Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere - WBGU
Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere - WBGU
Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere - WBGU
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Conserving natural <strong>and</strong> cultural heritage E 3.5<br />
175<br />
result <strong>of</strong> droughts. In <strong>the</strong> early 1970s, drought disasters<br />
drove thous<strong>and</strong>s <strong>of</strong> Tuareg to Nigeria <strong>and</strong> Niger.<br />
Traditional cultural patterns <strong>and</strong> forms <strong>of</strong> managing<br />
natural resources <strong>the</strong>refore prove <strong>the</strong>mselves to<br />
be highly vulnerable <strong>and</strong> are increasingly jeopardized<br />
in an ever more globalized world.<br />
The 1999 World Conference on Science:<br />
Encouraging <strong>the</strong> recognition <strong>of</strong> indigenous<br />
knowledge<br />
However, <strong>the</strong> observation that many indigenous <strong>and</strong><br />
traditional communities have contributed with <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
knowledge <strong>and</strong> practices to <strong>the</strong> conservation <strong>and</strong> sustainable<br />
use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> biosphere <strong>and</strong> maintained highly<br />
complex ecosystems, <strong>the</strong> functioning <strong>of</strong> which has not<br />
yet been explained by ecological research, has for<br />
some time increasingly led to discussion on how<br />
indigenous knowledge differs from scientific findings,<br />
especially from <strong>the</strong> natural sciences.<br />
This question played a major role at <strong>the</strong> World<br />
Conference on Science in Budapest (1999) <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
discussions about it were highly emotional at times.<br />
Some representatives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> indigenous peoples feel<br />
that <strong>the</strong>ir identity is severely threatened <strong>and</strong> call,<br />
among o<strong>the</strong>r things, for <strong>the</strong>ir indigenous knowledge<br />
bases to be recognized as a science. O<strong>the</strong>rs favour a<br />
‘de-mythification programme’, differentiating<br />
between <strong>the</strong> ‘rational core’ <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> spiritual belief<br />
systems <strong>and</strong> practices associated with knowledge systems.<br />
Traditional knowledge systems do in fact impinge<br />
upon many areas <strong>of</strong> science, such as astronomy, meteorology,<br />
geology, ecology, botany, agriculture, physiology<br />
<strong>and</strong> medicine. But <strong>the</strong>re is no clear separation<br />
<strong>of</strong> knowledge <strong>and</strong> belief systems in <strong>the</strong>se knowledge<br />
systems (Berkes et al, 1995; Gadgil, 199). In one<br />
region <strong>of</strong> India <strong>the</strong> indigenous population protects<br />
<strong>and</strong> honours fig trees (practice treatment) because <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir knowledge (qualitative underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
importance <strong>of</strong> fig trees as food for birds, bats, squirrels<br />
<strong>and</strong> monkeys) <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir belief that fig trees are<br />
abodes <strong>of</strong> nature spirits. By contrast, according to <strong>the</strong><br />
example cited by Gadgil (1999), science also comes<br />
to <strong>the</strong> decisions that some fig trees should be protected<br />
(practice dealings), on <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> quantitative<br />
findings about <strong>the</strong>ir importance as a keystone<br />
species. Added to this is <strong>the</strong> belief or value that <strong>the</strong><br />
comprehensive conservation <strong>of</strong> biological diversity is<br />
a desirable objective (Table E 3.5-1).<br />
Berkes et al (1995) cites fur<strong>the</strong>r similarities <strong>and</strong><br />
differences between scientific <strong>and</strong> indigenous knowledge:<br />
both systems <strong>of</strong> knowledge are philosophies or<br />
interpretation systems aiming to make <strong>the</strong> world<br />
comprehensible. Both are based on observations <strong>and</strong><br />
conclusions derived from <strong>the</strong>m. But <strong>the</strong> knowledge<br />
systems also differ in that traditional ecological<br />
knowledge (TEK)<br />
– refers only to restricted geographical areas,<br />
– largely relies on qualitative ra<strong>the</strong>r than quantitative<br />
information,<br />
– lack <strong>of</strong> built-in drive to collect more <strong>and</strong> more<br />
facts,<br />
– accumulates facts much more slowly,<br />
– trusts in trial-<strong>and</strong>-error more than in systematic<br />
experimentation,<br />
– only has limited scope to <strong>the</strong> verification <strong>of</strong> predictions,<br />
– has little interest in developing general principles<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ories.<br />
In future, <strong>the</strong> debates about <strong>the</strong> dignity <strong>and</strong> recognition<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se two knowledge systems will go even fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />
– including in <strong>the</strong> negotiations on <strong>the</strong> CBD. In<br />
addition to <strong>the</strong> more ‘academic’ aspects <strong>of</strong> this discussion<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> question as to how far <strong>the</strong> ecological<br />
knowledge <strong>of</strong> indigenous <strong>and</strong> traditional communities<br />
(or its rational core) is superior to <strong>the</strong> somewhat<br />
rudimentary findings <strong>of</strong> scientific ecology, as proved<br />
by <strong>the</strong> increasing interest <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pharmaceutical<br />
industry (Section D 3.3), <strong>the</strong>se traditional knowledge<br />
systems have ano<strong>the</strong>r important function.<br />
Since TEK not only contains cores <strong>of</strong> knowledge,<br />
but also information on managing natural resources,<br />
this knowledge is most definitely <strong>of</strong> practical relevance,<br />
especially when <strong>the</strong> precautionary principle is<br />
Table E 3.5-1<br />
Natural resources in<br />
traditional <strong>and</strong><br />
scientific knowledge<br />
systems.<br />
Source: Gadgil, 1999<br />
Knowledge system Practice Knowledge Belief<br />
Traditional Strict protection Qualitative Fig trees are <strong>the</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> worship underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>of</strong> abode <strong>of</strong> natural<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fig tree <strong>the</strong> trees’ fruit spirits<br />
as food for birds,<br />
bats, squirrels,<br />
monkeys<br />
Scientific Partial protection Quantitative Comprehensive<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fig tree underst<strong>and</strong>ing leads conservation <strong>of</strong><br />
to <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong> a biological diverkey<br />
resource<br />
sity is desirable