A cultural framework for Indigenous, Local, and Science knowledge systems in ecology and natural resource management

Abstract

The relationship between Indigenous, Local, and Science knowledge systems has been the subject of much debate over the past few decades, especially in ecology and natural resource management. In this monograph, we review available scholarship to develop a pragmatic framework for representation of knowledge systems in general, with specific emphasis on productive engagement between individuals from different communities and cultures. We distill operational definitions/explanations of fundamental concepts associated with data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. With these concepts clarified, we reconsider previous applications of sociocultural knowledge system thinking, focusing on system structure and function. Our analysis leads to convergence on a set of fundamental knowledge system processes and actor roles that have emerged repeatedly across many of the scholarly disciplines. We embed these key concepts within a general framework for operational characterization of sociocultural knowledge systems. In order to demonstrate existing and potential applications of the knowledge system framework, we present and discuss major trends in recent ecology and natural resource management literature. Finally, we propose that continued and collaborative development of this general framework can serve as a pragmatic tool for individuals from Indigenous, Local, and Science knowledge systems who wish to engage in reciprocal and meaningful dialogue with members of other knowledge systems, especially regarding the highly uncertain global future of ecology and natural resource management.

Rethinking individual relationships with entities of nature

“…Approaches to human–nature relationships progressively recognize the importance of local context for equity issues related to NCP impacts or policies and decision‐making regulating human behaviour towards nature (Ellis et al., 2019; Fletcher & Toncheva, 2021; Martín‐López et al., 2020). Stakeholder participation, place‐ and community‐based approaches, co‐management of areas and resources, co‐production of knowledge and the integration of indigenous and local knowledge have gained traction (Armitage et al., 2020; Balvanera, Daw, et al., 2017; Colloff et al., 2017; Varghese & Crawford, 2021); and NCP assessments increasingly integrate a context‐specific perspective (Hill et al., 2021). The IREN framework aims to encourage approaches that additionally take variation between individuals within local contexts into account.…”

Review: biological engineering for nature-based climate solutions

“…We need to incorporate perspectives on the landscape—and on perceived solutions—from indigenous and other under-represented groups. There are landscape management and sustainability lessons to be learned from women [ 111 ], indigenous peoples [ 112 , 113 ], and historically marginalized racial groups [ 114 ]. These communities must be incorporated into implementation plans, ensuring fair access to incentive programs and feedback on the co-benefits and negative effects of land management changes [ 115 ].…”

Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management

“…(2016) argue that scientists are not compromised when they transparently evaluate policies or recommendations for their consistency with the best available science, its weight of evidence, and any associated uncertainties. A systematic evaluation of best available science would include careful examination of Indigenous and western data, information, knowledge, and wisdom from a variety of locally and regionally relevant sources (Varghese and Crawford 2020). Garrard et al.…”