Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

DOI 10.1007/s11625-015-0349-x

SPECIAL FEATURE: EDITORIAL Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences to

Diversify Our Methods (WIS2DOM)

Weaving Indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our

methods
Jay T. Johnson1 · Richard Howitt2 · Gregory Cajete3 · Fikret Berkes4 ·
Renee Pualani Louis1 · Andrew Kliskey5

Published online: 12 December 2015

© Springer Japan 2015

Introduction ecological ethic in part by learning from the wisdom of

traditional knowledge holders” (2012: 19). The primary
Indigenous and sustainability sciences have much to offer focus of the papers in this special edition of Sustainability
one another regarding the identification of techniques and Science, including this editorial introduction, is an explo-
methods for sustaining resilient landscapes. Based upon the ration of the intersection of Indigenous and sustainability
literature, and our findings, it is evident that some Indige- sciences. We challenged key thinkers in these research
nous peoples have maintained distinct systematic, areas to cultivate mutually conducive and appropriate
localized, and place-based environmental knowledge over principles, protocols, and practices that address humanity’s
extended time periods.1 These long-resident knowledge collective need to sustain landscapes that demonstrate the
systems contain extensive information regarding not only ability not only to maintain human life but more crucially
how to maintain but also to steward biodiverse ecosystems. the interrelated more-than-human biosphere. The authors
For example, the Nisqually Tribe of western Washington were asked to address the strengths and limitations posed
State, USA blends various aspects of ecological science by both Indigenous and sustainability sciences in this
with their Indigenous knowledge to support the restoration endeavor. We also encouraged discussion concerning how
and management of the Nisqually river system watershed these two scientific paradigms might collaborate,
along with its associated natural resources of biological and acknowledging that protocols will need to be identified, or
cultural significance. We believe these kinds of Indigenous created, to enable successful collaborations. It is our hope
observations and perspectives are critical for establishing that this special edition might add to what Scholz and
or expanding collaborations with sustainability scientists. Steiner (2015) have identified as a scant literature docu-
Fikret Berkes observed in his foundational text, Sacred menting the benefits of transdisciplinary research.
Ecology, a “growing interest in traditional ecological This special edition was inspired by an internationally
knowledge since the 1980s is perhaps indicative of two diverse set of Indigenous academics, community scholars
things: the need for ecological insights from indigenous and non-Indigenous academics who participated in a
practices of resource use, and the need to develop a new National Science Foundation funded workshop entitled
Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences: Diversi-
fying our Methods (WIS2DOM).2 The next three sections
& Jay T. Johnson
jaytjohnson@ku.edu
1
For examples see: Berkes (2012) Sacred Ecololgy; Cajete (2000)
1 Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence; and McGregor
University of Kansas, 1475 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence,
KS 66045, USA (2004) Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Sustainable Develop-
2
ment: Towards Coexistence.
Macquarie University, North Ryde, Australia 2
The 4-day workshop was held at The Evergreen State College’s
3
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA Longhouse in Olympia, Washington, USA in 2013 and funded under
4 NSF Grant # 1233266. The WIS2DOM Workshop Report may be
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
accessed at http://ipsr.ku.edu/cfirst/wis2dom/WorkshopReport2013.
5
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA pdf.

123
2 Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

of this introduction are abbreviated versions of the work- Framing the politics of science
shop’s three keynote presentations on sustainability
science, Indigenous science, and the protocols for bridging Opening dialogue between sustainability science and
these two scientific paradigms.3 We then present our Indigenous sciences requires acknowledgement that power
findings and recommendations regarding how Indigenous underpins the place of science in contemporary global
and sustainability sciences may find common ground upon society. Framing Indigenous knowledges (and peoples) as
which to collaborate, ending with an introduction to the out of place and out of time (in so many senses!) is com-
papers in this special edition. mon amongst dominant (colonizing) culture commentators.
But in the case of sustainability science, it risks reducing
Indigenous peoples as anachronistic sources of insights,
Sustainability science information and knowledge that can be used by science to
produce authoritative, authentic and useful universal
The difficulty of developing a prolonged and nurturing knowledge in the present, for the future. For example,
dialogue between sustainability science and Indigenous Callicott’s rejection of post-contact Native American
sciences is surprising and warrants serious reflection. thinking and experience (1990; see also Curtin 1999) as
Ostrom (2007) noted there are no easy answers in coupled irrelevant to the development of a contemporary environ-
human–natural systems: no panaceas—and no simple way mental ethics is an extreme case, but consistent with much
of representing, understanding or responding to the com- of the science-focused discourse of sustainability science.
plexity in settings that are simultaneously biophysical and In the Australian setting, Turnbull (2000a, b: 18) reported
cultural (Wilcock et al. 2013). Sustainability science that Indigenous collaborators in the late-1990s felt that
explores the wisdom that emerges from scholarly consid- “information [they] shared with non-Indigenous research-
eration of human–nature interaction. Human–nature ers is often still regarded as if the communities have no real
interactions’ however, always entwine questions of social moral or legal claims to dictate how it will be represented
and environmental justice and deeper metaphysical ques- or used within the wider world.” Contrary to utilitarian or
tions of connection and meaning, inevitably giving rise to instrumentalist valuing of Indigenous ‘environmental
questions of human rights, Indigenous rights and environ- knowledge’, there is an increasing acknowledgement that
mental rights. Yet to date sustainability science has been locally specific, contingent and conditional sciences persist
largely disengaged from questions of Indigenous science, in many places. Confronted with changing environmental
Indigenous knowledges and Indigenous rights. conditions, changing political, economic and social rela-
This observation allows the possibility of dialogue tionships, Indigenous science is not limited to ‘traditional’
between sustainability science and Indigenous sciences as knowledge.
both invitation and challenge. This brief note frames sus- Universities and academic disciplines of science and
tainability science’s interaction with Indigenous experience social science have unequivocally been part of the structure
in three ways, politically, epistemologically and method- and infrastructure of European colonial power and its
ologically. It advocates framing and reframing as central to specific impacts on particular Indigenous peoples and their
the task of developing a more humble, welcoming and places and institutions. Entry of Indigenous voices into
receptive engagement between sustainability science and both the academy and political institutions has been—and
Indigenous science in the future. Adopting a position of typically remains—contingent and conditional. Compli-
“radical contextualism” as the basis for thinking about our ance with scientific notions of rigor and method remain
particular place in the “awkward sticky messes that char- implicit requirements in most circumstances and Indige-
acterize the experiences and practices of coexistence—of nous participants in debates are commonly expected to
being-together-in-place” (Howitt 2011: 132), it considers respond in ways as representatives of knowledge that
the wider importance of context in dialogue between sus- would never be asked of other scientists. Consistently
tainability science and Indigenous science. framed in negative terms by the dominant colonizing cul-
tures, Indigenous cultures and the knowledges they
produce have too often been seen and treated as out of
place in academic discourses and institutions.

3
Richard Howitt of Macquarie University addresses the strengths Framing epistemological differences
and limitations of sustainability science in sustaining resilient
landscapes. Gregory Cajete of the University of New Mexico
Perhaps the key challenge for sustainability science in
addressed these same questions regarding Indigenous sciences. Fikret
Berkes of the University of Manitoba addresses strategies for uncertain circumstances is to provide information to sup-
developing collaboration between these scientific paradigms. port and motivate societal transformation. But that begs the

123
Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11 3

question of how judgement might be made about what is differences between ‘Western science’ and Indigenous
better. In shaping a dialogue with Indigenous sciences, the knowledge systems in terms of oversimplified binaries,
explicit universalism of science and the need for more than there is increasing recognition in the Indigenous method-
locally or contextually tailored solutions to problems, ologies discourse of the strengths of participatory, narrative
confronts a need to build frameworks for understanding and ethical engagement with context as foundational to
that are themselves pluralist, open and engaged across methodologies that are ‘fit for purpose’.
(linguistic, cultural, epistemological, spatial and temporal)
difference. Reframing the invitation and challenge
In the context of this discussion, Nakata et al. (2012)
offer a timely warning in reflecting on the challenges of In opening both an invitation and challenge to sustain-
shifting university students away from colonized thinking. ability science regarding developing engagement with
Rushing towards a politically defined end-point (in our Indigenous sciences, we need to recognize the existing
case, dialogue)—surely recognized as a dangerous tactic in frames that contextualize the relationships involved, and
a sustainability science that grapples with dynamic uncer- actively reframe those relationships. In the scientific frame,
tainty in both earth and human systems—risks skipping for example, we need to unsettle assumptions that scientific
“the more complex theoretical dilemmas students need to method alone is able to produce authoritative knowledge.
engage with to understand the conceptual limits of their In public policy frames we need to reframe the relation-
own thinking” (Nakata et al. 2012: 121). In engaging in ships between the producers, users and beneficiaries of
dialogue with Indigenous sciences, scientists cannot skip to knowledge in the overlapping contexts of local cultural
the end-point imaginary of a dialogue of equals. We have survival and global ecological survival. Learning to listen
to learn to listen and to hear: remember Louis’ provocative to each other’s concerns and proposals with respect, and
words—“Can you hear us now? … Have I got your openness to change is an important element of the process
attention yet? I hope so because it’s really not my intention of dialogue between sustainability science and Indigenous
to preach about the ills and woes of Indigenous peoples in sciences.
relation to research” (Louis 2007: 130–131). Scientists For Indigenous participants, decolonization of one’s
have to learn to see our own privilege, our own context, our understanding of science, escaping the dominant privileg-
own deep colonizing. We have to learn to think anew—to ing of science to allow valuing of local knowledge, weak
think in ways that take seriously and actually respond to theory and contextualized ethics often demands a tran-
information, understanding and knowledges as if difference scendence of long histories of colonization, colonial
confronts us with the possibility of thinking differently. education and deep colonizing patterns of thought (Tuck
and Yang 2012). For scientists, recognizing that the social,
Framing methodologies political and historical context of scientific method hides
the specificity (non-universalism) of scientific method and
There is an important, extensive literature and emergent the knowledge it produces similarly demands decoloniza-
practice around questions of Indigenous methodologies (e. tion of how sustainability science is pursued.
g. Coombes et al. 2014)—with implications for a dialogue The organizers of the WIS2DOM workshop choose to
between sustainability science and Indigenous sciences. frame the discussion at the scale of ‘resilient landscapes’—
For the science community, which values methodologically a concept that has not been widely discussed in the liter-
sound research as the foundation for authoritative knowl- ature and thereby presents its own challenges. In Australian
edge, Smith’s opening statement in Decolonising Aboriginal discourse, this is the scale of ‘Country’, the
Methodologies (1999) heralds a huge challenge: scale at which cosmological relationships and processes
intersect with human (and non-human) presences and
The word itself ‘research’ is probably one of the
responsibilities (Howitt 2002; Hsu et al. 2014). This is the
dirtiest words in the indigenous world’s vocabulary.
scale of human responsibility in an everyday sense. In
When mentioned in many indigenous contexts, it stirs
political terms, however, landscape is a slippery scale to
up silence, it conjures up bad memories, it raises a
work with.
smile that is knowing and distrustful (Smith 1999: 1).
Framing a call for dialogue at this scale pushes us to
Many Indigenous commentators challenge their science contextualize our thinking in novel ways. In reframing
collaborators to shift focus; to reconsider how they con- sustainability science in radical contextualist terms (Howitt
struct and use knowledge. In the discipline of geography, 2011), one is drawn to the wider value of a dialogue across
for example, Louis (2007) challenges the traditional prac- knowledge systems that is humble, respectful and hopeful;
tice of science as the acquisition of knowledge by means of which listens to Country and all its peoples; which recog-
power. While there may be a tendency to characterize nizes not only the need to acquire knowledge, but also the

123
4 Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

need to transform and respond to different knowledges, Indeed, climate change is already presenting profound
understandings, meanings, and opportunity. challenges to many tribal cultures, economies, resources
There can be no doubt that the challenge of sustain- and well-being. Climate change has had significant effects
ability is both complex and multifaceted. It is, of course, on cultural ways of life and place based rights. For
captive to the contexts in which ideas of sustainability example, land based traditional hunting and gathering has
science and contemporary governance have been framed. been affected. This, in turn, results in a loss of traditional
As Benessia et al. remind us, knowledge because of loss of key plants, animals, and geo-
physical context. Coastal tribes are equally impacted by sea
the very notion of sustainability is embedded in an
rise and disruption of traditional fishing and gathering
essentially modern framework, entailing a number of
practices. Globally, the challenges also include ensuring
contradictions and paradoxes, which can be inter-
freshwater supplies, secure food supplies, and mediating
preted as epistemic and normative diversions and
impact on key plant and animal species. For Indigenous
obstacles, preventing the needed transformation
Peoples these challenges require attention to practiced
(2012: 75).
forms of community. It requires reforming of traditional
Framed at the landscape scale, sustainability science and eco-knowledge, and to exercise of sovereignty. It requires
Indigenous sciences will see things quite differently. It that planning locally, cooperating with educational orga-
should not surprise us to find each convinced of its own nizations, NGO’s, governmental agencies and other tribes.
importance. The discursive space created by dialogue, Healthy communities are cultural and natural systems
however, invites transformation in both approaches; chal- where life and learning are nourished by the actions of
lenges both approaches to stretch towards understanding members. This requires a community education process,
the other(s), and in the process to deepen our understanding gathering and sharing of information, formal research,
of the context of the simultaneous pursuit of justice and strategic planning and appropriate and effective imple-
sustainability. This is a space we should enter with hope mentation. This includes an application of existing treaties
and excitement, but with caution as well. There can be no and agreements to protect key habitats. Equally important
simple solutions; no panaceas; no short cuts—indeed, there is the creation of new agreements and policies that move
can actually be no obvious target end-point against which the agenda of Indigenous community based sustainability
to measure progress in any simple sense. In entering this forward. Added to this is the systematic development of
space, we journey together on the paths of dialogue to renewable energy and food sources. While also creating
share understandings, learning and possibilities, and look- authentic strategies for engaging youth and all community
ing forward to the challenges involved. members’ participation in this reassertion of Indigenous
community knowledge (Charles and Samples 2004: 10–
11).
Sustaining Indigenous community in the context What do we have to build from in our communities? We
of climate change have our traditional knowledge handed down, based on
stories and experiences of a people through time. There is
In a natural community the diversity of plants and animals empirical knowledge gained through careful observation and
is directly related to the resilience and ability of the system practice over time. We have revealed knowledge gained
to sustain itself in the face of a changing environment. In through vision, ritual and ceremony. And, finally contem-
human community, preserving dynamic socio- cultural porary knowledge gained through experience, education and
diversity is just as important. In many ways, the fate of problem solving. These four forms of community knowledge
Indigenous peoples in their quest to develop the capacity to are what we have to re-engage and augment in a truly
re-build the social ecology of their communities through restorative community education process.
their attempts at self-determination and re-asserting their What does the re-assertion of Indigenous Community
communal Indigeneity in thought and action is indicative imply for the communities themselves? It implies the re
of the broader fate of human communities worldwide. How assertion of a “sense of purpose” for the continuance of
Indigenous communities fare in their attempts to sustain Indigenous communities. It asserts the quest for “agree-
their unique forms of community may well foretell the fate ment on core values” through deep dialogue. It requires
of larger modern communities to sustain themselves in the that communities reform around participation, communi-
face of global climate change. Indeed, the accelerated cation, commitment, collaboration, and trust. On the part of
disappearance of Indigenous cultures, languages and all participants it requires a conscious choice, shared
communities, in and of itself, reflects a profound dys- responsibility that is predicated on acceptance, account-
functional state in the integrated social–physical ecology of ability, respect reciprocity, and demonstrated efficacy
our global societies. (Ibid).

123
Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11 5

To do this, Indigenous communities must educate for science, which is important to the overall diversity of
the re-creation of cultural economies around an Indigenous human knowledge related to the biosphere. However, for
paradigm. Indigenous communities must begin by learning some, only Western science is ‘true science’ and all other
the history and principles of (our) Indigenous Way of forms of knowledge must be subordinate. In spite of such
Sustainability and explore ways to “translate” their lessons attitudes, teaching for sustainability provides a context for
into the present. Indigenous communities must research the the inclusion of Indigenous science in all aspects of science
practical ways to apply these Indigenous Principles/ education (Cajete 2000: 59–83).
Knowledge Bases. In all, this entails engendering a new Sustainability, or the ability of current generations to
kind of Native education predicated on guiding Native meet their basic needs within the context of a given place,
people once again toward an authentic community vision is by its nature an interdisciplinary inquiry that is inclusive
of health, renewed and revitalized, sustainable and eco- of sciences, technology, business, politics, philosophy, and
nomically viable Indigenous communities. This is what the arts. This inquiry takes place around a focus upon a
will ultimately enable peaceful and sustainable futures for specific place, populations and time period. The goals of
Indigenous communities. It is, in the final analysis, a such an inquiry are to engage students in the production of
transformative vision for Indigenous community that knowledge, to learn various research methods, to develop a
comes from deep within the community itself for which we critical voice in writing, and most importantly, to under-
must now lay the groundwork through creating a new stand the importance of sustainability. According to Orr
“indigenized process of community education” (Wolf- (1992: 28–40), there are four challenges to doing sustain-
gramm 2007). able education. These are: (1) creating better more
Indigenous science may be defined as a ‘multi-contex- integrated science and accounting tools to measure bio-
tual’ system of thought, action and orientation applied by physical wealth; (2) getting people involved; (3)
an Indigenous people through which they interpret how transforming societal value systems through ‘empathic
Nature works in ‘their place’. Indigenous knowledge may education’, and (4) improving knowledge transfer around
be defined as a ‘high-context’ body of knowledge built up sustainability. Tied to these challenges is the need to
over generations by culturally distinct people living in address issues associated with human health, social justice,
close contact with a ‘place’, its plants, animals, waters, equity, economic development, ethical valuing, and
mountains, deserts, plains, etc. Epistemological character- governance.
istics of Indigenous science include oral transmission; The context in which this occurs must be understood and
observation over generations; cyclical time orientation; bring about the balanced and ethical interaction of three
quantification is a macro level; specific cultural/literary interacting circles of relationship between individuals,
style and symbolism; knowledge is context specific to a community and the environment. And in understanding
tribal culture and place; conservation of knowledge these relationships, the aim must be to maintain cultural
through time and generations. Development of knowledge diversity, protect human health, create and maintain sus-
through Indigenous science is therefore guided by: spiri- tainable economic relationships, reconcile social issues
tuality, ethical relationships, mutualism, reciprocity, non-violently and most essentially protect the environ-
respect, restraint, a focus on harmony, and acknowledge- mental life support system (ibid).
ment of interdependence. This knowledge is integrated Sustainability oriented Indigenous science education can
with regard to a particular ‘place’ toward the goal of sus- be strategically applied for the re-creation of cultural
tainability. Indigenous science knowledge is derived using economies around an Indigenous paradigm of sustainabil-
the same methods as modern Western science including: ity. This begins by learning the history of a particular
classifying, inferring, questioning, observing, interpreting, Indigenous way of sustainability and explores ways to
predicting, monitoring, problem solving, and adapting. The translate its principles into the present. There must be
difference is that Indigenous science perceives from a research into the practical ways to apply these Indigenous
‘high-context’ view including all relational connections in principles and knowledge basis. Added to all this Indige-
its consideration. In contrast, Western science perceives nous people must revitalize, re-learn or otherwise maintain
from a ‘low-context’ view, reducing context to a minimum. their traditional environmental knowledge. This can be
(Cajete 2000: 59–83). accomplished through applying the Indigenous communal
Indigenous science and culturally responsive education strengths of resourcefulness, industriousness, collaboration,
instigates the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge on an and cooperation. In addition, we must once again apply our
equal par with modern Western science. This is a relatively collective and historical ability to integrate differences in
new and radical idea for Western science, which has been our political organisations, forge alliances and confedera-
met with much debate. For proponents of the inclusion of tions, and re-introduce our propensity for trade and
Indigenous science, all cultures have developed a form of exchange. We have ancient systems of extended family,

123
6 Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

clan and tribal relationship that we can mobilize in positive results. The operative word, therefore, should be “bridg-
ways to implement sustainable changes in our economies. ing” knowledge systems (Reid et al. 2006). Such an
In addition we have developed modern political, social, approach is preferable to “synthesizing” or “combining” or
professional trade organisations, federations, associations, “integrating” knowledge systems. If and when integration
and societies which we can enlist in the addressing the occurs, such integration often works to the disadvantage of
challenges which we now collectively face. These are the Indigenous people and Indigenous knowledge systems due
new areas of Indigenous education which must be explored to differences in power. As many examples show, power
and operationalized in the context of Indigenous education imbalances make local and Indigenous communities and
toward the development and revitalization of Indigenous their knowledge vulnerable to outside forces (Berkes
communities as they face the challenges of surviving the 2012). Hence, bridging knowledge systems is preferable to
ecological, social and political challenges of a twenty first integrating them. It certainly is preferable to “mining”
century world. Indigenous knowledge and using it, often out of context, as
“data” for Western science!
A number of methods exist to bring together the two kinds
Bridging sustainability and Indigenous sciences of knowledge in ways that is respectable and generally
acceptable to knowledge holders. Some of these methods,
How can these two kinds of knowledge (Indigenous sci- such as participatory rural appraisal, have a relatively long
ence and Western science) collaborate toward sustaining history of use. Others, such as community-based monitoring,
resilient landscapes, and what methods or models can be are still being developed. The following list is by no means
used to aid in this collaboration? The two paradigms can comprehensive. New approaches are being developed all the
best be considered together by combining knowledge in a time. As well, the various approaches in the list are not
collaborative way around a particular topic. For example, equally applicable in a given situation for combining
ethnobiology is a field that has developed specifically to Indigenous science with Western science.
use the two kinds of knowledge together. Ethnobotanists Participatory rural appraisal, originally developed for
have developed methodologies that combine botany with agricultural applications, is a toolkit that has been in use for
Indigenous knowledge related to species identifications and some decades (Chambers 1983). It has been adapted for
classification (Hunn and Selam 1990). Many of the using local and Indigenous knowledge along with agri-
attempts to combine the two kinds of science occur around cultural and other kinds of Western science (Warren et al.
species biology and ecology (e.g., Goldman 2007; Gagnon 1995).
and Berteaux 2009), or around ecosystems such as forest Participatory action research also has a relatively long
ecosystems (Posey 1985; Parrotta and Trosper 2012). More history and is closely related to participatory rural appraisal
to the point regarding resilient landscapes, it can also occur (Chambers 1983). However, it is not a toolkit but an
around biocultural landscapes (Kimmerer and Lake 2001; approach that emphasizes collective inquiry and social
Johnson and Hunn 2010), biocultural landscape change change (Fals-Borda 1987). It seeks to understand the world
(Robson and Berkes 2011); and landscape biodiversity by trying to change it collaboratively and reflectively.
conservation (Bhagwat et al. 2005). Participatory education (critical pedagogy) comes out
Combining the two kinds of knowledge is especially of a tradition of empowering learners. Freire’s (1970)
important in situations of insufficient information. Using Pedagogy of the Oppressed proposes a new relationship
the two paradigms together can improve problem solving. between teacher, student and society, in which the learner
Such co-production of knowledge has been defined by is treated as the co-creator of knowledge. Some of these
Armitage et al. (2011: 996) as “the collaborative process of ideas have been applied to Native American education by
bringing a plurality of knowledge sources and types toge- Indigenous scholars (Kimmerer 2002).
ther to address a defined problem and build an integrated or Similar to the communities of practice concept in edu-
systems-oriented understanding of that problem.” Knowl- cation that emphasizes learning-as-participation, place-
edge co-production has been used productively in relation based learning communities refers to groups of people
to questions about which neither knowledge system by with a shared interest, learning through partnerships
itself has sufficient information to deal with the issue. through regular interactions based in practice (Davidson-
Climate change is one such problem, and the comple- Hunt and O’Flaherty 2007).
mentarity of Indigenous knowledge and Western science A number of processes use techniques to elicit and
produces a better understanding of the issue than either understand local and Indigenous views and knowledge.
would alone (Tyler et al. 2007; Nakashima et al. 2012). Participatory mapping (Chapin et al. 2005) is probably
These examples together indicate that respecting the the best known of these techniques. Film, video and other
integrity of each knowledge system produces healthy visual arts can also be used in a similar way.

123
Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11 7

Participatory workshops and modeling have been together, a number ways exist to bridge the two paradigms.
used successfully with both Indigenous and non-indigenous This does not necessarily mean that there are well-estab-
rural knowledge holders such as ranchers (Knapp et al. lished, sure-fire ways to bring together the two paradigms
2011). They include a suite of techniques that can be respectfully. In some cases (e.g., spiritual practices) it may
adapted to different kinds of knowledge and different not be appropriate to attempt any bridging at all. In other
cultural backgrounds. Some sustainability science work, cases (e.g., knowledge co-production for conservation), it
for example with the Saami, has used participatory work- may be appropriate to go beyond bridging to synthesize the
shops (Tyler et al. 2007). two kinds of knowledge creatively. General protocols for
Participatory scenario planning is a part of the toolkit bridging are difficult to formulate. Each bridging effort will
of participatory workshops and modeling approaches. be unique and will no doubt take much hard work from all
Scenarios in this context are plausible and challenging sets the partners involved.
of stories about how the future might unfold. The approach
was developed and used widely by the Scenarios Working
Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Bennett Findings
and Zurek 2006).
Community-based monitoring involves reading signs Through our dialogue, we have arrived at a number of key
and signals of environmental change based on the ways of findings regarding how these two scientific paradigms
knowing of a given group (as opposed to monitoring based might collaborate in creating a “transition discourse” that
strictly on Western science). In using the two kinds of could, as Escobar (2011: 138 emphasis in original)
knowledge, there often are complementarities of scale, observes, assist us in positing a “radical cultural and
with Indigenous science contributing local expertise. institutional transformation—indeed, a transition to an
Applications include Arctic Borderlands Ecological altogether different world.” In reviewing the strengths and
Knowledge Co-op (Eamer 2006). limitations of sustainability science toward sustaining
Participatory conservation planning aims for the use resilient landscapes, we acknowledge that while sustain-
of complementary knowledge from Western science and ability science has moved in directions that further
local/Indigenous communities. As in the case of monitor- articulate social–ecological systems, it has increasingly
ing, participatory conservation planning makes use of scale been coupled with sustainable development and techno-
complementarities between the two kinds of knowledge centric approaches to environmentalism that aim to sustain
(Roth 2004). ecosystems, and the services they provide, by building a
In a similar vein, participatory environmental ‘smarter planet’. The technocentric and development-based
restoration uses both local/Indigenous knowledge and approach presupposes that the planet and human societies
Western science. In some cases, local knowledge can require improvement and depend upon Western science to
provide essential information not otherwise available to advance human interaction with their ecological systems.
science (Robertson and McGee 2003). We observe that both the strengths and limitations of
Some of these ways of bridging knowledge systems are sustainability science can be traced to its dominant Western
based on research methods and processes (participatory worldview and the methodologies employed that have
rural appraisal; workshops, modeling and scenario plan- emerged from that ‘scientific tradition’. These include a
ning), and/or approaches that consider local and Indigenous systems theory framework that provides a wide range of
people as equal partners (participatory action research; tools and technologies to examine the effects of change on
participatory education). Some rely on cooperating around an environmental system. We also agree that the scientific
a particular task at which local and Indigenous communi- method and measurement provide methodologies and the
ties have specific expertise: environmental monitoring; associated metrics necessary for the quantification and
conservation planning; and environmental restoration. Yet monitoring of negative and positive actions over time. A
others may be based on new institutions and governance willingness to adopt a transdisciplinary approach that
arrangements such as bridging organizations that assist in draws from multiple scientific paradigms allows sustain-
co-management (Berkes 2009). Many are interactive: co- ability science to bring together a diverse set of methods,
management, learning communities, and knowledge co- contributing to pluralistic solutions that fit specific envi-
production. Some of the ways of bridging may take ronmental conditions. These strengths are countered by
advantage of the similarities between Indigenous knowl- considerable limitations though, founded within the same
edge and some areas of Western science such as fuzzy Western scientific traditions. As sustainability science has
logic and adaptive management (Berkes 2012). emerged over the past two decades, concern with securing
In facilitating the cooperation of the two paradigms, its place in the discourses of science has led to it being
Indigenous science and Western science, can work framed as a discourse about science as much as a discourse

123
8 Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

about sustainability. The openness of scientific enquiry is The quest for common ground between Western and
threatened by a powerful and self-referential expertocracy Indigenous sciences will require a recognition that all sci-
that is embedded within academic structures, supported by entific traditions have place-based origins (Turnbull
and perpetuating both state and corporate interests. These 2000a). Indigenous scientific practitioners could also aid
interests threaten not only sustainability but also Indige- these collaborations by making the metaphors embedded in
nous peoples’ knowledges and resources. As a result, much their scientific records more accessible to Western scien-
scientific research, including in sustainability science, tists seeking respectful collaboration (Louis 2014).
pursues only those questions for which funding can be Our final set of findings focuses on how Indigenous and
secured from government and corporate sources. sustainability sciences might create ‘best practices’ for
Contrary to the Western approach that seeks to dominate collaboration. Our central question revolves around whe-
and interrogate nature, Indigenous societies and knowledge ther or not these two paradigms can successfully work
systems have developed to sustain reciprocal relationships together, and if they can what protocols would be required.
between culture and nature and therefore utilize scientific More specifically, what new or newly adapted methods and
approaches that are rigorous in their own methods and rely protocols will be required to aid in addressing the chal-
on long-term observations. These scientific approaches are lenges that face the world in the midst of the anthropocene?
spatially localized and place-based. They integrate short- As Keali‘ikanaka‘oleohaililani (2014) observes, any col-
term periods to extend upon long-term observations. Sig- laboration must be based upon “curiosity, compassion, and
nificantly, they acknowledge humans as a part of the the willingness to flex and evolve our own practices. We do
natural world without the binary reductionism found within this by creating and fulfilling our personal relationships to
Cartesian constructs. In addition to providing a glimpse being-human and to the more-than-human.” We observe
outside of the ontological constructs of Western scientific that sustainability is “simultaneously the ability and the
thought, we identify that Indigenous science also provides processes necessary for the earth to support life—all life,
access to deep-spatial knowledge. This knowledge is con- not just human life” (Johnson et al. 2014: 19 emphasis in
stituted within long-term and empirical observations with original). Unfortunately, there are too many variables to
landscapes and non-human others to produce understand- consider in formulating and articulate specific protocols
ings based upon sustainable resilience. Indigenous science within the constraint of this paper, but through our con-
is as diverse as the groups around the world who engage tinuing research dialogue we intend to address this in future
local and traditional forms of ecological knowledge, but publications.
are also surprisingly similar in many regards. As Berkes’s By framing our discussion at the landscape scale, sus-
work with his colleagues4 has demonstrated, Indigenous tainability science and Indigenous science will likely
peoples’ ecosystem management is capable of sustaining interpret things quite differently. It should not surprise us to
some of the most biodiverse ecosystems globally. As Wark find each convinced of its own importance. Indigenous
(2014) notes, “our ecological interactions are not framed as sciences will likely raise issues of connection, responsi-
exploitation, but are instead seen as mutually beneficial bility, and meaning while sustainability science will point
relationships. Humans are an integral component of the to issues of management, governance, and adaptation. “In
health of the land; we provide for it even as it provides for between is the discursive space to be created by WIS2DOM
us.” Momaday (1976) described this as a “reciprocal —a space that challenges us and invites transformation in
appropriation” between humans and non-human others and both approaches” (ibid:12). It is our intent that a productive
serves as a hallmark of Indigenous science and its local and reciprocal collaboration between Indigenous and sus-
ecological knowledge systems. tainability sciences could create a new vision for sustaining
We also observe though two limitations to Indigenous resilient landscapes. As Escobar observes, together we
sciences’ ability to collaborate effectively with sustain- could create a notion of sustainability, “capable of inspir-
ability science. First, despite one of its greatest strengths ing the popular and scientific imaginations alike to take
being long-resident observations and associated deep-spa- steps that are at once pragmatic and transformative in the
tial knowledge, frequently this knowledge is based within path toward more ethical and ecological worlds” (Escobar
place-specific constructs that are culturally integrated, 2011:139).
posing difficulties in translating this knowledge for broader
audiences. The second related critique is that Indigenous
science is integrated into the spiritual belief systems of Articles in this special edition
Indigenous communities adding to difficulties in finding
protocols to share this knowledge with Western scientists. The thirteen articles in this special edition all, in one-way
or another, advance the deliberations concerning how
4
See Berkes et al. (2000) and Gadgil et al. (1993). Indigenous and sustainability sciences might work together

123
Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11 9

in productive collaborations. Some are aimed at articulat- Alessa and her co-authors explore how Indigenous obser-
ing specific Indigenous knowledge systems, frequently at vers in the Arctic are incorporated, along with their
the local scale, that are geared toward understanding how Indigenous ecological knowledge, into community-based
these protocols and practices can inform sustainability at a observing networks to improve monitoring of environ-
larger scale. Mark Palmer’s article explores how Aborigi- mental and climatic change. Their efforts are aimed at
nal Australian knowledge is mapped and represented in improving effective response and adaptation strategies in
UNESCO World Heritage documents establishing Uluru- addition to incorporating Indigenous observations into
¯
Kata Tjuta as a heritage site. This article also explores how broader data networks. Lin and Liu introduce the concept
¯
utilizing an Indigenous geographies research approach can of cooperative game theory to analyze conflicting views of
inform sustainability science. Whyte, Brewer and Johnson locally based Community Based Natural Resource Man-
utilize examples from Meskawki and Anishnaabe traditions agement initiatives in the Truku tribal territory in Taiwan.
to inform protocols related to stewardship and caretaking Cooperative game theory provides scenarios for groups
by humans and non-humans alike. They introduce this engaged in consensual decision-making processes. In this
central concept within American Indian tradition so that case both groups of people consist of Indigenous villagers
sustainability scientist can become more accustomed to who either support or oppose the government’s natural
thinking about stewardship in relation to scientific inquiry. resource management planning process with regard to eco-
Fang, Hu and Lee describe how the Atayal peoples of tourism. Robinson and her co-authors focus on participa-
Taiwan have developed a sustainable hunting culture, tory mapping research to attain ‘useable knowledge’ for
demonstrating the importance of ecological balance within inter-Indigenous community sharing to address how com-
many Indigenous communities globally. They observe that peting and conflicting Indigenous knowledge systems and
Taiwanese Aboriginals utilize moral values based within collective standards for Indigenous knowledge contribu-
their spiritual practices to construct their sustainable tions and partnerships are negotiated among the Girringun
environmental practices. Ziker, Rasmussen and Nolin in northern Queensland. This process promoted critical
describe how Indigenous Siberian communities establish dialogue and collective knowledge co-production amongst
food-sharing protocols in order to maintain reciprocity Girringun participants.
within communities. In this example, we again see that The final set of papers focus on finding appropriate
ethical concepts such as kinship, reciprocity, and gen- methods and protocols for dialogue between Western and
erosity illustrate Indigenous perspectives on resource Indigenous paradigms toward establishing successful and
entitlements. Keali‘ikanaka‘oleohaililani and Giardina adaptive sustainability practices. Dockry and his coauthors
share a method of integrating Western and Indigenous explore the creation of a sustainable development model by
sustainability practices, grounded in Hawaiian perspec- the College of Menominee Nation based upon the tribe’s
tives. They orient the reader to the northeastern coast of profound attachment and relationship with their land,
Hawai‘i island providing a transformational vision of sus- which has allowed them to adapt to environmental and
tainability focused on sacred relationships that place the social change over time. Their paper provides examples
success or demise of our planet’s ability to sustain human illustrating how the model has been utilized for educa-
life in our hands. tional, community planning, and research purposes. Zanotti
Several of the papers in this special edition approach the and Palomino-Schalscha discuss the vexing roles, chal-
interaction between Western and Indigenous science from lenges, and opportunities of non-Indigenous academics
the perspective of sustainability science, exploring how working at the interface of Indigenous and non-Indigenous
Indigenous knowledge may inform transdisciplinarity. knowledges, highlighting the critical issues governing the
Cohran and her co-authors address the perplexing issue of roles and responsibilities of non-Indigenous researchers in
appropriate temporal and spatial boundaries in sustain- decolonizing the reproduction, and co-production of
ability science by studying Indigenous ecological calendars knowledges. The paper enhances our understanding of the
in Amazonia toward defining the scales of climate change epistemological consequences of engaging in such work
and sustainability assessment. Their paper considers how and the critical need for spaces of plural co-existence.
possible climatic changes may impact the sustainability of Gondor explores how Inuit knowledge is employed in the
resources, by bringing together knowledge from the co-management and regulation of environmental impact
Tukano ecological calendar with a methodology for assessment in Nunavut Territory, Canada. By reviewing an
examining changes in precipitation and river levels and environmental assessment of a gold mine in the region, the
their interactions at multiple timescales. Their collabora- author explores how traditional ecological knowledge is
tive work highlights how high spatial and temporal brought into dialogue with scientific principles in the
variability in precipitation patterns and river levels might decision making process. In our final paper, Herman pro-
complicate climate change and sustainability analyses. poses embracing indigeneity’s holistic approach to

123
10 Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11

knowledge production while also utilizing scientific the semiarid world. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, pp
advancement to reshape human behavior toward sustain- 255–272
Chambers R (1983) Rural development: putting the last first. Pearson
able strategies. The author develops a ‘new cultural Education Limited, London
discourse’ aimed at reshaping society toward a more sus- Chapin M, Lamb Z, Threlkeld B (2005) Mapping indigenous lands.
tainable future. Annu Rev Anthropol 34:619–638. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.
Together the papers in this special edition further 34.081804.120429
Charles C, Samples B (2004) Coming home: community, creativity
articulate the possibilities for improving the transdisci- and consciousness. Personhood Press, Fawnskin
plinary reach of sustainability science through engaging Coombes B, Johnson JT, Howitt R (2014) Indigenous geographies III:
Indigenous sciences. They also explore the central philo- methodological innovation and the unsettling of participatory
sophical concepts upon which Indigenous peoples’ research. Prog Hum Geogr 38:845–854. doi:10.1177/03091325
13514723
sustainability is founded, such that sustainability scientists Curtin D (1999) Chinnagounder’s challenge: the question of
might explore how these concepts could inform sustain- ecological citizenship. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
ability initiatives more broadly. We hope that the dialogue Davidson-Hunt IJ, O’Flaherty RM (2007) Researchers, indigenous
begun in this special edition will lead to further collabo- peoples and place-based learning communities. Soc Nat Resour
20:291–305. doi:10.1080/08941920601161312
ration based within a shared curiosity and compassion for Eamer J (2006) Keep it simple and be relevant: the first ten years of
difference. the Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Co-op. In: Reid
WV, Berkes F, Wilbanks T, Capistrano D (eds) Bridging scales
Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge the and knowledge systems. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 185–
other WIS2DOM workshop participants, including Paulette Blan- 206
chard, Joseph Brewer, Brian Buma, Christian Giardina, Zoltan Escobar A (2011) Sustainability: design for the pluriverse. Develop-
Grossman, Lene Kielsen Holm, Kekuhi Keali‘ikanaka‘oleohaililani, ment 54:137–140. doi:10.1057/dev.2011.28
Deb McGregor, Debra McNutt, Liz Medicine Crow, Mark Palmer, Fals-Borda O (1987) The application of participatory action-research
Marcela Palomino-Schalsha, Lin Pei-Shan, Karina Walters, Jon in Latin America. Int Sociol 2:329–347. doi:10.1177/0268580
Waterhouse, Kyle Wark, Daniel Wildcat, Laura Zanotti, and John 98700200401
Ziker. We would also like to thank the student associates from the Freire P (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum, New York
University of Kansas who assisted at every level in organizing the Gadgil M, Berkes F, Folke C (1993) Indigenous knowledge for
workshop; Katrina McClure, Joshua Meisel, and Victoria Walsey. We biodiversity conservation. Ambio 22:151–156
also would like to thank the Nisqually Tribe and The Evergreen State Gagnon CA, Berteaux D (2009) Integrating traditional ecological
College Longhouse for so warmly hosting us. knowledge and ecological science: a question of scale. Ecol Soc
14:19. [online]: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/
art19/
Goldman M (2007) Tracking wildebeest, locating knowledge: Maasai
References and conservation biology understandigns of wildebeest behavior
in Northern Tanzania. Environ Plan D Soc Space 25(2):307–331.
Armitage DF, Berkes F, Dale A, Kocho-Schellenberg E, Patton E doi: 10.1068/d0505
(2011) Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: Howitt R (2002) Scale and the other: Levinas and geography.
learning to adapt in Canada’s Arctic. Glob Environ Change Geoforum 33:299–313. doi:10.1016/S0016-7185(02)00006-4
21:995–1004. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.04.006 Howitt R (2011) Knowing/doing. In: Del Casino Jr VJ, Thomas ME,
Benessia A, Funtowicz S, Bradshaw G et al (2012) Hybridizing Cloke P et al (eds) A companion to social geography. Wiley-
sustainability: towards a new praxis for the present human Blackwell, Chichester, pp 131–145
predicament. Sustain Sci 7:75–89. doi:10.1007/s11625-011- Hsu M, Howitt R, Chi C-C (2014) The idea of ‘Country’: reframing
0150-4 post-disaster recovery in Indigenous Taiwan settings. Asia Pac
Bennett E, Zurek M (2006) Integrating epistemologies through Viewp 55:370–380. doi:10.1111/apv.12058
scenarios. In: Reid WV, Berkes F, Wilbanks T, Capistrano D Hunn ES, Selam J (1990) Nch’i-Wana “The Big River”: Mid-
(eds) Bridging scales and knowledge systems. Island Press, Columbia Indians and their land. University of Washington
Washington, DC, pp 275–294 Press, Seattle
Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge Johnson LM, Hunn ES (eds) (2010) Landscape ethnoecology.
generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Berghahn, New York
Manage 90:1692–1702. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001 Johnson JT, Louis RP, Kliskey A (2014) Weaving indigenous and
Berkes F (2012) Sacred ecology, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York sustainability sciences: diversifying our methods (WIS2DOM)
Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional workshop report. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA
ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl Kimmerer RW (2002) Weaving traditional ecological knowledge into
10:1251–1262. doi:10.2307/2641280 biological education: a call for action. Bioscience 52:432–438.
Bhagwat SA, Kushalappa CG, Williams PA, Brown ND (2005) The doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0432:WTEKIB]2.0.CO;2
role of informal protected areas in maintaining biodiversity in Kimmerer RW, Lake FK (2001) The role of indigenous burning in
the Western Ghats of India. Ecol Soc 10:8. [online]: http://www. land management. J For 99:36–41
ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/art8/ Knapp CN, Fernandez-Gimenez M, Kachergis E, Rudeen A (2011)
Cajete GA (2000) Native science: natural laws of interdependence. Using participatory workshops to integrate state-and-transition
Clear Light Publishers, Santa Fe models created with local knowledge and ecological data.
Callicott JB (1990) American Indian land wisdom. In: Olson PA (ed) Rangel Ecol Manage 64:158–170. doi:10.2111/REM-D-10-
The struggle for land: indigenous insight and industrial empire in 00047.1

123
Sustain Sci (2016) 11:1–11 11

Louis RP (2007) Can you hear us now? Voices from the margin: using Robson JP, Berkes F (2011) Exploring some myths of land use
Indigenous methodologies in geographic research. Geogr Res change: can rural to urban migration drive declines in
45:130–139. doi:10.1111/j.1745-5871.2007.00443.x biodiversity? Glob Environ Change 21:844–854. doi:10.1016/j.
Louis RP (2014) E Ala E. In: Johnson JT, Louis RP, Kliskey A (eds) gloenvcha.2011.04.009
Weaving indigenous and sustainability sciences: diversifying our Roth R (2004) Spatial organization of environmental knowledge:
methods (WIS2DOM) workshop report. National Science conservation conflicts in the inhabited forest of northern
Foundation, Arlington, VA, pp 78–80 Thailand. 9:5. [online]: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/
McGregor D (2004) Traditional ecological knowledge and sustainable iss3/art5/
development: towards coexistence. In: Blaser M, Feit HA, Scholz RW, Steiner G (2015) Transdisciplinarity at the crossroads.
McRae G (eds) In the way of development: indigenous peoples, Sustain Sci 10:521–526. doi:10.1007/s11625-015-0338-0
life projects, and globalization. Zed Books, London, pp 72–91 Smith LT (1999) Decolonizing methodologies: research and indigen-
Momaday NS (1976) Native American attitudes to the environment. ous peoples. University of Otago Press and Zed Books, Dunedin
In: Hultkrantz Å, Capps WH (eds) Seeing with a native eye: and London
essay on Native American Religion. Harper & Row, New York Tuck E, Yang KW (2012) Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolon
Nakashima DJ, Galloway McLean K, Thrulstrup HD, Ramos-Castillo Indig Educ Soc 1:1–40
A, Rubis J (2012) Weathering uncertainty: traditional knowledge Turnbull D (2000a) Masons, tricksters, and cartographers: compara-
for climate change assessment and adaptation. UNESCO, Paris tive studies in the sociology of scientific and indigenous
Nakata NM, Nakata V, Keech S, Bolt R (2012) Decolonial goals and knowledge. Routledge, London
pedagogies for Indigenous studies. Decolon Indig Educ Soc Turnbull P (2000b) Introduction: learning to understand Western and
1:120–140 Indigenous science. Humanit Res 1:7–20
Orr D (1992) Ecological literacy: education and the transition to a Tyler NJC, Turi JM, Sundset MA et al (2007) Saami reindeer
postmodern world. SUNY Press, New York pastoralism under climate change: applying a generalized
Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. framework for vulnerability studies to a sub-arctic social–
Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:15181–15187. doi:10.1073/pnas. ecological system. Glob Environ Change 17:191–206. doi:10.
0702288104 1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.06.001
Parrotta JA, Trosper RL (2012) Traditional forest-related knowledge: Wark K (2014) WIS2DOM-weaving indigenous and sustainabilty
sustaining communities, ecosystems and biocultural diversity. sciences: diversifying our methods workshop. In: Johnson JT,
Springer, New York Louis RP, Kliskey A (eds) Weaving indigenous and sustain-
Posey DA (1985) Indigenous management of tropical forest ability sciences: diversifying our methods (WIS2DOM)
ecosystems: the case of the Kayapo Indians of the Brazilian workshop report. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA,
Amazon. Agrofor Syst 3:139–158. doi:10.1007/BF00122640 pp 101–103
Reid WV, Berkes F, Wilbanks T, Capistrano D (2006) Bridging Warren DM, Slikkerveer LJ, Brokensha D (1995) The cultural
scales and knowledge systems. Millennium Ecosystem Assess- dimension of development: indigenous knowledge systems.
ment and Island Press, Washington, DC. http://www.maweb.org/ Intermediate Technology Publications, London
en/Bridging.aspx Wilcock D, Brierley G, Howitt R (2013) Ethnogeomorphology. Prog
Robertson HA, McGee TK (2003) Applying local knowledge: the Phys Geogr 37:573–600. doi:10.1177/0309133313483164
contribution of oral history to wetland rehabilitation at Wolfgramm R (2007) Continuity and vitality of worldview(s) in
Kanyapella Basin, Australia. J Environ Manage 69:275–287. organizational culture; toward a Maori perspective. Doctoral
doi:10.1016/S0301-4797(03)00155-5 Diss. Graduate Center, University of Auckland: New Zealand

123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.