SUBJECT: The role of indigenous knowledge in biodiversity conservation.
AUTHOR: Sandra Bell
DATE: 8th April 2003

KEYWORDS: Perception of nature, indigenous knowledge, participation, decision-making.

SUMMARY: The author discusses the various meanings of nature for human beings, the influence of culture in determining those values and the role of indigenous knowledge (IK) in the resolution of conflicts that arise around natural resources.

Contributions in the first session wandered into the territory of the meanings that nature holds for human beings. This seems to suggest that without a more refined understanding of those meanings we cannot expect to move beyond the old conservationist model of preserving nature in reserves. John Hucheson points out that reserves are not the solution.

We must realise that Wilson's ideas, raised by Allan Watt, are two-edged. In the book Wilson edited with Kellert, The Biophillia Hypothesis, there are explorations of how human beings can also react with deep-seated aversion to certain species, as anyone who has tried to campaign for people to care more about reptiles will avow.

Peoples' ideas, knowledge and feelings about nature are mediated directly through experience and also indirectly through social interaction. In such ways the meanings generated around nature are formulated in cultural values and representations. These may be altered by historical circumstance, are susceptible to political manipulation and often tied to resource management and distribution. Conflicts tend to arise around natural resources and these conflicts can be between opposing groups of people or between humans and other species.

Anthropologists, archaeologists and historians have demonstrated the variety of ways in which different human societies at different eras have perceived and related to nature. The scientific model that has come to dominate as a basis for decision making within nation states is counted as one model among many that survive, evolve and overlap in the modern world. Those who are not familiar with the scientific paradigm, or who also participate in different forms of knowledge and ideas about nature, may resist or be confused by the assumptions and regulations that arise from it.

Over the past few years there has been a move to attempt to resolve some of the problems inherent in this situation by recognising the importance of what is often referred to as indigenous knowledge - IK. (There is in fact a dispute about terminology that does not need to detain us here). A key issue in this work is the facilitation of meaningful communication and a realisation that more effective participation in solving problems can only be achieved with awareness of socio-cultural barriers in both directions. It is often the case that individual scientists demonstrate a keen appreciation of IK, but it remains unacknowledged at the institutional level.

Awareness of these issues is however only the beginning. While acknowledgment of the significance of IK is essential for successful conservation initiatives, it is not an easy option. Prof Paul Sillitoe, who has published extensively on the topic, points to the specificity of IK, which makes it difficult to work with against the generalisations that inform national or international policy or practice. IK is not static and is subject to continuous negotiation by stakeholders. IK is diffuse and conveyed piecemeal in everyday life; there is often no absolute consensus among local people equivalent to textbook knowledge. Finally, in depth research into IK requires a long-term commitment and can be expensive, although it depends more on a sufficiency of field workers than expensive equipment.

Despite these difficulties it is important that more IK research be carried out alongside action research that seeks to combine IK with enabling local people to set the research agenda and to participate in its unfolding. Both scientists and social scientists should be involved in order to integrate IK into an inter-disciplinary framework. The ethnographic record shows that people are frequently quite flexible and capable of moving between different paradigms according to circumstances, or even explaining one paradigm in terms of another. I show students a film where an agricultural extension officer from the Trobiand Islands describes Trobiand garden magic as "like western fertiliser". This is clearly more obvious to a Trobiand Islander, but it takes only a little empathy to enter the circle of understanding.

A contribution by:

Sandra Bell
Durham University
Department of Anthropology
43 Old Elvet
Durham DH1 3HN, UK