Cultural Studies of Science Education (2019) 14:1037–1043

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9902-0

FORUM

Place, food practices, and scientific knowledge

Katie Lynn Brkich1

Received: 11 September 2018 / Accepted: 18 October 2018 / Published online: 12 February 2019
© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Abstract
This commentary seeks to extend the discussion on place, food practices, and ancestral sci-
entific knowledge presented in Silvia Lizette Ramos de Robles’, María Guadalupe Garibay-
Chávez’, and Arturo Curiel-Ballesteros’ article, in which the authors conceive of place as
defined by the local practices related to the production and consumption of food, and con-
sider within this lens the ways in which Mexican cultural practices surrounding the prepa-
ration of local indigenous vegetation for sustenance led to the development of scientific
knowledge borne out of centuries of practical application. As someone outside of Mexican
culture, I look to understand their arguments through my own cultural lenses and consider
the importance of preserving ancestral scientific knowledge for the benefit of humanity’s
cultural heritage as a means of combatting the commercial forces of globalization.

Keywords  Ancestral scientific knowledge · Place · Globalization · Cultural identity ·

Cultural preservation

Resumen
Este comentario busca ampliar la discusión sobre el lugar, las prácticas alimentarias y el
conocimiento científico ancestral presentado en los artículos de Silvia Lizette Ramos de
Robles, María Guadalupe Garibay-Chávez y Arturo Curiel-Ballesteros, donde los autores
conciben el lugar como definido por las prácticas locales relacionadas con la producción
y el consumo de alimentos, y considerar desde este lente las formas en que las prácticas
culturales mexicanas que rodean la preparación de la vegetación autóctona local para el
sustento condujeron al desarrollo del conocimiento científico a través de siglos de aplicación
práctica. Como alguien ajeno a la cultura mexicana, busco entender sus argumentos a través
de mi propia cultura y considerar la importancia de preservar el conocimiento científico an-
cestral en beneficio del patrimonio cultural de la humanidad como un medio para combatir
las fuerzas comerciales de la globalización.

Lead Editor: Alejandro J. Gallard M.

This review essay addresses issues raised in Silvia Lizette Ramos de Robles, María Guadalupe
Garibay-Chávez, and Arturo Curiel-Ballesteros paper entitled: Identification, collection and
consumption of weeds and wild vegetables in Mexican communities: institutionalized local ancestral
indigenous knowledge as ecological literacy, place and identity. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1142​2-017-
9852-y.

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 K. L. Brkich
1038

Palabras claves  Conocimiento científico ancestral · lugar · globalización · identidad

cultural · preservación cultural

 “As American as apple pie.”

—Unknown.

The expression “As American as apple pie” is typically used by Americans to describe
things that represent things which most typify American culture both within the United
States and abroad—blue jeans, baseball, Ford pickup trucks, and rock-and-roll music, of
which Elvis Presley is the King. It must be noted here, of course, that when I say Ameri-
can, I am referring to citizens of the United States of America as a matter of course—and
not residents of the Americas, which include a beautifully diverse swath of peoples and
cultures both indigenous and exogenous to the continent. The irony regarding the expres-
sion As American as apple pie is that apples themselves are not indigenous to America—
but were “born and evolved in Central Asia’s rugged mountain terrain” (Bennett 1997, p.
2), countries which many Americans might link prejudicially and incorrectly to Al-Qaeda.
Recent phylogenetic analysis and reconstruction of Malus domestica—the apple as we
know it—shows that the fruit finds its DNA roots in Malus sieversii, the wild apple native
to the Altai mountains in southern Kazakhstan (Velasco et al. 2010). There in the moun-
tain ranges of Kazakhstan, “the wild Malus sieversii—the many-times great-grandparent of
Malus domestica, the modern domesticated apple—still flourishes” (Rupp 2014, para. 4).
The apple—along with cattle, Christianity, and various infectious diseases such as small-
pox—were brought to the Americas by white colonizers. Given that the Malus is not inher-
ently American, why then is a pie made of apples considered a quintessential American
symbol—and what does this mean for the complex nature of being an American?
Silvia Lizette Ramos de Robles, María Guadalupe Garibay-Chávez, and Arturo Curiel-
Ballesteros explore the identity of Mexican people and communities around the ideas of
places as producers of food as well as of indigenous practices related to wild vegetation.
In “Identification, collection, and consumption of wild vegetables in Mexican Commu-
nities” they consider the ways in which culture develops as a result of a people seeking
“to understand a geographical territorial space’s capacity to produce food in order to sus-
tain its human population”. By interviewing some six participants, the authors were able
to discern six indigenous archetypal plants used in local cuisine and the importance for
Mexican culture which they relay—the Nopal cactus (Genus opuntia), Common Purslane
(Portulaca oleracea), the Romerito (Suaeda diffusa), the Quelite Cenizo (Chenopodium
berlandieri Moq), the mountain sweet potato (Dioscorea remotiflora), and the husk tomato
(Physalis ixocarpa). The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organiza-
tion (2010) recognized the traditional cuisine of México as an intangible cultural herit-
age of humanity, and Ramos de Robles, Garibay-Chávez, and Curiel Ballesteros state that
this comes as a result of “Traditional cuisine serving as a cultural model that incorporates
activities related to farming crops, knowledge, practices, rituals, customs and ancestral
techniques that express the identity, importance, peculiarities and lifestyles of place. In
México, gastronomy plays a central role in our national identity” (NPN). And in this paper,
they explore the ways in which places in México are defined by the relationship they have
to the land, to the food it produces, to the ways in which they prepare and consume it, and
to the ancestral scientific knowledge passed from generation to generation—all contribut-
ing to the development and continuation of localized cultures.

13
Place, food practices, and scientific knowledge 1039

I find their reading of place to be a compelling interpretation of the notion extending

beyond mere physical locality. David Sobel (2004), in his treatment of place-based educa-
tion (PBE) defines the process as “using the local community and environment as a starting
point to teach concepts in language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, and other
subjects across the curriculum, emphasizing hands-on, real-world learning experiences”
(p. 7). Ramos de Robles’ and associates’ focus on local Mexican communities of people—
bound at the level of the extended family—and indigenous vegetation harvested as food,
coupled with a rich oral tradition showcases the transmission of scientific knowledge borne
out of hundreds of years of experience. These centuries of scientific experiences include
longitudinal observations, experimentation and a deep-rooted connection with nature.
By interviewing them on their families’ histories and presenting these as vignettes con-
nected to indigenous vegetation consumption practices, Ramos de Robles and associates
“immerse themselves in the interviews… so that they can begin to uncover patterns and
develop social or historical generalizations” (Shopes 2006, p. 261). Because community
“refers to a shared social identity” (ibid.)—frequently bound by place—Ramos de Robles’
and associates’ examination provide for an engaging and culturally meaningful exploration
of “the intersection of voice and provenance” (Shopes 2006, p. 262) regarding the trans-
mission of ancestral indigenous scientific knowledge in a broad and rich culture of which
they are all a part. And while much of the PBE literature focuses on improving the teaching
of science by preparing teachers to be “local experts” and “cultural translators” (Aiken-
head, Calabrese Barton, & Chinn, 2006, pp. 408, 413), Ramos de Robles’ and associates’
work could be used to make a compelling case arguing that place-based science education
also serve as a means of preserving local cultural traditions and funds of ancestral scientific
knowledge at risk of disappearing. One of their respondents marked it quite succinctly:
“People have stopped eating many plants we used to eat and it is possible that in the future,
this knowledge will be lost” (Miguel C., Colima, México). Finding ways to secure these
funds of ancestral scientific knowledge should be a concern of those interested in the cul-
tural study of science education.
Because the authors conceptualize and examine place specifically as practices related to
the production and consumption of food—and because the regions and the people whom
they interviewed discussed significant indigenous vegetation and its role in sustaining local
cultures—it made me think reflexively on my experiences as a white English-speaking
native-born citizen of the United States of America, and how these experiences in turn
made me think of what constitutes cultural foods. Exposure to foreign cultures—if not
treated superficially or ethnocentrically in social studies classes—is generally reserved
in American schools to International Day events or Culture Fairs in which these “rituals
of inclusion” (Sanjek 1998, p. 332) typically present students with foods stereotypically
associated with the presented cultures. Ramos de Robles’ and associates’ work made me
consider some of my heretofore unexamined preconceptions of Mexican culture, because
the foods they discussed are not the foods I would have previously identified as Mexican.
Instead, my experiences provided only the points of reference to which I had been exposed,
either by the International Fairs of my schooling or American popular culture—enchila-
das, tamales, burritos, guacamole, et cetera—which fail to capture the breadth and rich-
ness of local Mexican culinary traditions, all while bastardizing and commodifying Mexi-
can culture for globalized mass market consumption. Similar comparisons can be drawn
to the vast dispersion of Chinese restaurants in the United States—some 41,000 of them
nationwide, more than three times the number of McDonald’s franchises (Parham 2013)—
to the point that Chinese food in America has in many ways been reduced to General Tao’s
chicken, sweet and sour pork, and lo mein, with authentic traditional menu items such as

13
 K. L. Brkich
1040

jellyfish, sea cucumbers, and phoenix claws substantially harder to find. In a TED Talk
by Jennifer 8. Lee (2008) she notes that chop suey, in particular, is frequently considered
the “granddaddy of all the Chinese American dishes”—and was invented as “the biggest
culinary joke one culture ever played on another” as something which could “ ‘pass’ as
Chinese” and be marketed to a broader American audience for profit. The dish’s name,
after all, when translated to Chinese and back means “this and that”, “which is sort of like
a Japanese guy coming here (the United States) and saying, ”I understand you have a very
popular dish in your country called ‘leftovers’.”
Ultimately, this gross juxtaposition between Chinese food and Chinese American food
prompted me to wonder whether Ramos de Robles’ and associates’ argument on place and
practices regarding the production and consumption of food could be extended to consider
the ways in which place as a concept itself need not be bounded by locality but rather by the
culture of the members of the community occupying a series of spaces. Yoonmee Chang
(2010) argues that ethnic enclaves can be “turned into spaces of positive and productive
culture—they are turned into cultural communities” (p. 11) geographically separate both
from their cultural homeland and from each other. Chinatown in San Francisco bears some
local distinctiveness compared to Chinatown in Montreal or Washington, DC, but never-
theless each provides a more representative reproduction of Chinese culture than found in
a Panda Express or PF Chang’s. Because food “plays various roles in our daily life, beliefs,
and socioeconomics” and because immigrants “will continue keeping their traditional eat-
ing habit, taste, and cooking methods” (Ma 2015, pp. 195–196), ethnic enclaves represent
places not bounded by locality but rather by the culture of the members of the community
occupying those spaces. In these ethnic enclaves—the Chinatowns of San Francisco, Mon-
treal, and Washington, DC—retention of traditional Chinese culture, including ancestral
scientific knowledge such as traditional Chinese medicine is able to persist (National Insti-
tutes of Health 2013). Ramos de Robles’ and associates’ position on the nature of place
as it relates to practices regarding the production and consumption of food can thus be
extended. In their paper, they consider the importance of multigenerational transmission
relating to the production and consumption of natural vegetation and also consider the
application of this natural vegetation to varied medical purposes; for example, the Nopal
cactus “is also used for therapeutic purposes in traditional and alternative medicine, in the
treatment of diarrhea, vomiting, and diabetes, as it has been found that the consumption
of cactus decreases levels of glucose in blood” (López-Romero et al. 2014, as referenced
in de Robles et al. this issue). Additionally, Ramos de Robles and associates reference the
value of the mountain sweet potato in the production of hormonal treatments for women by
the pharmaceutical industries. Consequently, the relationship between place and practices
related to the production and consumption of food can have tremendous importance when
considering the impact of ancestral scientific knowledge and its applications in the practice
of medicine.
For much of human history, there was a straightforward sense that what one ate was
an indicator of one’s identity. Eighteenth-century French essayist and gastronome Jean
Anthelme Brillat-Savarin (1825) wrote shortly before his death, “Dis-moi ce que tu
manges: je te dirai ce que tu es”—or, Tell me what you eat and I will tell you what you
are. While there was frequent trade between the nation-states of the early nineteenth
century, most foodstuffs were so easily perishable that people generally ate what was
grown or raised local to their homes. Consequently, what they ate was heavily influ-
enced by their geographical location. If there was something unique about the products
or recipes of a region, especially if that food was unavailable elsewhere, then one’s food
preferences inevitably indicated one’s origins. However, in today’s  day and age—with

13
Place, food practices, and scientific knowledge 1041

increasing globalization and the migration of peoples, along with the invention of
refrigeration and improved use of engineered preservatives—food preference is not nec-
essarily as strongly tied to geographical identity as it once was:
When everyday or ritualistic foods are taken out of their original context, they are
manipulated, taking on new interpretations. Not only does the movement of these
foods manipulate their use and meaning, but it also impacts their ability to act as
vehicles for identity. These manipulations and alterations can be seen within the
culture of origin as well as the recipient culture. (Shaw, Mayers, Goltz, & Astulfi
2014, para. 6)
The cultural risk inherent to globalization is that in the process of modifying other
cultures—and being modified by them in turn—is that something is lost. The partic-
ipants in Ramos de Robles’ and associates’ study voiced their concerns, as members
of their generation increasingly forsook ancestral practices regarding the production
and consumption of indigenous vegetation in favor of globally sourced foodstuffs. And
while in some regards these practices, “whose origins are ancient and indigenous, have
prevailed in our time and in México because they have been incorporated into an indi-
vidual and collective identity which has allowed their permanence in the face of capi-
talist globalization forces” (Ramos de Robles et al.), the cultural threat is nevertheless
present—and the risk real.
This risk was highlighted for me as I struggled initially to relate to the study done by
Ramos de Robles and associates. Inspired by the centrally cultural nature of their argument
on place, its connection to practices regarding the production and consumption of food,
and how tightly interwoven these practices are in Mexico’s national identity, I struggled to
find and identify with what would be my American counterpart. Dwight and Lynn Furrow
(2015) argue perhaps that this is because one simply doesn’t exist:
A national identity based on food would require traditions more grounded in the rela-
tively constant rhythms of everyday life that knit the various aspects of life into a
whole. When we look at the popular forms of food practices and preferences that cir-
culate in the media and in the everyday life of Americans, they are all over the map,
so diverse and divergent that it is difficult to pick out a pattern that we could point to
as distinctly American and that symbolizes belonging to the nation. (para. 8)
Perhaps with the exception of the Thanksgiving feast—and even this varies substantively
from corner to corner in the United States—it seems that all of America’s culinary tradi-
tions are borrowed or colonized. And so we come full circle to Malus domestica—the apple,
which Rebecca Rupp (2014) calls “a victim of [its] own genetic creativity, a characteristic
known to botanists as extreme heterozygosity” (para. 6), which causes for an apple’s seeds to
bear no genetic resemblance to the tree which bore it. While providing for an evolutionarily
robust fruit suited ideally to changes within the local environment, it can bring substantive
frustrations to cultivators “intent on preserving selected favorites… [with] the only guarantee
of reproducibility [being] grafting, which is how our modern eating apples are propagated”
(ibid.). Analogously to their arguments on place and on ancestral practices pertaining to the
production and consumption of indigenous vegetation, those concerned with the preservation
of ancestral scientific knowledge borne out of hundreds of years of pragmatic application (see
esp. Turnbull 2000)—in light of the encroachments of Western bench science—have work
to do in grafting these valued traditions to ensure their survival. Recognition by UNESCO
(2010) of Mexico’s traditional cuisine as part of the intangible cultural heritage of humanity
is a start in ensuring the scientific value of these contributions are not lost to the centuries, but

13
 K. L. Brkich
1042

as science educators focused on the importance of place and culture in education (e.g., Brkich
2014) we must do more.

References
Aikenhead, G. S., Calabrese Barton, A., & Chinn, P. W. U. (2006). Forum: Towards a politics of place-based
science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 403–416. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1142​
2-006-9015-z.
Bennett, A. R. (1997). Many rewards from international cooperation. Agricultural Research, 45(9), 2.
Brillat-Savarin, J. A. (1825). Physiologie du goût, ou méditations de gastronomie transcendante. Paris: FR:
Sautelet.
Brkich, K. L. (2014). Urban fifth graders’ connections-making between formal earth science content and their
lived experiences. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, 141–164. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1142​
2-013-9505-8.
Chang, Y. (2010). Writing the ghetto: Class, authorship, and the Asian American ethnic enclave. New Brun-
swick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Furrow, D., & Furrow, L. (2015). Nationalism and food: Do Americans have a food identity? Retrieved from
https​://fooda​ndwin​eaest​hetic​s.com/2015/01/14/natio​nalis​m-and-food-do-ameri​cans-have-a-food-ident​ity/.
López-Romero, P., Pichardo-Ontiveros, E., Avila-Nava, A., Vázquez-Manjarrez, N., Tovar, A. R., Pedraza-
Chaverri, J., et al. (2014). The effect of Nopal (Opuntia ficus indica) on postprandial blood glucose, incre-
tins, and antioxidant activity in Mexican patients with Type 2 diabetes after consumption of two different
composition breakfasts. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(11), 1811–1818. https​://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.06.352.
Ma, G. (2015). Food, eating behavior, and culture in Chinese society. Journal of Ethnic Foods, 2(4), 195–199.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2015.11.004.
National Institutes of Health. (2013). Traditional Chinese medicine: In depth (D428). Retrieved from Washing-
ton, DC: https​://nccih​.nih.gov/healt​h/whati​scam/chine​semed​.htm.
Parham, K. (2013). The best Chinese restaurants in America. Retrieved from https​://www.huffi​ngton​post.com/
trave​l-leisu​re/best-chine​se-resta​urant​s-_b_26386​14.html.
Rupp, R. (2014). The history of the “forbidden fruit”. National Geographic. Retrieved from http://thepl​ate.natio​
nalge​ograp​hic.com/2014/07/22/histo​ry-of-apple​s/.
Sanjek, R. (1998). The future of us all: Race and neighborhood politics in New York City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
Shaw, S., Mayers, D. J., Goltz, G., & Astulfi, L. (2014). An introduction to Food & Identity: From the Everyday
to Ritual and Beyond. Retrieved from https​://fooda​ndide​nity.wordp​ress.com/.
Shopes, L. (2006). Oral history and the study of communities: Problems, paradoxes, and possibilities. In R.
Perks & A. Thomson (Eds.), The oral history reader (2nd ed., pp. 261–270). New York: Routledge.
Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. Great Barrington, MA: The
Orion Society.
Turnbull, D. (2000). Masons, tricksters and cartographers: Comparative studies in the sociology of scientific
and indigenous knowledge. London: Taylor & Francis. https​://doi.org/10.4324/97802​03304​58.
UNESCO. (2010). Traditional Mexican cuisine–ancestral, ongoing community culture, the Michoacán para-
digm: Nomination File 00400 for Inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
of Humanity. Retrieved from https​://ich.unesc​o.org/en/RL/tradi​tiona​l-mexic​an-cuisi​ne-ances​tral-ongoi​ng-
commu​nity-cultu​re-the-micho​acan-parad​igm-00400​.
Velasco, R., Zharkikh, A., Affourtit, J., Dhingra, A., Cestaro, A., Kalyanaraman, A., et al. (2010). The genome
of the domesticated apple (Malux x domestica Borkh.). Nature Genetics, 42, 833–839. https​://doi.
org/10.1038/ng.654.

Katie Lynn Brkich  is an Associate Professor of Elementary Science Education at Georgia Southern Univer-
sity and is the Program Coordinator of the Master’s of Elementary Education. Her research interests focus
on social justice, place-based education, contextual mitigating factors, and the cultural studies of science
education.

13
Place, food practices, and scientific knowledge 1043

Affiliations

Katie Lynn Brkich1

* Katie Lynn Brkich

kbrkich@georgiasouthern.edu
1
Georgia Southern University, PO Box 8134, Statesboro, GA, USA

13