Meaningful Learning for Resilience-building among Mongolian Pastoralists

Abstract

Two pairs of herding communities with and without formal communitybased rangeland management experience were studied to understand how the resilience of pastoral communities is infl uenced by their ability to combine different knowledge types for learning. The two types o f communities differed in number, use and integration of existing knowledge types. Challenges in knowledge integration for learning occur when outside knowledge carriers present their information to herders without relating it to prior knowledge systems. When they establish trusted relationships and meaningful communication with herders, oneway knowledge exchanges are avoided, stimulating equitable, inclusive and durable integration of various knowledge systems essential for social-ecological resilience building.

Local knowledge production, transmission, and the importance of village leaders in a network of Tibetan pastoralists coping with environmental change

“…However, in spite of problems with any single interviewee's recall accuracy, people who were named the Ecology and Society 21(1): 25 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol21/iss1/art25/ most frequently across all interviews are likely to be the people who were most sought out in the network in reality (Bernard et al 1982). This tendency to consult with local leaders about environmental concerns has also been reported by Mongolian pastoralists seeking ways to cope with change (Baival and Fernández-Giménez 2012).…”

“…Each of these leaders talked about ways in which they could manage the rangeland more adaptively to alleviate the stress felt by villagers, though their ability to do so is constrained by the management parameters imposed by higher levels of government. In Tibet and elsewhere, open communication between villagers and leaders who bridge administrative levels could therefore be a useful strategy for creating adaptive solutions to the environmental problems that communities face (Reid et al 2009, Baival and Fernández-Giménez 2012, Naess 2013. However, for substantive adaptations to be possible, it is also imperative that administrators beyond the local level are receptive to LEK from village leaders and other local-level stakeholders (Fu et al 2012).…”

“…Local ecological knowledge is acquired through personal observations and experiences, but it is also transmitted through social networks, including learning from elders (Reyes-García et al 2009), participation in natural resource management institutions (Fernández-Giménez 2000), and discussion with peers (Baival and Fernández-Giménez 2012). Variation in individuals' LEK is therefore explained not only by their livelihood practices and personal characteristics Bodin 2006, Klein et al 2014), but also by their ability to access information through their relationships to others (Atran et al 2002, Hopkins 2011, Isaac et al 2014).…”

“…These networks of LEK information sharing and learning may enhance household and community resilience to the impacts of global change (Folke et al 1998, Adger 2003, Baival and Fernández-Giménez 2012. However, power dynamics, local institutions, and government policies also affect the ability of LEK to inform climate change adaptation practices, research, and policies (Smith andSharp 2012, Naess 2013).…”

The relevance of herders’ local ecological knowledge on coping with livestock losses during harsh winters in western Mongolia

“…As Berkes (1999) and Baival and Fernandez-Gimenez (2012) reasoned, there is an obvious parallel between resource management strategies based on local ecological knowledge and 'modern' adaptive resources management. According to Berkes (1999), periodic crises evolving around resources use are not disproving the validity of traditional ecological knowledge but might rather lead to its revitalization.…”