ISSUES POSITION PAPER

BACK TO ISSUES POSITION PAPERS' TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Brendan Connolly
Ireland

Issues Position Paper

Issues put forward in this paper are for consideration by the Working Seminar and are ranked under the headings suggested by the Steering Committee of the Working Seminar.

 

1. The meaning or various meanings of "ecological knowledge"

Two types of ecological knowledge: Scientific and Practical;

  • Scientific: Ecological Knowledge is scientific knowledge about the functioning of the, whole, or part of the, biological system on earth. Ecological literature suggests a number of different definitions of ecology. The one suggested by the present author lays stress on the fact that the environment existed before the biological system developed and it is as a result of the nature of the earthly environment during the last 400 million years that biological activity exists. The suggested (scientific) definition of ecology is: "Ecology is the study of the manner in which the environment in its totality allows biological life to exist". The totality of the environment includes both non-biological and biological factors (Connolly 1998). The scientific perception of ecology tends to have a top-down approach, attempting to identify principles and ground rules which are of universal ecological relevance, and testing these in a variety of individual ecological instances.
  • Practical: People live in ecological relationships and situations all their lives without perceiving it in the manner that the scientific approach does. Most people see it as just living their life. Farmers see it as growing crops and rearing stock, fishermen see it as catching and selling fish, urban peoples see it as doing their work in order to earn their pay. Without themselves seeing it in those terms, most people are practical ecologists, using specialised knowledge about the particular ecosystem within which they acquire their necessary resources.

 

2. Issues arising when theorising or conceptualising "ecological knowledge"

Issues arising from the scientific and practical approaches;

  • Science: The advantage of taking the top-down approach is the potential this gives for a broader perspective which will result in a clearer understanding of the basic mechanisms which operate in the very complex chemical process which is life. One aim of this approach is to be able to generalise from one situation to another. A disadvantage of scientific ecology is that most of those who carry it out are usually not practically dependent on the ecological system which they study. Researchers usually do not personally economically depend on fish catches and sales, agricultural markets or on hunting and gathering for food. This can create a certain remoteness and lack of immediate urgency in predicting future events correctly. The need to play safe and to have a margin of error in an ecological system is not as great for the researcher of the system as it is for the active participants in that system. On the other hand, not being an active participant in the ecological system in question, the researcher may be able to be more objective and independent in histher judgments. The researcher would therefore tend not to have a vested interest in particular conclusions being arrived at.
  • Practical: Depending on an ecological system for one's livelihood creates a very strong appreciation and need for a good understanding of its functioning. Decisions need to be taken within a certain time frame and they need to be correct. This type of situation tends to focus the mind. For those living in an urban ecology, crossing the street has got to be done safely. Fishermen need to fish in areas where there are fish or they will go bankrupt. Therefore practical knowledge tends to be real and to the point. The disadvantage however can be, for practical participants living in a money economy, that short and medium term economic pressures may force decision making which is not sustainable in the longterm. In fact, practical ecological knowledge may realise that the short and medium term decisions are non-sustainable, but be unable to do anything about it.

 

3. Observations. issues and for problems arising from participants experiences in eco-knowledge focussed research:

From the context, the term "participant" is taken to mean the participant in the ecosystem (i.e.: a farmer, a fisherman) rather than a participatory researcher of eco-knowledge.

From the present author's experience of human ecological research in fishing communities in Ireland and The Netherlands (Connolly 1997), the experience which an ecological participant, such as a fisherman, had of eco-knowledge focused research was little or nothing. This type of research had not been carried out in their communities previously. When initially approached, some expressed a doubt as to whether they "would know the correct answers". However, when the idea, of their experience and knowledge being of real and broad practical value, was put to them they generally understood the aim of the study and were usually willing, even enthusiastic, respondents.

As regards the attitudes of Dutch and Irish respondents towards fishery biologists and their research, the communities in these two European countries contrasted in one respect while agreeing in another. The Dutch respondents tended to be of the opinion that the fishery biologists did not employ correct research procedures and were therefore incorrect in many of their conclusions. They claimed that their own experience at sea confirmed this. The Irish fishermen thought that the fishery biologists were reasonably correct in their conclusions, but that much more research needed to be done before information on fish stocks would be adequate. Both Irish and Dutch fishermen felt out of touch with researchers, helpless in the face of a remote research establishment and far removed from decision making on fish stock assessments. In Ireland the remote geographic location of the fishing communities was often blamed for this, but the Dutch fishermen also felt ignored and disregarded by their research establishment and their communities were located between one half and three hours travel from both the Dutch and the European Union fishery research and management organisations. It should be noted that eco-knowledge or any knowledge systems research has up to now effectively been absent from fisheries research in Ireland and The Netherlands.

 

4. Observations respecting the similarities and differences embedded in various ecological knowledge systems:

Contrasts of scientific and practical ecological knowledge systems have been discussed under the second heading above, and can be summarised as follows:

  • Science: Good overview and broad perspective, objective but can be lacking in practical application.
  • Practical: Focussed because of immediate dependency factor, high level of specialisation but can have vested interests, tendency for decision making more controlled by short term economics rather than longterm sustainability.

 

5. Remarks respecting ways and means of reconciling differences between scientific and experience-based ecological knowledge systems

Certain differences between scientific and experience-based (practical) ecological knowledge systems are necessary and "good" in the sense that they exist as a result of the difference in the nature and aim of the work carried out by a researcher and a practical participant in an ecological system. As a researcher one usually doesn't have the time, energy and skills, nor is it your function, to also work as a farmer or fisherman, and vice versa. The actual work a researcher carries out is simply different from that of the practical participant in an ecological system, and needs to be done as much as that of the practical participant. In fact, the two can and should compliment each other. However, both the scientist and the participant have knowledge of the same ecological system and therefore, particularly because there are differences between them, these two bodies of knowledge need to be brought into contact to attain the potential of the fully integrated body of knowledge. The reason why this tends not to have happened in the past is because the lines of communication between scientists and practical participants have traditionally varied from bad to non-existent. The opening of lines of communication may be best achieved via specialised communicators; persons whose job it is to communicate between the two eco-knowledge systems. In fact, in research carried out by the present author (Connolly 1997), certain fishing communities were working on a practical level towards more sustainable exploitation practices and in these instances lines of communication had been opened, either via fisheries management organisations, or unofficial local contact persons who voluntarily took this role upon themselves. In both cases it was largely due to the good social skills of the individual communicator involved that the lines of communication existed.

A very important aspects of lines of communication is that the information flow is in both directions. The practical participants need to feel that their contributions really do influence the opinions of the researchers, and the researchers need to feel that the information they receive is reliable. One group should neither dominate nor hold out information on the other.

The question, as to who pays such a communicator, should be given special attention as this could create a conflict of interest for the communicator.

 

6. Observations on the strengths and weaknesses evident in the published literature respecting eco-knowledge research.

Information on eco-knowledge and general indigenous and traditional knowledge systems research is scant outside of this field. Agricultural, fisheries, veterinary and human health care scientists have traditionally not paid much attention to eco- and indigenous/traditional knowledge systems. Even those possessing this knowledge undervalued it, often being unaware of its full potential. In the modem technical press serving a particular eco-user group, the eco- and indigenous knowledge base which they posses is usually largely ignored. The immediate need for economic survival can easily obscure the often more subtle and longterm value of eco-knowledge. The conservation oriented "Green" literature also concentrates more on other areas. Maybe this is due to the emphasis this interest group puts on the deleterious effects which human knowledge has had on the environment and therefore are suspicious of it?

The body of literature describing Indigenous Knowledge Research is much concerned with sustainable ecological practices and is a rich source of Eco-Knowledge (eg: the Indigenous Knowledge & Development Monitor , etc.).

 

7. Observation regarding the design of eco-knowledge research:

The aims of the research study control the design of the study and the area of eco-knowledge to be studied. Both the aims and the particular area of eco-knowledge need to be defined and clearly understood by the researchers.

As the research is primarily concerned with gathering, recording and assessing knowledge, it has to identify the sources of eco-knowledge. Knowledge, in a form that we can retrieve it, is firstly stored in people's brains. Research techniques such as those used in anthropology and sociology would seem the most appropriate to access this knowledge. The information can be retrieved by means of qualitative interview and/or quantitative questionnaires. Qualitative interviews to find out the range of knowledge which exists amongst the people, followed by quantitative questionnaires in order to assess the spread of this knowledge in the population. The functional relationships between the questions in the quantitative questionnaires need also to be considered. An attitude of courteous respect fbr the experience, achievements and knowledge of the respondents should be adopted on the part of the researcher, this includes attention being given to form of dress worn by the researcher. Other sources of knowledge, such as literature and historical records should also be consulted.

Residence of the researchers within the community for a period of weeks should be aimed for. This will allow a more correct interpretation of the attitudes and reactions of the respondents. Alternative sources of information relevant to the aims of the study should also be identified. In eco-knowledge research this may be biological scientific knowledge, economic records, trends in eco-production over the years, human demography and geography etc. The eco-knowledge recorded from the study community should be compared with this information and any discrepancies investigated.

Crucial to all eco-knowledge is information, both from local and scientific sources, about the particular characteristics of the local environment. As indicated by the definition of ecology given above, the environment is the ultimate arbiter as to the type of human ecology which is carried on, and about which the eco-knowledge exists.

The recorded data should be suitable for the statistical analyses which are to be used.

 

8. Observations respecting particular methodological issues, challenges and needs:

In eco-knowledge research, which includes ecology and areas of research usually included in the social sciences, the main challenge and possible methodological conflict may be between the biological science approach and the social science approach. These areas of science have traditionally not been very closely integrated. Human ecology, in the opinion of the present author, is one discipline, within which there are many specialised areas (Connolly 1998). These include all the social sciences as well as biological science. Workers within these areas have at times viewed involvement by others in their field as uninformed encroachments on their territory to be avoided. While many do see the potential of a fully integrated approach to the study of humans, such a wholistic approach is still a very long way from being universally applied.

The career structures of the researchers and research specialisations of organisations involved in studying humans (ie: human ecology), are not as yet suited to a wholistic and truly integrated approach to human ecology. This is a very powerful force supporting the fragmentation of human ecology.

 

9. Observations concerning the relation of ecological knowledge to public natural resource management policy:

Public management policies are influenced, in most western democracies, by both expert advice and popular public opinion. The present author would see the role of the researcher to be one of recording information and disseminating it to policy makers and the general public alike. This allows informed judgment and debate on the part of the public and policy makers.

However, what is known to participants in ecological systems to be the most sustainable manner of exploitation of a natural resource may not always be the way they actually exploit the resource. Official policy and regulations and economic circumstances may bring about situations that realistically the only possible course of action to take is the non-sustainable over -exploitative one. This may happen despite the existing ecological knowledge, simply because participants in an ecological system may be able to afford to fall behind their competitors or do not want to go out of business. These situations need to be highlighted by researchers who can inform natural resource management policy makers of the ecological knowledge which exists, and the possible contrast that exists between it and actual practices on the ground.

Ecological knowledge about a natural resource should be integrated with other information on that resource so that public management policy makers are fully informed of all aspects of exploitation of that resource.

In the exploitation of any resource, vested interests will attempt to influence policy formulation for their own advantage. For this reason it is important that, firstly: the bona fide's of the ecological knowledge is verified as much as possible, and secondly: that public natural resource management policy formulation procedure are carried out in a impartial and proper manner, and that the natural resource users are able to monitor the progress of the procedures.

 

10. Observations on how shared "ecological knowledge" might change relationships between resource users and resource regulators:

The important point on the sharing of ecological knowledge hinges in the lines of two-way communication between the resources users and the resource regulators, already discussed in section 5 in relation to resource users and researchers. Suffice to say that the resource users should feel that their opinions and knowledge get a fair hearing and have a real impact on the judgments of the resource regulators, and that the regulators feel they are receiving genuine information from the resource users.

As also mentioned in section 3, many fishermen who were respondents in a study carried out by the present author in Ireland and The Netherlands (Connolly 1997), felt ignored by and irrelevant to fishery regulators both in their own country and in the European Union. This lack of perceived influence gave rise to a feeling of frustration and powerlessness.

The recording and dissemination of ecological knowledge could sensitise the natural resource regulators to the wealth of wisdom which exists in communities which have experience of these resources for many generations. This could change the relationship between resource users and regulators, particularly when resource regulators realise that users do know what sustainable exploitation is and what is not, and when resource users feel their opinions, experiences and knowledge are being taken seriously and are influencing natural resource management regulations.

 

11. Specific research design and methodological recommendations:

  • Make sure that the goals for information gathering are achievable (eg: will resource users disclose income, can level of resource exploitation be quantified, can biological production of the resource be quantified, do generated data sets suit available statistical analyses etc.)
  • The present author would be inclined towards hand written notes of interviews, typed out fully the same or next day when it is still fresh in the memory, rather than recording interview on audio tape. Audio recording was found to be prone to mechanical brake down and was thought to have an off-putting effect on the respondents.
  • As part of the formulation of conclusions of the study to take into account the possible alternative decisions which the active participants in an ecological system could have taken. (eg: Why do fishermen opt to fish all their lives, considering it is one of the most dangerous types of work one can do in the western world).
  • All respondents to be kept informed of the progress of the study with a yearly news letter as well as a summary of the final results. Copies of the full report could be lodged at convenient locations in the relevant communities, such as local development or user-group organisation offices or municipal authority offices.
  • All communications and results to be written in clear non-jargon non-technical language.

 

References

Connolly, B. (1997) Traditional Fishery Knowledge and Practice for Sustainable Marine Resources Management in Northwestern Europe: A Comparative Study of Fisheries in Ireland and The Netherlands. Under the auspices of the Human Capital and Mobility Programme of the European Union; Leiden Ethnosystems and Development Programme (LEAD), Institute of Cultural and Social Sciences, Leiden University, The Netherlands, in collaboration with Department of Zoology, University College, Galway, Ireland. 176pp.

Connolly, B. (1998) Human Ecology: One Coherent Unit, not a Multi- or Interdisciplinary Amalgam. Journal of Human Ecology, 9(4): 297-310.