Contributions of Indigenous Knowledge to ecological and evolutionary understanding

Abstract

Indigenous Knowledge (IK) is the collective term to represent the many place‐based knowledges accumulated across generations within myriad specific cultural contexts. Despite its millennia‐long and continued application by Indigenous peoples to environmental management, non‐Indigenous “Western” scientific research and management have only recently considered IK. We use detailed and diverse examples to highlight how IK is increasingly incorporated in research programs, enhancing understanding of – and contributing novel insight into – ecology and evolution, as well as physiology and applied ecology (that is, management). The varied contributions of IK stem from long periods of observation, interaction, and experimentation with species, ecosystems, and ecosystem processes. Despite commonalities between IK and science, we outline the ethical duty required by scientists when working with IK holders. Given past and present injustice, respecting self‐determination of Indigenous peoples is a necessary condition to support mutually beneficial research processes and outcomes.

Current Trends and Issues in Research on Biodiversity Conservation and Tourism Sustainability

“…The gap between the PA managers' perception and professional monitoring results comes from missing reference situations for the species and habitats, making any inter-temporal and inter-spatial comparison complicated. Therefore, we need rigid accuracy testing rules and solid reference baselines for the data inputs from 'citizen science' since any misjudgment about species, or habitat change can lead to inadequate management response [47][48][49][50][51][52].…”

Indigenous peoples as sentinels of change in human‐wildlife relationships: Conservation status of mountain goats in Kitasoo Xai'xais territory and beyond

“…Many Indigenous peoples had—and often maintain to this day—well‐developed governance models that inform wildlife stewardship. Millennia of continued interaction through observation, experimentation, and hunting allowed for the accumulation of knowledge that continues to facilitate management by Indigenous peoples (Atleo, 2011; Ban et al, 2017; Berkes, 2018; Berkes et al, 2000; Jessen et al, 2021). Models of Indigenous management were explicitly place‐based, which allowed detailed observations about populations at localized scales (Berkes et al, 2000; Berkes & Turner, 2006).…”

“…Models of Indigenous management were explicitly place‐based, which allowed detailed observations about populations at localized scales (Berkes et al, 2000; Berkes & Turner, 2006). Recent calls in the literature (e.g., Ban et al, 2018; Hessami et al, 2021; Jessen et al, 2021) and policies from government bodies at global (e.g., United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; UN General Assembly 2017) to regional (e.g., Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission; Environics Research Group 2008) scales encourage or mandate increased consideration of local ecological knowledge (LEK) and Indigenous Knowledge (IK) in natural resource management. Incorporating Indigenous perspectives can enhance wildlife management (Ban et al, 2018; Reid et al, 2020), especially for species for which centralized management agencies have logistical or financial challenges to detect and respond to changes in the abundance, distribution, or other dimensions of population health.…”

Exploring the relevance of engaging the Orang Asli in Malaysia’s forest management

“…The compatibility of local and indigenous peoples' knowledge and ways of life with the conservation of ecosystems and natural resource management has been recorded in many parts of the world (Joa et al, 2018;Abas et al, 2022;Jessen et al, 2022). As the environment is progressively being understood as a complex social-ecological system, such compatibility calls for more inclusive management, in which local and indigenous people are deemed capable of contributing to more desirable management in the face of unprecedented global change and uncertainty (Ban et al, 2018;Molnár and Babai, 2021;Ullah et al, 2021;Jessen et al, 2022).…”

“…The compatibility of local and indigenous peoples' knowledge and ways of life with the conservation of ecosystems and natural resource management has been recorded in many parts of the world (Joa et al, 2018;Abas et al, 2022;Jessen et al, 2022). As the environment is progressively being understood as a complex social-ecological system, such compatibility calls for more inclusive management, in which local and indigenous people are deemed capable of contributing to more desirable management in the face of unprecedented global change and uncertainty (Ban et al, 2018;Molnár and Babai, 2021;Ullah et al, 2021;Jessen et al, 2022). Local and indigenous people who were previously overlooked and excluded in the conventional management of the environment are increasingly being considered meaningful stakeholders, offering an alternative set of Diansyah et al 10.3389/ffgc.2022.1019994 management to the table with the traditional ecological knowledge and values that are embedded in their worldviews (Berkes, 2012;Molnár and Babai, 2021).…”