Bridging knowledge divides: The case of indigenous ontologies of territoriality and REDD+

Abstract

Highlights• New relationships are needed among indigenous peoples and researchers in order to co-produce knowledge to tackle global challenges.• Comparing and sharing knowledge across knowledge traditions can create opportunities to develop new approaches to addressing deforestation, forest degradation and climate change more generally.• Much is at stake as we move into the Paris Agreement implementation phase, where it is clear that 2 or even 1.5 degrees warming limitations cannot be achieved without the meaningful participation of non-state actors, including indigenous peoples and their different bases of knowledge.• We identify three approaches through which indigenous ontologies on territoriality are relevant in their local context. These approaches could be scaled up and related to REDD+ across levels of governance; their holistic practices could be interpreted as guiding principles for improving forest management.• Approaching REDD+ through the perspective of indigenous territoriality is not only about protecting forests from deforestation and forest degradation, but also about defending the integrity of peoples who have sustainably coexisted in and with their forests by means of a worldview that promotes a reflective practice on reciprocity between human and natural worlds. AbstractThis study examines traditional indigenous ontologies of territoriality based on a number of indigenous communities in Bolivia and Colombia to show how they can inform effective implementation of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation plus sustainable forest management, forest conservation and enhancing forest carbon stock). This could help address concerns that REDD+ interventions oversimplify local dynamics and complexities. The concept of territoriality subsumes a variety of definitions and conceptions, some of which are embedded in Traditional Ecological Knowledge and represented in the multiple expressions of collective indigenous identity. We compare and contrast Western and indigenous ontologies of territoriality and identify three ways in which engagement with territoriality can enhance REDD+ implementation and effective non-state actor participation.

El bosque más allá del capitalismo: un contraste entre sistemas de conocimiento

“…Por el contrario, las ontologías forestales y otros insumos locales se han simplificado en exceso y, en repetidos casos, se han minimizado, invisibilizando las preocupaciones centrales de las comunidades locales (Schroeder y González, 2019). Por ejemplo, el informe REDD+ menciona la palabra indígena 74 veces en el documento (REDD+, 2016).…”

“…En las ontologías indígenas, la verificación es local y directa, basada en el registro de su experiencia. Por el contrario, la lógica científica racional se guía por procedimientos técnicos oficiales fundados en evidencias científicas cuantitativas o cualitativas (Schroeder y González, 2019).…”

“…El desarrollo de megaproyectos trae sin duda rendimientos financieros, pero a nivel político y ecológico no dará espacio a la sostenibilidad de la vida. La gobernanza debe indagar sobre métodos que permitan incorporar el conocimiento milenario local, así como la transferencia de sus valores desde un enfoque bottom up que incluya métodos que comprendan mejor las prácticas agroforestales y ecológicas indígenas (Schroeder y González, 2019). La ampliación de un diálogo político a las prácticas del chagra indígena descritas aquí y su impacto en las políticas del cambio climático pueden representar los primeros pasos hacia la generación de alternativas a los desafíos de la seguridad alimentaria, la reducción de las emisiones y la protección de la biodiversidad y la salud pública.…”

“…Mientras que dos décadas atrás los indicadores más relevantes sobre poblaciones indígenas hacían referencia solo a sus altos índices de pobreza, actualmente las tecnologías digitales aportan pruebas para una nueva mirada a estos actores desde otro paradigma. Así, se reconocen sus potencialidades para pensar de manera interdependiente la salvaguarda forestal, la biodiversidad, la salud pública y la seguridad alimentaria (González y Kröger, 2020;Schroeder y González, 2019;Krause et al, 2013).…”

Policy learning in REDD+ Donor Countries: Norway, Germany and the UK

“…The significant dominance of donor countries in the process (Dooley and Parker 2015) and their reliance on development assistance goals and national interest (Gulrajani 2017) have led to repeated cases of oversimplified and generalized understanding of local level dynamics and complexities, leading to adverse outcomes and a tendency to not align project goals with local needs and relationships with their territory (Corbera and Schroeder 2017;Gebara and Agrawal 2017;Traedal and Vedeld 2017). Recognition of the ecological knowledge and practices of inhabitants of forests that have historically maintained the balance and wellbeing of these ecosystems remains insufficient (Schroeder and Gonzalez 2019).…”