Introduction
Many terms and definitions exist for what we call
Traditional Knowledge (TK) in our semester project, among them
are Indigenous Knowledge, Local Knowledge or
Farmers’ Knowledge. Each of them are addressing
different aspects (El Beer, 2007) but are also often used
interchangeably (Nakata, 2002). Yet, no common definition on which we
could base our work is available, thus we see the need to suggest our
own. Our aim is not to create an universal definition of TK
but to incorporate many of its different connotations in order to
form a sound description on we can base our work and which may also
lead to a substitution of the term Traditional Knowledge by a
more suitable one. For convenience reason we use the term Traditional
Knowledge (TK) as a synonym for the afro mentioned terms
in the course of our definition finding.
According to Antweiler(1996) in its original sense
indigenous referred to local or folk while
knowledge was referred to informal knowledge. When TK
became increasingly interesting
for scholars and development agents between the 1960’s and
1970’s, indigenous culture shifted towards an opposition to western
culture. Nowadays, TK is often considered as non-western or
anti-western knowledge and is not used solely descriptive and value
neutral any more.
The following connotations are used for the various terms of non-western knowledge. This selection includes some of the terms we were encountering frequently:
- indigenous knowledge: culturally integrated knowledge; knowledge of small, marginal/non-Western groups
- endogenous knowledge: of internal origin, as opposed to exogenous or external knowledge
- local knowledge: knowledge rooted in local or regional culture and ecology
- traditional knowledge: handed down, old, oral; implying static, low level of change
Source: Local Knowledge and Local Knowing: An Anthropological Analysis of Contested "Cultural Products" in the Context of Development (Antweiler, 1996)
Since the late 1960, many terms were introduced for non-western knowledge (Antweiler, 1996). Among them: indigenous knowledge, endogenous knowledge, native knowledge, local knowledge, sustainable knowledge, traditional knowledge, people’s knowledge, folk knowledge, farmers’ knowledge or science of the concrete.
The active participation of indigenous peoples in national and international development processes presents an indispensable potential for broad-based realisation of political, civil, economic, social and cultural human rights. It facilitates the enhancement of social cohesion, the harnessing of the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples for sustainable development, and the strengthening of the fragile legitimacy of democratic institutions in Latin America.
Source: The GTZ Coordination Office for Indigenous Peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean http://www.gtz.de/en/weltweit/lateinamerika-karibik/regionale-themen/14300.htm
As there exist this great variety of views of TK,
a real comprehension of TK is necessary for our semester
project and for any kind of (development) project in general. It will
affect the way a project is established and planned and how TK is
integrated (El Beer, 2007). In public and multilateral development
agencies such as the BMZ,
GTZ, Worldbank
or UNESCO it
can be observed that TK is
used as a new paradigm in order raise acceptance and
sustainability of their projects by incorporating local resources (El
Beer, 2007).
Perceptions of TK
Terms like Traditional or Indigenous
Knowledge are not value neutral per se (El Beer, 2007),
thus already implying a certain character and appraisal of that
knowledge. They are formed from a western point of view according to
the western perception of indigenous or traditional
(people). In doing so, traditional or indigenous
people and knowledge are often
seen either as anachronistic , outdated, static in nature with little
adjustments over time (Antweiler, 1996) or are idealized (El Beer,
2007). This polarized view leads to different approaches of utilizing
and valuing TK .
In a so called eco-romantic approach, TK
is denoted as unique, locally adjusted, sustainable, holistic and
equitable, used by indigenous people living as one with nature (El
Beer, 2007) and represents the solution to all problems, in contrast
to western science which is considered destructive in its nature.
This approach doesn’t take into account that local knowledge can also
include for example the knowledge about the benefits of exploiting
natural resources (Antweiler, 1996), thus it is not solely used in
favour for the local community or the ecosystem but can be
non-sustainable and of destructive nature as well (Zwahlen, 1996
cited in Grenier, 1998).
In contrast, a positivist approach denies any
usability of TK as it is considered as antagonistic and
inhibiting development and is the reason for poverty and
underdevelopment of its carriers. Their knowledge doesn’t comply to
the standards of western science which is considered universally
valid (El Beer, 2007). Additionally, TK is also perceived as
static knowledge that doesn’t develop over time which stigmtize it as
outdated (Altweiler, 1996).
A third position is pragmatically incorporating TK
but still considers western scientific knowledge as superior to TK.
TK serves as a supplement where suitable but is classified and
recorded according to western science standards which leads to the
separation of the knowledge from its carriers (El Beer, 2007).
These different perceptions and approaches (from a
western point of view) exhibit several contradictions and lead to
misconception and misuse of TK.
On the one hand, agents who want to use TK
for their own purposes define what accounts as suitable knowledge and
what not and who has access to that knowledge. This behaviour
exhibits power structures that allows the agent to control which
knowledge is accepted and accessed by whom (El Beer, 2007) even if TK
often considered beneficial for participatory approaches in
development projects in order to raise acceptance among the affected
people.
On the other hand, TK is usually not equally
distributed over the members of a community. There exist interest
groups that possess a certain knowledge due to their position within
the community. Further on, knowledge may be possessed by only one
gender, men or women, and is usually also unequally distributed
between the young and the old (Antweiler, 1996). Therefore, TK
is not social equitable just by definition and doesn’t always
represent the knowledge of a homogeneous community (El Beer, 2007).
It is thus important to understand the social, cultural and economic
context in which this knowledge is existing (Antweiler, 1996) and
their application domains.
TK and western science
TK is applied by its carriers
in a great variety of domains and materializes in social
and environmental, legal, technical and
medical contexts.
Therefore, TK may not be considered solely as a traditional
form of knowledge but a whole knowledge system (Antweiler, 1996)
which consists of declarative and procedural knowledge.
Declarative knowledge consists of facts about the local or
regional social and natural environment (i.e. weather, plants, market
prices of goods) and more complex categorical descriptions of
occurrences in the environment (i.e. categories of organisms,
colours). Procedural knowledge represents general and specific
processes and rules (i.e. calendars, cycles, everyday routines) and
complex systems of knowledge which consists of interlinked elements
and concepts and doesn’t represent just a simple aggregation of
individual and non-related elements (i.e. belief systems, models of
justice) (Antweiler, 1996).
Possible domains of applications mainly structured according to well known and investigated areas (Antweiler, 1996):
- environmental knowledge (environmental cognition), which includes
- knowledge on the natural environment, i.e. plants, animals, natural disasters, ecosystems
- knowledge on the anthropogenical modified environment, i.e. risks, management of tropical soils, agro-ecological knowledge
- knowledge on the social and political environment, i.e. neighbourhood groups, structures of the dominant group, development projects
- agricultural knowledge
- medical knowledge, health knowledge, diagnosis and therapy
- indigenous technical knowledge (ITK)
- organisational and management knowledge including knowledge of conflict management (so called legal knowledge)
- knowledge on persons, structures and relationships within the own society (social cognition)
Source: Local Knowledge and Local Knowing: An Anthropological Analysis of Contested "Cultural Products" in the Context of Development (Antweiler, 1996).
Development
projects and scientific research often doesn’t consider TK as
an independent knowledge system, based on different concepts than
western science. As already mentioned above, TK is
often re-interpreted according to specific needs of development
agents or scholars. In some case it is just another tool that extends
the repository of solutions mainly based on western science or
it is considered as the sole alternative to western science. In
neither case, TK is considered in its entirety and an
artificial barrier is constructed which enforce an exclusiveness of
only one of the different systems. According to that perception,
there could only exist either TK or western science,
but not both of them equitable at the same time.
(Added 14.09.2009) Another
issue is “that by accepting that there is a legitimate indigenous
knowledge as a viable alternative to western scientific knowledge in
particular locational contexts, the authority of external knowledge
providers is seriously threatened” (Briggs J. 2005). Therefore
research on TK has been activly discuraged by some researchers
and TK has been pictured as obstacles to development (Briggs
J. 2005).
But both knowledge
systems, TK and (western) science, are complementary
(vom Liebstein, 2002 cited in Agrawal, 1995) and the attempt to
separate them cannot succeed because they rely basically on the same
principles (Antweiler, 1996), even if their historic background and
certain characteristics differ (Agrawal, 1995). Gaining knowledge is
based in both systems on empirical observations and follow certain
methodologies. Both systems use for example experiments in order to
create knowledge, trial and error experiments in case of TK,
controlled experiments in case of (western) science
(Antweiler, 1996).
Only their aims
differs to a certain extend in theory. (Western) Science aims
towards universal validity (in the case of natural science)
which is not context bound, neither spatial nor social (Banuri and
Apffel-Marglin, 1993:11/13 cited in Antweiler, 1996), while TK
aims to find solutions for locally existing problems. TK
considers all aspects of problem and their interlinks while western
science aims to isolate a problem and reduce it to a small set of
controllable parameters (Shankar, 1996 cited in Grenier, 1998). In
practice the distinction between TK and western science
has become obsolete as Agrawal (1995) mentioned. He asks how
(natural) science can be universally applicable but
then fails at the same time to solve to the problems of the people in
large regions of the world. Nowadays, western lifestyle is clearly
driven by science (Agrawal, 1995) thus development in science
tends to provide solutions mainly for the regions of the world
where (western) science evolves. In the area of social
science, a universal applicability is often not aimed at all as
social research is often context based.
The polarisation
between both systems helps to sustain the restricted perception of
exclusively bad or good knowledge (Antweiler, 1996) and implies that
a small set of characteristics can define and divide two very complex
systems of knowing which in addition also neglects the fact that
diversity exists even within the two mentioned categories of
knowledge (Agrawal, 1995). The verification and validation of TK
according to scientific standards in order to asses validity and
suitability (Johnson, 1992 cited in Grenier, 1998) neglects the fact
that people and communities may regard their knowledge according to
their own concepts and may not even refer to their knowledge as TK:
The Dene people from northern Canada want their knowledge to be referred as "Dene Science"! (Grenier, 1998).
Storage and codification of TK
The acceptance gap between traditional and western knowledge is widened further when it comes to the conservation of TK. On the one hand, conservation and documentation of TK is necessary as TK diminishes due to pressure of modernisation. On the other hand, conservation follows the concepts of western science thus TK would then becomes prone to the same criticism because it is not embedded in its local context any more but removed from it and it is characterized according to standards of western science (Nakata, 2002). Further on, the documentation of TK follows western interest for prosperity and trade increase and transforms TK into a commodity which can be traded and value added (Nakata, 2002).
Indigenous knowledge fuels multi-billion dollar genetics supply industries, ranging from food and pharmaceuticals in developed countries to chemical product, energy and other manufactures.
Source: United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Civil Society Organizations and Participation Programme (CSOPP) ( 1995, p. 9 cited in Nakata, 2002)
In order to prevent that TK becomes
solely an additional module which can be plugged into the
framework of scientific work (Nakashima, Guchteneire, 1992 cited in
Nakata, 2002) one should let the
people that posses their knowledge decide what to do with it, let
them record and document it but in situ
(Agrawal, 1995), according to their own ideas and needs (Agrawal,
1995, Nakata, 2002) even if ex situ conservation,
the isolated documentation and storage in databases and archives, is
the most easy and convenient strategy. Ex situ
documentation will contribute to
the maintenance of a distinctive perception of TK
and scientific knowledge
(Brokensha et al., 1980; Ulluwishewa, 1993; Warren, 1989; Warren et
al., 1993 cited in Agrawal, 1995). Documentation is often not
considered as a long term process once the knowledge is codified in a
database or article. The documented knowledge is then just a snapshot
in time but with respect to its dynamic and change over time,
documented knowledge must be always adjusted by constant
feedbacks (Antweiler, 1996) from the people that posses, use and
develop their knowledge.
General properties of TK
Throughout literature, several common
characteristics of TK are
named. In addition to the popular characteristics that are referred
to by development agents, additional factors such as the importance
of the context in which knowledge resides and develops are often
mentioned by more critical definitions and description of TK.
The following points resemble the characteristics that are important
for us but which could also be used for a general description of TK:
- generated by communities where it is locally or regional embedded in the social, ecological and economical context of a culture (Antweiler, 1996)
- is unique to a given culture and society (Warren, 1991, 1993 cited in Nakata, 2002)
- orientated towards real life problems and solutions by using locally available resources (Antweiler, 1996)
- not static but dynamic, thus incorporates contemporary information and experiences, acquired on local level (Antweiler, 1996)
- based on empirical experience gained from (trail and error) experiments and observations (Antweiler, 1996)
- often incorporates long term observations of the ecological and social environment (Antweiler, 1996)
- covers knowledge of indigenous people in developing and developed nations, of migrant groups in developing or former colonized countries and everyone who relies on TK in the struggle to survive (Nakata, 2002)
- is comprehensive, systematic and methodical
- represents a knowledge system consisting of declarative and procedural knowledge (Antweiler, 1996) which is related to the spiritual and material aspects of a society (Marolo, 2002, p .1)
- is a hybrid mixture of continuously advancing local and external knowledge (Flavier, J., de Jesus, A. and Navarro, C. 1995 cited in Nakata, 2002)
- often handed over in oral form, thus it is stored in human beings, in their routine practices but also in material objects and in written form (Antweiler, 1996)
- holistic and related to different aspects of the local community (Antweiler, 1996)
- due to its local base it is better and easier accepted by the local community (Antweiler, 1996)
- is not equally distributed within the community thus it also exhibits power structures between the ones who posses different levels of their local knowledge and their differing objectives (El Beer, 2007)
- by definition not sustainable or social just (Antweiler, 1996 and El Beer, 2007)
- is context bound and it’s transferability to other contexts is often not given or can only be done with difficulties. It has only a limited potential for generalisation (Antweiler, 1996).
- is not a replacement for other types of knowledge but is complementary to them as they are for TK (Antweiler, 1996 and von Liebenstein, 2002 cited in Nakata, 2002)
Alternative terms for TK or IK
Traditional or Indigenous Knowledge has become an umbrella term (Agrawal, 1995 and Nakata, 2002 ) which is often already preallocated with implicit assumption and preconceptions. A more suitable term could be Local Knowledge which is already used synonymously for TK and which seems to be more value neutral and applicable for a wider range of knowledge.
Reference
Christoph Antweiler, 1998. Local Knowledge and Local Knowing: An Anthropological Analysis of Contested "Cultural Products" in the Context of Development. Anthropos, 93, 469-494.
Arun Agrawal, 1995. Indigenous and scientific knowledge: some critical comments. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, 3(3).
Available at: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~arunagra/papers/IK%20Monitor%203(3)%20Agrawal.pdf
[Accessed June 5, 2009].
El Berr, S., Vom Ökoheiligen zum Umweltzerstörer und zurück: Indigenes
Wissen in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. In Von Honig und Hochschulen : dreizehn gesellschaftskritische Interventionen zehntes DoktorandInnenseminar der Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung. Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung, Manuskripte. Berlin: Karl Dietz Verlag.
Available at: http://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Manuskripte-73.pdf.
[Accessed June 6, 2009]
Banuri, T., and F. Apffel-Marglin.(eds) (1993) Who will save the forests? Knowledge, power and
environmental destruction. London, Zed Books.
Brokensha, D., D. Warren and O. Werner (eds) (1980) Indigenous knowledge systems and
development.Lanham: University Press of America.
Flavier, J., de Jesus, A. and Navarro, C. (1995). The regional program for the promotion of Indigenous knowledge in Asia. In: D. Warren, L Slikkerveer and D. Brokensha (eds.), The Cultural Dimension of Development: Indigenous knowledge systems (pp. 479-487). London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Louise Grenier, 1998. Working with indigenous knowledge : a guide for researchers.
Available at: http://www.idrc.ca/openebooks/847-3/ [Accessed June 3, 2009].
Johnson, M. 1992. Research on traditional environmental knowledge: its development and its role. In Johnson, M., ed., Lore: capturing traditional environmental knowledge. Dene Cultural Institute; International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, ON, Canada. pp. 3–22.
Morolo, T. 2002. Indigenous knowledgesystem. National Research Foundation
website [Online paper]. Retrieved July 10, 2002, from
http://www.nrf.ac.za/focusareas/iks
Nakashima, D. and de Guchteneire, P.(1999). Science and other systems of knowledge: a new impetus for Indigenous knowledge from the World Conference on Science. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor [electronic joumal], 7 (3), 1-3.
Retrieved July 10, 2002, from http://www.nuffic.nl/ciranlikdm/7-3/nakashima.html
Nakata, M., 2002. Indigenous Knowledge and the Cultural Interface: underlying issues at the
intersection of knowledge and information systems. IFLA Journal, 28(5-6), 281-291.
Shankar, D. 1996. The epistemology of the indigenous medical knowledge systems of India. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, 4(3).
Online: http://www.nufficcs.nl/ciran/ikdm/.
United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Civil Society Organisations and Participation Programme (CSOPP). (1995). Conserving Indigenous knowledge – integrating new systems of integration [online paper].
Retrieved July 10, 2002, from http://www.undp.org/csopp/CSO/NewFiles/dociknowledge.html
Von Liebenstein, G. (2000). Interfacing global and Indigenous knowledge: to wards an Indigenous knowledge information system [Online paper]. Paper presented at the 6 UNESCO-APEID the international conference on education, Bangkok Thailand, 12-15 December 2000, Bangkok
Thailand. Retrieved July 26, 2002, from http://www.developmentgateway.org/node/130646/browser/?keyword_list=233182andcountry_list=0
Ulluwishewa, R. (1993) ‘Indigenous knowledge, national IK resource centres, and sustainable development’, Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor 1(3):11-13.
Warren, D.M. (1989) ‘Linking scientific and indigenous agricultural systems’, pp. 153-170 in J.L. Compton (ed) The transformation of international agricultural research and
development. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Warren, M. (1991). Using Indigenous knowledge in agricultural development. World Bank discussion paper no. 127. Washington. DC. World Bank.
Warren, D.M., G.W. von Liebenstein and L. Slikkerveer (1993) ‘Networking for indigenous knowledge’, Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor 1(1):2-4.
Warren, M. (1993). Using Indigenous knowledge for agriculture and rural development: current issues. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor online journal], 1 (1), 1-6.
Retrieved July 25, 2002, from http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ikdm/1-1/warren.html