More on Indigenous Knowledge Systems
Epistemology is an obstacle in the acceptance of indigenous knowledge, as Western thought deduces that empirical data acquired using scientific methods are the only legitimate source of data in resource management. The example from our discussion that best demonstrates the absurdity of such a claim is in the case of the Dandrupin Gorenpul people and the seemingly declining dugong population in Moreton Bay. When scientists who were surveying the population of the dugong species were concerned over the low numbers sighted in the Western side of the bay, a Dandrubin Gorenpul dugong hunter, told them that they were taking their sample from the wrong area. Everyone (meaning the Dandrubin Gorenpul) knew that the dugong fed on the Southwest side of the island during this time, so it puzzled the aboriginal ranger that they were expending time and energy looking for dugong that weren’t there (Ross 2011). Incredibly, the scientific officer told the man that because this was a scientific exercise, they must stay on the same path every time during their surveys so that their data collection is comparable. There is no further explanation needed of this situation to demonstrate the absurdity of such a claim, and why indigenous knowledge is invaluable to research. Furthermore, to say that indigenous knowledge is illegitimate because it has not been produced by the scientific method is the furthest thing from the actual truth. Indigenous practices were invented, and then tested through the rigors of scientific method through years of experimentation and research. While perhaps it was not done in a laboratory, and was not meticulously recorded in writing, it was nevertheless produced using some form of what Westerners know as “science”.
Although we did not discuss this in class, I feel that it is important to be aware of as it is a valid issue in indigenous rights. While there have been concerted efforts to collaborate with indigenous people, sometimes the knowledge that is incorporated into research can be manipulated, taken advantage of, and in some instances copyrighted by scientists and conservationists for commercial purposes. Capitalist thought surrounds the protection and ownership of knowledge and any wealth that surmises from it, and science is used to feed commercialism in order to capitalize on production of natural resources. An example of this is biopiracy, or the commercialization of naturally occurring biological materials. Along with land ownership, copyright is another example of ownership that was never practiced in ancient Hawaiian traditions, so naturally there was political unrest when University of Hawai’i researches put a patent on a strain of taro that was genetically engineered to be resistant to certain diseases (Losch 2007). The researchers involved recognized the economic incentive they had, and rights to cultivate this particular strain of taro had to be purchased from the university. Like the Lakota of Montana, Native Hawaiians too have deep and complex kinship ties to the land, especially the kalo, which was there ancestors’ main source of food. To own this resource was impossible as it had a deep spiritual connection to the people. In the midst of political and social unrest surrounding this controversy, Native Hawaiian leaders who spearheaded the protest said, “Nobody should own any life form” (Losch 2007), and subsequently rejected the offer of owning the patent themselves. Finally in 2006, the university decided to drop the patent, and returned the taro to the public domain for all to use. This brings me back to the idea of collaboration and how it is successful only if it I done ethically, for there are a number of ways in which indigenous knowledge could be manipulated and taken advantage of.
This page is a tag of:
| Previous page on path | Contemporary Native Hawaiian Issues, page 3 of 3 | Path end, return home |
Discussion of "More on Indigenous Knowledge Systems"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...