Rights and Heritage Ethics. Anthropological Quarterly 83:839–859.

Patterson, T. C. 1994. Towards a Properly Historical Ecology. In Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes, edited by C. L. Crumley, pp. 223–237. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Simpson, L. B. 2014. Land as Pedagogy: Nishnaabeg Intelligence and Rebellious Transformation. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 3:1–25.

Simpson, L. B. 2017. As We Have Always Done: Indigenous Freedom through Radical Resistance. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

Sinclair, P., J. Moen, and C. L. Crumley. 2018. Historical Ecology and the Longue Durée. In Issues and Concepts in Historical Ecology: The Past and Future of Landscapes and Regions, edited by C. L. Crumley, T. Lennartsson, and A. Westin, pp. 13–40. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Supernant, K., J. E. Baxter, N. Lyons, and S. Atalay, eds. 2020. Archaeologies of the Heart. Springer, New York.

Watts, V. 2013. Indigenous Place-thought and Agency Amongst Humans and Non-humans (First Woman and Sky Woman Go on a European World Tour!). Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 2:20–24.

Whyte, K. 2020. Indigenous Environmental Justice: Anti-colonial Action through Kinship. In Environmental Justice, edited by B. Coolsaet, pp. 266–278. Routledge, London.

Wolverton, S., R. M. Figueroa, C. M. Levin, and P. Swentzell. 2021. Archaeology and Tourism at Mesa Verde National Park: An Environmental Justice Heritage. In The Routledge Handbook of Development and Environment, edited by B. McCusker, W. Ahmed, M. Ramutsindela, and P. Solís, pp. 257–275. Taylor and Francis, New York.

Wolverton, S., R. M. Figueroa, and C. G. Armstrong. 2023. Integrating Historical Ecology and Environmental Justice. Journal of Ethnobiology 43:57–68.

Wolverton, S., J. Dombrosky, C. G. Armstrong, and S. C. Ryan. 2025. Archaeofaunal Remains, Geography, and the Investigation of Cultural Keystone Places. Ethnobiology Letters 16:47–57. DOI:10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1913.

Ethnobiology Letters Cover, Volume 16, Issue 2, 2025
Published
2025-12-01
How to Cite
Wolverton, S., & Armstrong, C. G. (2025). Cultural Keystone Places and Historical Ecology: Conceptual Benefits and Ethical Impacts. Ethnobiology Letters, 16(2), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.16.2.2025.1969
Issue
Vol 16 No 2 (2025)
Section
Perspectives

Copyright (c) 2025 Steve Wolverton, Chelsey Geralda Armstrong

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content and grant Ethnobiology Letters (the “Journal”) and the Society of Ethnobiology right of first publication. Authors and the Journal agree that Ethnobiology Letters will publish the article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits others to use, distribute, and reproduce the work non-commercially, provided the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal are properly cited.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

For any reuse or redistribution of a work, users must make clear the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0).

In publishing with Ethnobiology Letters corresponding authors certify that they are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements. They warrant, on behalf of themselves and their co-authors, that the content is original, has not been formally published, is not under consideration, and does not infringe any existing copyright or any other third party rights. They further warrant that the material contains no matter that is scandalous, obscene, libelous, or otherwise contrary to the law.

Corresponding authors will be given an opportunity to read and correct edited proofs, but if they fail to return such corrections by the date set by the editors, production and publication may proceed without the authors’ approval of the edited proofs.

Most read articles by the same author(s)