IK Monitor Articles (7-3)

Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, November 1999

Contents IK Monitor (7-3) | IKDM Homepage | Suggestions to: ikdm@nuffic.nl | © copyright Nuffic-CIRAN and contributors 1999.

Column

‘Science and other systems of knowledge’:
A new impetus for indigenous knowledge from the World Conference on Science

by Douglas Nakashima and Paul de Guchteneire

As a programme specialist for UNESCO’s intersectoral Coastal Regions and Small Islands initiative, Dr Douglas Nakashima has worked among the Inuit and Eeyou (Cree) of Arctic and Subarctic Canada for more than 15 years.

Dr Paul de Guchteneire is co-ordinator of the Management of Social Transformations programme of UNESCO. He was previously director of the Steinmetz Archive for social science data in the Netherlands and President of the International Federation of Data Organizations.

From 26 June to 1 July 1999, delegates from over 150 countries participated in the World Conference on Science in Budapest, Hungary, jointly organized by UNESCO and the International Council for Science (ICSU). Through lengthy negotiations, the participants finalized the contents of two documents—the Declaration on Science and the Framework for Action—that establish priorities for science in the 21st century. Among the more contentious issues are science ethics, the funding of science through debt relief and ... indigenous knowledge.

In the session on ‘Science and other systems of knowledge’, indigenous experts and scientists explored the topic of local and traditional knowledge. The animated debate that followed these presentations raised issues of pressing concern: is indigenous knowledge ‘science’?; how to protect indigenous intellectual property; how to ensure the provision of informed consent; the threat posed by formal schooling in general, and science education in particular, etc.

‘Indigenous knowledge’ is no newcomer to international action plans and conventions. At the 1992 Earth Summit, clear reference to indigenous and local knowledge was inscribed in the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21. Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity addresses the ‘knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities’. However, the World Conference on Science (WCS) attracted different circles of actors. Here, science per se - essentially the basic and natural sciences - (1) held centre stage, while environment and conservation were one issue among many.

Perhaps for this reason, a certain unease with indigenous knowledge surfaced from time to time during the preparatory period. Some scientists expressed surprise at seeing this issue on the agenda of a World Conference on Science. Regional preparatory meetings, however, spoke out strongly in support of its inclusion. Dissenting voices were heard again during the thematic debate in Budapest, suggesting that by including ‘indigenous or traditional knowledge’ scientists might be lending a credibility which was ill-deserved.

These undercurrents, which animated discussions behind the scenes, did not impede the unanimous adoption of the Declaration and Agenda at the conference’s closing. But the polemic did not end there. The debate re-emerged later in the year at the 26th General Assembly of ICSU in Cairo (Egypt), where endorsement of WCS recommendations was a main agenda item. In plenary debates, certain delegates took exception to the phrase ‘traditional and local knowledge systems’ and expressed concern that this would open the door to anti- and pseudo-scientific approaches, such as creationism and astrology.

The concept of ‘traditional and local knowledge’ is clear to those of us who work with local communities, and the concern that creationism and astrology might fall into the same basket seems unfounded. We have often debated, however, whether this knowledge should be qualified as ‘folk’, ‘traditional’, ‘indigenous’ or ‘local’, and while we all have our preferences, no single term is completely satisfactory. For the purposes of the WCS Declaration and Agenda, a clear definition of what is and is not included is a reasonable requirement. It can be met without undue complication by giving recognition to the empirical bases of traditional and local knowledge, while respecting the cultural frameworks in which these systems are constructed.

If we dare venture into murkier waters, however, we might consider that the discomfort of these scientists gives expression to a more fundamental concern ... about the relationship between science and these other systems of knowledge, other understandings of the world. Of course, if indigenous knowledge is conceived as just another information set from which data can be extracted to plug into scientific frameworks of understanding, then we do not trouble the scientific worldview. However, this practical approach—that of the pharmaceutical industry or of conservation ecologists who validate traditional information and use it to attain pre-defined ends—may threaten the integrity of traditional knowledge systems. On the other hand, if science is seen as one knowledge system among many, then scientists must reflect on the relativity of their knowledge and their interpretations of ‘reality’. For the survival of traditional knowledge as a dynamic, living and culturally meaningful system, this debate cannot be avoided.

In response to the World Conference on Science, UNESCO will address fundamental concerns such as these with partners in Member States, while pursuing initiatives for integrating indigenous knowledge into sustainable development and poverty alleviation. Part of this effort is the expansion of the ‘Best Practices on Indigenous Knowledge’ database, jointly developed by CIRAN and UNESCO’s Management of Social Transformations (MOST) programme. These activities will be linked to others, such as pilot projects on traditional management through the Coasts and Small Islands initiative, ethnobotanical research in biosphere reserves, and intangible heritage conservation via the Culture Sector. By its very nature, indigenous knowledge is interdisciplinary, and by combining natural sciences, social sciences and culture, UNESCO can offer an integrated response to this challenging issue.

(1) As the World Conference on Science focused on the issue of 'natural sciences and technology in society', the social and human sciences played a secondary role. (back)