Revaluing Underutilized Agrobiodiversity Through a Biocultural Indigenomics Framework: Indigenomics indices

Abstract

Indigenomics is proposed as an integrative analytical framework for examining relationships between Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) and ethnobotanical resources through interconnected ecological, cultural, and socioeconomic dimensions. The framework emphasizes four key components of biocultural value: ecological integration, collective well-being, cultural sovereignty, and monetary valuation. To operationalize this approach, we developed four participatory indices: the Ecological Integration Score (EIS), the Collective Well-being Index (CWI), the Cultural Sovereignty Index (CSI), and the Monetary Value Score (MVS). These indices were combined to generate a composite Indigenomics Index (II) and an Indigenomics Value Rating (IVR), enabling comparative assessment of plant species across multiple value domains. The framework was applied to underutilized palm species in northwest Nigeria using a mixed-methods design involving 86 participants from local communities. Results indicate variation in biocultural and socioeconomic valuation across species. Native palms generally exhibited higher composite scores across ecological, cultural, and well-being dimensions. In particular, Phoenix dactylifera L. showed the highest collective well-being (CWI = 9.0) and monetary value (MVS = ₦20,578,000; USD 13,645.19), as well as full recognition of cultural sovereignty (CSI = 100%). Borassus aethiopum Mart. and Hyphaene thebaica (L.) Mart. also demonstrated strong biocultural integration, as evidenced by high II values. In contrast, introduced species (Caryota mitis Lour. and Roystonea regia O.F. Cook) consistently recorded lower scores across all indices. These findings suggest that the Indigenomics framework can support the comparative assessment of biocultural values in agrobiodiversity systems, particularly in highlighting the interconnected ecological and cultural significance of native species. Further refinement and cross-regional validation are required to assess its broader applicability in sustainable agrobiodiversity governance.