The environmental crisis raises crucial questions about the possibility of
harmony between human beings and the rest of Nature. To restore
ecological equilibrium, it has become imperative to promote an ecocentric
ethos that sees humans as a part of Nature, not apart from Nature (Mazzocchi,
2020). One fertile source for such an ethos is indigenous ecological knowledge,
which is characterized by beliefs that promote ecological equilibrium. As
profoundly important as these biocultural beliefs may be for the restoration of
a properly ecocentric relationship to other-than-human Nature, they have
remained marginalized and thus relatively unexplored.
This epistemological marginalization is the parallel of the socio-political
marginalization experienced by many indigenous peoples today. Although the
land occupied by indigenous peoples remains vital, many groups still find it
hard to secure basic rights (ICCA Consortium, 2021). For instance, 80 per cent
of the world’s biodiversity is domiciled in the 22 per cent of land inhabited by
indigenous peoples, and 70 per cent of the world’s food is produced through
traditional knowledge. Despite this clear contribution to food security and
protecting global ecosystems, indigenous peoples the world over are often
subject to oppression, discrimination, disempowerment and social exclusion.
Indigenous wisdom
Indigenous people and local communities are profoundly place-based, living
within the ecological capacities of their territories through exchange and
reciprocity. Thus, the major lesson that can be learnt from indigenous peoples
is the importance of discovering (or, perhaps, rediscovering) a biocultural
paradigm for living within ecological limits. For instance, much of the world’s
biodiversity is in the forests managed by indigenous peoples, and their wisdom
o4ers us good lessons in protecting and restoring the integrity of forest
ecosystems (Brondizio et al., 2021).
Similar lessons can be learned from indigenous wisdom with regard to soil
ecosystem integrity. Many indigenous peoples engage in no-till farming,
retention of farm residues and the cultivation of cover crops to increase carbon
density in the soil. Carbon sequestration is achieved through crop and land
rotation. The indigenous concept that the natural world is imbued with life and
is our home, rather than merely a source of ‘ecosystem services’, reinforces the
idea that restoration is a way towards an ecocentric way of life rather than
simply another tool for serving human ends (Unuigbe, 2021).
As is well known, anthropogenic climate change is a major cause of the
ecological crisis. Data from indigenous ecological knowledge can be used in
areas where there is little or no baseline environmental data. The
understanding of climate-induced changes and building climate adaptation
strategies can be enhanced by acquaintance with historic conditions
(Mafongoya and Ajayi, 2017; Cajete, 2020). This is validated by the UN report
on Climate Change and Land which emphasized the need for indigenous land
management systems and agricultural practices (ICCA Consortium, 2021).
The UN report has validated the fact that environmental decline is less severe
in places where Nature is regarded as sacred and indigenous ecological
knowledge remains a guide. This has created an opportunity for indigenous
peoples to be at the forefront of conservation initiatives. For example, the
Bambuli-Babuluko community is helping to protect one of Central Africa’s last
remaining tropical forests. In Iran, the semi-nomadic Chandegal Balouch
oversee 580,000 hectares of fragile scrublands and desert. In Canada, Inuit
leaders are working to restore caribou herds, whose numbers have been in
steep decline.
The nature of indigenous ecological knowledge
Despite the growing recognition of the relevance of indigenous ecological
knowledge, it is still often dismissed as ‘primitive’, ‘savage’ and
‘superstitious’, with policy makers and scientists claiming that it lacks
su5 cient credibility to be consulted for the purpose of helping to address the
ecological crisis, or other challenges that touch on human existence such as
food security and conflict resolution (Nepal, 2021). To effectively address this
challenge, we need to briefly examine the nature of indigenous knowledge.
The term indigenous knowledge denotes a set of practices, beliefs and
attitudes which an indigenous community has possessed over a long period of
time (centuries, or even millennia), and which has been validated through its
use and usefulness in human experience. Despite being thus deeply rooted in
the experiences of previous generations, such knowledge is also dynamic and
adapts to current technological and socioeconomic realities. Indigenous
ecological knowledge includes a system of classification, a set of empirical
observations about the local environment and, perhaps most importantly, an
ethical framework that governs relationships between human beings and the
rest of Nature. That is, indigenous ecological knowledge is not simply a set of
propositions that attempt to describe and explain the world, but is a way of life
(Maweu, 2011; Congretel and Piton, 2020).
Hence, attempts to separate indigenous ecological knowledge from its
ecocentric community worldview and integrate it into western scientific
knowledge would be a misappropriation, and a denial of its essence. In this
way, the profound contributions that indigenous ecological knowledge can
make to our understanding of ecological integrity will be missed. For this
reason, it has become imperative to promote genuinely collaborative research
that recognizes the distinctive nature of such knowledge (Maweu, 2011; Berkes
et al., 2000; Huntington, 2000).
Indigenous ecological knowledge is, of course, not a panacea for achieving
harmony with Nature. For instance, it can be fallible and subject to bias, and
should be verified when possible. Furthermore, indigenous ecological
knowledge is vulnerable to corruption resulting from the larger capitalist
economy and society, which is always keen to turn a sustainable subsistence
ecocentric economy into a for-profit exploitative anthropocentric economy.
However, rather than summarily dismissing indigenous ecological knowledge
as incorrect whenever it does not correspond with scientific research,
researchers should strive to understand the cause of the discrepancy.
Indigenous ecological knowledge and ecological policy making
An illustration of cooperation between indigenous ecological knowledge and
‘Western’ thought is provided by some Melanesian communities, where
constitutions or national legislations give recognition to customary laws.
For example, in Palau the major indigenous conservation practices were
moratoriums (buls) and taboos. The traditional chiefs, or Rubaks, had extensive
and intimate knowledge of local ecosystems, and implemented buls to ensure
that the integrity of those ecosystems was protected. For example, with their
knowledge of the spawning season of various fish species, they would
implement buls to prevent overfishing. When buls were in effect, there were
indicators to notify villagers – such as a coconut frond being placed vertically
in the soil. With regard to taboos, the people of Palau had certain foods that
were traditionally taboo to them and some of these taboos are still respected.
These taboos were rooted in a belief system, for example about how certain
foods were taboo during illnesses or pregnancies, or that certain animals
should not be hunted because they were protective spirits. Such taboos should
not be blithely rejected as ‘mere superstition’, but seen in their context as part
of a holistic ethical framework for protecting the integrity of local ecosystems.
These traditional systems for governing human interaction with the non-
human world drew their legitimacy from the vast body of ecological knowledge
gained by generations of people in intimate contact with the ecosystems they
relied upon. This grounding in shared indigenous ecological knowledge (rather
than in the esoteric knowledge of scientific experts) meant that people were
inclusively engaged in the decision making, which resulted in less conflict and
increased rule compliance.
Through the inclusion of traditional chiefs in Palau’s legislature and
government bodies, a compromise between Western and indigenous models is
being achieved. Importance is now given to building traditional knowledge into
regulations and policies. One such regulation is Palau’s Marine Protection Act
of 1994 (https://www.+a.int/system/files/Marine_Protection_Act_1994.pdf)
which incorporated traditional knowledge of spawning periods, and imposed
catch limits and seasonal closures for important fish species (see also Caillaud
et al., 2004).
The traditional Maori concept of Kaitiakitanga (roughly translatable as
‘guardianship’) is another example of how indigenous ecological knowledge
can contribute to policy formation. As part of Tikanga Maori – the intermixed
laws, knowledge and protocols ruling society – Kaitiakitanga is deeply
embedded in Maori culture. It captures the idea of having ethical
responsibilities to Nature – obligations to guard and respect the well-being of
places, species and ecosystems. To promote recognition of Maori rights and
involvement in ecosystem protection at the local level, the Kaitiakitanga concept
has been incorporated into New Zealand law. Under the Fisheries Act of 1996
(https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1996/0088/latest/DLM394192.html),
for instance, kaitiakitanga has been interpreted as “the exercise of
guardianship; and, in relation to any fisheries resources, includes the ethic of
stewardship based on the nature of the resources, as exercised by the
appropriate tangata whenua [people of the land] in accordance with tikanga
Maori” (Part 1, s. 2.1). The kaitiakitanga ensures Maori participation in the
development, establishment and management of fisheries; it also serves as a
tool for empowering Maori communities to manage and protect customary
fisheries and other local ecosystems.
Conclusion
The Earth is in the midst of an environmental crisis, brought about by self-
interested human activities. We are witnessing mass extinctions caused by
pollution, soil erosion, climate change, deforestation and desertification.
Individualistic and instrumentalist attitudes towards nature have led humans
to plunder the environment recklessly. If we are to find a comprehensive
solution to this spiralling environmental catastrophe, there is a great need to
learn from the wisdom of the world’s indigenous people, accumulated over
millennia of living sustainably within ecosystems. The indigenous ethos of a
harmonious community of human and non-human nature o4ers a necessary
ecocentric corrective to the anthropocentrism that has characterized so much
of Western ecological thought.
References
Berkes F, Colding J and Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as
adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10: 1251–62.
Brondizio E, Aumeeruddy-Thomas Y, Bates P et al. (2021) Locally based, regionally manifested
and globally relevant: Indigenous and local knowledge, values and practices for nature.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources 46: 481–509.
Caillaud A, Boengkih S, Evans-Illidge E, et al. (2004) “Tabus or not Taboos.” How to use
traditional environmental knowledge to support sustainable development of marine
resources in Melanesia. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge
Information Bulletin: 16–18.
Cajete GA (2020) Indigenous science, climate change, and indigenous community building: A
framework of foundational perspectives for indigenous community resilience and
revitalization. Sustainability 12: 9569.
Congretel M and Pinton F (2020) Local knowledge, know-how and knowledge mobilized in a
globalized world: A new approach of indigenous local ecological knowledge. People and
Nature 2: 527–543.
Huntington H (2000) Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: Methods and
applications. Ecological Applications 10: 1270–4.
ICCA Consortium (2021) Territories of Life: 2021 Report. Stockholm, Sweden. Available at
https://is.gd/iKlMuq (accessed March 2023).
Mafongoya PL and Ajayi OC (2017) Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Climate Change
Management in Africa. CTA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Maweu JM (2011) Indigenous ecological knowledge and modern western ecological
knowledge: Complementary, not contradictory. Thought and Practice 3: 35–47.
Mazzocchi F (2020) A deeper meaning of sustainability: Insights from indigenous knowledge.
The Anthropocene Review 7: 77–93.
Nepal TK (2021) An Overview of threats to traditional ecological knowledge. Quest Journals 9: 1–4.
Unuigbe N (2021) Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Global Pandemics: Biodiversity and
planetary health beyond COVID-19. Routledge, London, UK.
|
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ngozi Unuigbe is a Professor at the University of Benin, Nigeria, who has published widely
on topics on environmental law and ethics. She has been a key participant in
United Nations working groups on Human Rights and the Environment.
|
![[groups_small]](groups_small.gif)