Read the Report

MULTIPLE EVIDENCE BASE APPROACH Stockholm Resilience Centre Report November 2016 Mobilizing Traditional Knowledge, Innovations and Practices in rotational farming for sustainable development A contribution to the Piloting of the Multiple Evidence Base Approach From the community of Hin Lad Nai, Chiang Rai, Thailand. CO-PRODUCED BY: The Community of Hin Lad Nai, Thailand MULTIPLE EVIDENCE BASE APPROACH Foreword about the background to the collaborative partnership: Piloting the Multiple Evidence Base approach: Connecting across knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance This report is part of the outcomes of a collaborative partner back with the founding plenary of the IPBES. One of the ship for piloting a Multiple Evidence Base approach1 to outcomes of the ongoing dialogue has been the envisioning cogenerate knowledge and methods for mutual learning of The Multiple Evidence Base (MEB) approach that sees across knowledge systems. +The project partners are: African indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems as different Biodiversity Network2 with Institute for Cultural Ecology manifestations of valid and useful knowledge that generates (ICE)3, Kenya and MELCA, Ethiopia4; Forest Peoples complementary evidence for sustainable use of biodiversity. Programme (FPP)5 with Fundación para la Promoción de MEB emphasizes the importance of equitable and transparent Conocimiento Indígena (FPCI); Pgakenyaw Association processes for mobilizing knowledge and connecting across for Sustainable Development (PASD)6, Thailand; Tebtebba knowledge systems, and of maintaining the integrity of each Foundation, Philippines7; and SwedBio8 at Stockholm knowledge system throughout the process. This means that Resilience Centre, Sweden9. evaluations of knowledge occur within, rather than across, The collaborative partnership emerged from an ongoing the contributing knowledge systems when mobilizing and dialogue across knowledge systems, involving SwedBio and synthesizing knowledge, for example, in an ecosystem partners among indigenous peoples and local community assessment process. organisations (e.g. International Indigenous Forum on One of the objectives of the piloting of MEB has been to Bio diversity10, IIFB) and networks of experts from different develop methods, procedures and good examples for how knowledge systems. All participants are committed to valuing evidence can be mobilized for multiple needs, at local to global diversity and are engaged in biodiversity management and its levels, and across knowledge systems. For example, knowledge links to policy processes from local to global, such as in the that is relevant for feeding into local and national policymaking, Conventions on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Inter as well as in processes such as assessments for the CBD and governmental Panel for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services the IPBES, and other fora where working with synergies across (IPBES). The starting point was the window of opportunity knowledge systems are essential. Additional objectives have emerging from the possible inclusion of indigenous and local included: contributing to changing the views that governments knowledge in IPBES, during the years before IPBES was hold about indigenous governance and management systems, established. See for example the Guna Yala Dialogue from towards respect and benefit for indigenous peoples and local 2012 at www.dialogueseminars.net/Panama, held back to communities; strengthening livelihoods and wellbeing within the communities, based on their indigenous governance systems, and finally, promoting joint learning around this across the 1 http://swed.bio/focal-areas/themes/biocultural-diversity/a-multiple- participating communities and other partners. evidence-base-approach-for-equity-across-knowledge-systems/ 2 http://africanbiodiversity.org/ The community research that is part of the piloting has 3 http://www.icekenya.org/ been initiated and conducted by the communities themselves, 4 http://www.melcaethiopia.org/ 5 http://www.forestpeoples.org/ based on their own needs and priorities. Biodiversity, food and 6 http://www.pasdthailand.org/ culture were the unifying topics. Most of them have earlier 7 http://www.tebtebba.org/ 8 http://swed.bio/ experiences of mobilizing knowledge e.g. to recover lost seeds 9 http://www.stockholmresilience.org or to protect and revitalize sacred natural sites and rituals 10 The International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity is the Caucus for connected to them. Past experiences encourage communities Indigenous peoples and local communities and their organisations actively engaging in the CBD. See: http://iifb.indigenousportal.com/ to continue such work. Some communities are mobilizing Documentation by: Prasert Trakansuphakon and research Team in the Hin Lad Nai community. Cover photo: Pernilla Malmer 2 MULTIPLE EVIDENCE BASE APPROACH Photo credit: Pernilla Malmer knowledge as part of efforts to demonstrate the sustainability for interactions with other knowledge systems, including of their traditional management and governance systems, as a authorities. Another insight is the relevance for coproduction way of creating an evidence base for policies and decisions at of knowledge across knowledge systems to connect with scales beyond the local, that protects rather that counteracts interests and needs of all actors involved, including at the local their rights and capacities to manage their ecosystems and level. For all the communities, mobilisation of knowledge was resources. part of securing territory, authority and rights to govern their A number of insights have emerged across the five piloting ecosystems in a sustainable way. In several communities, the projects. One is the importance and role of mobilizing outcomes were well received by local and regional authorities knowledge before engaging with other knowledge systems. and collaboration has improved. The communities engaged in methods and approaches to mobilizing knowledge that were well suited to the local The project was financed by support from the Swedish context and engaged with multiple facets of knowledge, Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) through SwedBio at including cultural and spiritual dimensions. How knowledge Stockholm Resilience Centre. was mobilized was an important part of building confidence 3 MULTIPLE EVIDENCE BASE APPROACH Content Foreword about the background to the collaborative partnership: Piloting the Multiple Evidence Base approach: Connecting across knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance ........................ 2 1 Introduction to the Hin Lad Nai Community and the project. ............................................................ 6 1.2. Successful collective action for regeneration of the Hin Lad Nai forest ............................................. 7 2 A case story on Rotation Farmers’ innovations to improve soil quality in fallow land through reviving the use of P’dav trees in Hin Lad Nai. ................................................................................ 9 2.1 What is P’dav? ................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Comparison between farming a P’dav field and a normal fallow field .............................................10 2.3 Benefits of the use of P’dav trees ...........................................................................................11 2.4 Analysis of the P’Dav trees potential for soil and forest recovery, and for biodiversity .........................11 3 The cycle of the fallows in the rotational farming system in Hin Lad Nai ............................................12 3.1 Grasses and trees in the 1st and 2nd periods of the fallow .............................................................12 3.1.1. Community food areas and herbal medicine areas ...........................................................12 3.1.2. Foraging areas for domestic and wild animals .................................................................12 3.2 The 3rd year fallow, named by Karen communities “Hsgif loovhtauf” .............................................13 3.2.1. The 4th year, called “doo yauv ploj” ................................................................................13 3.2.2. Food and herbal medicines in the 3rd and 4th year fallow. .13 3.2.3. Wild animals in the 3rd and 4th year fallow ......................................................................13 3.3 The 5th and 6th fallow periods – “doo lax” .................................................................................13 3.4 The 7th fallow and beyond ....................................................................................................14 3.5 Summary of the benefits of fallow land ..................................................................................14 4 A study of the Hin Lad Nai fallows and its benefits for people and biodiversity ....................................15 4.1. Background and objective of the study ...................................................................................15 4.2 Research Methodology ........................................................................................................15 4.2.1. Preparation: Select theme or topic, select research team, orientation of the project, training for researchers on methodology, etc. ..................................................................15 4.2.2. Review the literature related to the topic, design the matrix forms and questionnaire

Load more