Indigenous knowledge

From Citizendium
Revision as of 11:21, 5 February 2009 by imported>Joe Quick (first attempt to reconcile parallel articles)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.

Indigenous knowledge, (often called traditional knowledge, folk wisdom or folk knowledge) is knowledge of ecology, botany, medicine, agriculture and other fields that does not originate in academic or corporate research institutions but rather is based on local-level accumulated knowledge and is frequently inherited through tradition and culture. Indigenous knowledge is increasingly used by agencies such as the World Bank, the World Health Organization, UNESCO and the United Nations Environment Programme in the formulation of their objectives and methods for local-level projects.

Origins of indigenous knowledge

Local and culturally specific knowledge and ways of knowing arise out of the simple fact that physical and cultural environments vary a great deal across the globe. People who live in different physical environments naturally learn ecology, botany, geology, hydrology and other aspects of the environment in different ways. Similarly, divergent cultural contexts foster diverging perspectives and ways of thinking about the various fields of knowledge. As a result, the accumulated knowledge of a people living in one part of the globe frequently includes specific knowledge or perspectives that are not present in the bodies of knowledge held by groups in other places.

Indigenous knowledge incorporates an extremely broad range of topics. A report from the World Intellectual Property Organization provides a brief inventory: "Traditional knowledge systems in the fields of medicine and healing, biodiversity conservation, the environment and food and agriculture are well known. Other key components of traditional knowledge are the music, dance, and “artisanat” (i.e. designs, textiles, plastic arts, crafts, etc.) of a people."[1]

In practical usage, indigenous knowledge is usually understood to designate the culturally or locally specific knowledge of traditional peoples. It is contrasted with the "international" knowledge system that is associated with the research institutions of the West. Thus, entities such as UNESCO, WHO and the World Bank that employ indigenous knowledge as part of their organizational approach place special emphasis on local knowledge and participation in preference to top-down strategies.

Participatory development

At the turn of the twenty-first century, development strategies shifted away from generalizing holistic theories toward local-level programs focused on participation and empowerment.[2] Recent projects have therefore placed significant emphasis on incorporating local and indigenous knowledge into the planning and evaluation processes. The Department of Science and Technology in South Africa, for example, views its Indigenous Knowledge Systems Policy as "an enabling framework to stimulate and strengthen the contribution of indigenous knowledge to social and economic development."[3]

Economics

Ecology

Health

Agriculture

Education

Scientific research

Frequently in conjunction with participatory development projects, researchers in a number of fields have employed indigenous knowledge as a useful research tool. This is most prominent in the field of health, where numerous new drugs and treatments have evolved from traditional medicine, but it also takes place in agriculture, biodiversity conservation and other fields.

Epidemiology

One noted example of cooperation between experts in indigenous health knowledge and scientific methods was the identification of the cause of a 1993 outbreak, in the southwestern United States, of a rapidly fatal respiratory disease. Eventually identified as a hantavirus pulmonary syndrome,[4] identifying it involved both Navajo elders and Centers for Disease Control epidemiologists. While hantavirus had been known to medicine, being named for the Han River in South Korea, the respiratory presentation had not been described — except by Navajo tradition. [5] Detailed discussion with Navajo elders revealed that the pinon nut harvest of 1993 was especially rich, which caused overgrowth of the deer mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus, for which the pinon nut was the prime diet.[6] Navajo traditions associated mice with a disease similar to that seen in the outbreak, which has now been identified in other areas throughout the Americas.

Agriculture

Ethnobotany

Intellectual property rights

"Commoditization of knowledge by means of intellectual rights," writes Stephen Brush, "has been practiced for five hundred years, but it continues to raise numerous ethical issues."[7] With respect to indigenous knowledge, there are two major ethical issues:

  • Can/should indigenous knowledge be privatized and commoditized by outside interests?
  • Can/should life forms be privatized through patents?

Sources

  1. WIPO. 2001. Intellectual Property Needs and Expectations of Traditional Knowledge Holders. p. 211. Available online: http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/tk/ffm/report/index.html
  2. Giles Mohan and Kristian Stokke. 2000. Participatory Development and Empowerment: The Dangers of Localism. Third World Quarterly 21(2):247–268.
  3. Department of Science and Technology, South Africa. "Indigenous Knowledge Systems" Available online: http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/folklore/creative_heritage/policy/link0007.html p. 9.
  4. Special Pathogens Branch, Centers for Disease Control, Tracking a Mystery Disease: The Detailed Story of Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome
  5. Special Pathogens Branch, Centers for Disease Control, Navajo Medical Traditions and HPS
  6. Laurie Garrett (1995), The Coming Plague: Newly Emerging Diseases in a World Out of Balance, Penguin, ISBN 0140250913, p. 536
  7. Stephen B. Brush. 1993. Indigenous Knowledge of Biological Resources and Intellectual Property Rights: The Role of Anthropology. American Anthropologist 95(3): 653-671. p. 653