Including diverse knowledges and worldviews in environmental assessment and planning: the Brazilian Amazon Kaxinawá Nova Olinda Indigenous Land case

Abstract

The concepts of 'ecosystem services' (ES) and 'nature's contributions to people' (NCP) inform environmental frameworks that set out to include Indigenous and Local Knowledge systems (ILK) and worldviews in policy and planning processes. These frameworks aim to enhance biodiversity conservation and human well-being in a legitimate and effective way. In this article, we explore how the concept of People's Contributions to Nature (PCN) is complementary to NCP. We use it to investigate challenges that planners and locals face in realizing the legitimate inclusion of diverse knowledges and worldviwes that account for people and ecosystems in a relational way. We introduce a case study where planners drew on ES and NCP and used participatory methods to implement a REDD+ policy in the Kaxinawá Nova Olinda Indigenous Land (Acre-Brazil). We find that both Kaxinawás and planners emphasize both NCP and PCN in their discourses. Nevertheless, differences between knowledge systems and disciplines, uneven power relations between Kaxinawás and planners, and an underconsideration of PCN by global frameworks challenge the legitimate inclusion of the Kaxinawá knowlege and worldviews to craft assessment and planning. We conclude that by explicitly addressing these challenges, science-policy interfaces can further advance knowledge legitimacy and policy effectiveness.

The science-policy interface on ecosystems and people: challenges and opportunities

“…The world visions, knowledge, and practices of indigenous and local peoples are quickly disappearing, and the different values of nature are not fully being integrated into commodity markets and development policies (IPBES 2019;Díaz et al 2019). Matuk et al (2020) stress the need for science-policy interfaces to address the relationship between cultural values and decisions on practices that create sustainable relationships between people and nature.…”

“…This validates the idea that the 'Nature's Contributions to People' concept developed in the context of IPBES' work can accommodate a variety of values, creating spaces for exploring relational values of nature (Kadykalo et al 2020). Yet, power imbalances threaten the legitimacy of decision-making processes, as shown by Matuk et al (2020).…”

“…Bringing together natural and social scientists into science-policy processes has resulted in global issues being considered from a variety of disciplinary perspectives. For instance, the very diverse worldviews about the linkages between ecosystems and people held in different disciplines and those held by different cultures have been made more visible and understandable (Kadykalo et al 2020;Matuk et al 2020). Furthermore, thinking regarding the need for social engagement in science-policy processes at a variety of scales has grown more entrenched (Krug et al 2020;Stevance et al 2020).…”

“…Recent studies, e.g. Matuk et al (2020), as well as the IPBES assessments, demonstrate the strength of including diverse knowledges (Hill et al 2019;Schröter et al 2020), which in the past were discarded as 'opinions' of 'lay people'.…”

“…The same goes for projects or research institutions: engaging with complex problems and evaluating success based on contributions to real solutions will transform the way decisions and choices are made. Matuk et al (2020) show that the co-production of knowledge by policy practitioners of different disciplinary backgrounds with Indigenous peoples and local communities is crucial for the creation of transdisciplinary policy outcomes. In the inter-and transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge, the resulting policy processes, and options and outcomes are recognized as more legitimate and effective (i.e.…”