Indigenous and Local Knowledge in a Scoping Study for a Nordic IPBES Assessment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Report from the project: Indigenous and Local Knowledge in a Scoping Study for a Nordic IPBES Assessment Håkan Tunón, Marie Kvarnström & Pernilla Malmer Tunón, H., Kvarnström, M, & Malmer, P., 2015. Report from the project: Indigenous and Local Knowledge in a Scoping Study for a Nordic IPBES Assessment. CBM:s skriftserie nr 96. Swedish Biodiversity Centre, Uppsala. Ecology, then, also involves protecting the cultural treasures of humanity in the broadest sense. More specifically, it calls for greater attention to local cultures when studying environmental problems, favouring a dialogue between scientific-technical language and the language of the people. Culture is more than what we have inherited from the past; it is also, and above all, a living, dynamic and participatory present reality, which cannot be excluded as we rethink the relationship between human beings and the environment. His Holiness Pope Francis, Encyclical letter Laudato Sí On care for our common home, May 24 2015 © Naptek, Swedish Biodiversity Centre 2015. Uppsala. Cover: Upper left: Saami people in Finland are rounding up reindeer (photo: Tero Mustonen), goats at a sum- mer farm in Budalen, Norway (photo: Håkan Tunón), cows and calves in a traditional apple meadow i Bråbyg- den, Sweden (photo: Håkan Tunón), winter seining in Karelia, Finland (photo: Tero Mustonen). Layout: Håkan Tunón Print: Taberg Media Group. ISBN: 978-91-88083-06-7 ISSN: 1403-6568 2 Preword There is a multitude of local cultures and customary uses of biological resources, and a va- riety of local subsistence systems all over the world, including the Nordic region. The need to include the knowledge and worldviews they are based upon in assessments of biological diversi- ty and ecosystem services, is today recognized in many fora. This is especially true when the aim is to evaluate mankind’s dependence of and impact on biological resources as a base for present and future policy and decisions. The local communities and their cultures and knowledge are in the IPBES context referred to as “indigenous and local knowledge” (ILK). IPBES has since it’s beginning agreed to recognize and respect indigenous and local knowledge in all its functions. The effort to evaluate the mutual impact between today’s status and trends of biological diversity and local communities all over the region in a Nordic IPBES assessment is dependent on a sincere participation process. To achieve a full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the context of a regional IPBES assessment is a challenge. IPBES still is in the process of developing its methods and procedures, and this scoping study is contributing to this experience. The overall aim to transfer the local perspective and knowledge into a more abstract regio- nal summary with the complexity of today’s society is likely to lead to simplifications. Thus it is important to incorporate the local perspective in the background process of preparing an assessment, and have a continuous ILK-referee mechanism in order to ensure that the drawn conclusions aren’t erroneously made from the local perspective. This report is focusing on how effective local participation could be achieved to a certain degree to reach a deeper understanding regarding how the local communities are being affected by global change, such as changes in climate, biological diversity and political decisions. The report is based on four different studies: a Nordic ILK-workshop held in the vicinity of Uppsala in June 2015, a ILK-questionnaire regarding perceived observations as well as perspectives on participation processes, a series of local workshops in Finland arranged by Snowchange Coope- rative, and an interview and literature study on the interface of ILK and citizen science (another important measure to reach a trustworthy assessment). We wish to thank all that have contributed to this study. The multitude of perspectives that have been brought forward by participants in the process provided a richness that has been so inspiring for all of us, in a collective learning process. This has been completely necessary for a study like this. The study was financed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and is connected to the Nordic project “Scoping Study for Nordic Assessment to feed into IPBES” coordinated by Maria Schultz funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers. Håkan Tunón, Marie Kvarnström & Pernilla Malmer Swedish Biodiversity Centre 3 Content 1. INTRODUCTION 5 1.1. Background to IPBES and the assignment 5 1.2. IPBES procedures and approaches for working with ILK 6 1.3. Multiple Evidence Base approach (MEB) 7 1.4. Nordic experiences of connecting across knowledge systems 8 1.5. Historical reflections on man as an ecological factor in the Nordic countries 8 2. PURPOSE 11 3. METHODS 13 3.1. Components of the Nordic ILK Scoping Study 13 3.2. Nordic dialogue workshop 13 3.3. ILK-Questionnaire 14 3.4. Sub-project piloting local dialogues 14 3.5. Citizens Science, ILK, and Community Based Monitoring 14 3.6. Development of a roster of experts for ILK Nordic IPBES assessment 14 3.7. A literature review, and other forms of identification of data 15 3.8. Report review process 15 4. DISCUSSION 17 4.1. Historical and biocultural diversity in the Nordic countries 17 4.2. Indigenous and local knowledge holders 18 4.3. Conditions for ILK participation 18 4.4. Contributions of indigenous and local knowledge 20 4.5. Roster of experts 21 4.6. Literature and other sources 21 4.7. Limitations of the ILK study within the Scoping Study 22 5. LITERATURE AND OTHER SOURCES 23 6. PROPOSALS FOR A NORDIC IPBES ASSESSMENT THAT INCLUDES ILK 27 6.1. Proposals for a Nordic IPBES assessment that includes ILK 27 6.2. The way forward 28 7. REFLECTIONS FROM THE REVIEWS OF THE DRAFT REPORT 31 Annex 1. Summary from the Nordic Dialogue Workshop on Indigenous and Local Know- ledge in a Future Nordic IPBES Assessment 33 Annex 2. Results: How to include people’s knowledge on biodiversity? – a questionnaire 95 Annex 3. Snowchange ILK Nordic IPBES Report – 2015 129 Annex 4. Citizen science, community based monitoring and ILK 151 Books and reports produced by Naptek 2006– 159 4 1. Introduction his is the report from a scoping study of how to mentation of article 8(j) – on traditional knowledge of Tcreate synergies across knowledge systems, such indigenous peoples and local communities embodying as indigenous, local and scientific knowledge based on traditional lifestyles (IPLCs) – of the UN Convention equity and reciprocity, for inclusion in a possible future on Biological Diversity (CBD), later also issues regar- full Nordic IPBES assessment. ding article 10(c) – customary sustainable use. The work of Naptek has dealt with traditional knowledge in 1.1. Background to IPBES and the assignment both the Saami community – in collaboration with the The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Bio- Swedish Saami Parliament – and other traditional local diversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was establis- communities or traditional knowledge practitioners. hed in 2012 with the aim of strengthening the dialogue Some activities have also involved cooperation with the between science and policy for biodiversity and ecosys- Norwegian Nature Inspectorate (the project MONA, tem services for the conservation and sustainable use of Mennesket og naturarven, “Man and the Natural Heri- biodiversity, long-term human wellbeing and sustainable tage”) and contacts with the Metsähallitus in Finland, development (see www.ipbes.net). In order to reach these which could be developed further within this context. goals, the platform needs to strengthen the dialogue bet- Based on these experiences, the Swedish Biodiver- ween the scientific community, governments, other hol- sity Centre and Naptek were given the task of con- ders of knowledge and actors, which are closely involved ducting the study ”Indigenous and Local Knowledge in sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity and in Scoping Study for the Nordic IPBES Assessment”, ecosystem services. which has been financed by the Swedish Environmen- The IPBES plenary has decided to perform regional tal Protection Agency (SEPA), which also coordinated and sub-regional assessments of biodiversity and eco- the scoping study of a Nordic IPBES assessment. system services in order to feed into a global assessment The IPBES conceptual framework includes six in- by 2018. The Nordic countries, with support from the terlinked elements which form a social-ecological sys- Nordic Council of Ministers, have come to the conclu- tem that works on various scales in time and space: i) sion that one of the sub-regional assessments should be nature; ii) nature’s benefits to people; iii) anthropogenic a Nordic assessment. A Nordic assessment on the status assets; iv) institutions and governance systems and other of biodiversity and ecosystem services would contri- indirect drivers of change; v) direct drivers of change; and bute to enhancing the foundation for ecosystem ma- vi) good quality of life. The framework1 is graphically nagement and sustainable development in the Nordic depicted in figure 1, below. This framework emphasi- countries, and it would also strengthen Nordic coope- zes the necessity of biodiversity and ecosystem services ration within this field. There are several benefits to for human wellbeing and good quality of life. In other link a Nordic assessment to the global process as well knowledge systems, this is often expressed as “Living as the science-policy platform IPBES. Consequently well in harmony with nature” or “living well in balance it was decided to do a scoping study regarding a pos- and harmony with Mother Earth”. These perspectives sible Nordic IPBES assessment and a connected specific acknowledge the diversity of the existing relationships scoping study concerning the contribution of ILK in a between human and nature in different cultures. future Nordic assessment. In 2006 the Swedish government assigned the Swe- 1 Dias, S.