Cross‐cultural environmental research and management: Challenges and progress

Abstract

The Royal Society of New Zealand encouraged this Forum on cross-cultural environmental research and management following the publication of a special issue of the New Zealand Journal of Zoology in September 2009 called "Mātauranga Māori, science and seabirds" (Moller 2009). Mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) is concerned with all aspects of Te Ao Māori (the Māori world view), including their version of what overseas scholars have variously termed Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), Traditional Knowledge, Local Knowledge, Ethnoscience or Ethnobiology. The most widely used definition of TEK is "a cumulative body of knowledge, practice, and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by cultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (including humans) with one another and the environment" (Berkes 2008: 7). Mātauranga Māori, and especially its interface with science, is a particularly important issue for New Zealand because of its colonial history, the partnership principles derived from the Treaty of Waitangi, and the government's Vision Mātauranga to 'unlock the innovation potential of Māori Knowledge, Resources and People' (MoRST 2005). The Mātauranga Māori, science and seabirds special issue of New Zealand Journal of Zoology featured 10 papers from the Kia Mau Te Tītī Mo Ake Tonu Atu ("Keep the Tītī Forever") research project. Tītī is the Māori term for 'muttonbirds', the chicks of sooty shearwater (Puffinus griseus). The 'tītī project' was a 14-year collaboration of Rakiura Māori kaitiaki (environmental guardians) and their mātauranga with University of Otago ecologists and mathematicians (Moller et al. 2009c). Its main aim was to assess the sustainability of the current harvest of tītī and identify ways that the tītī can remain plentiful enough for the Rakiura mokopuna (grandchildren) to be able to continue their cultural heritage of muttonbirding. However, another aim of the project was compare science and mātauranga (or TEK in its international context) as ways of knowing and guiding ecological management. As the tītī project is a long-running and detailed example of a cross-cultural science-mātauranga partnership, the Royal Society of New Zealand enabled us to invite a range of researchers to comment on the lessons from the tītī project, and more generally to explore challenges and enablers of partnerships between knowledge systems of different cultures.

Culturally significant fisheries: keystones for management of freshwater social-ecological systems

“…In seeking both social and ecological resilience in increasingly disturbed freshwater ecosystems, CKS can provide focal species for identifying and monitoring key cultural and subsistence ecosystem services that affect the resilience of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. In supporting social groups that culturally and economically rely on these species, we will also increase the potential for better management and regulation of broader ecosystem health (Berkes et al 2000, Tipa and Teirney 2003, Moller et al 2004, Stephenson and Moller 2009, Ruiz-Mallén and Corbera 2013. This is because many CKS are also ecological keystones that underpin key ecosystem processes that provide resistance and resilience of freshwaters to environmental disturbances.…”

“…Equitable integration of Indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) into modern fisheries management can empower Indigenous people via recognition of their sovereignty (Bohnesky andMaru 2011, Alfred 2014) and support of customary harvest values and practices (Schnierer 2011, Butler et al 2012). If we are to bolster social-ecological resilience in freshwaters, we must recognize culturally significant species, engage a range of people in building cross-cultural capacity and understanding of freshwaters, and include IEK in adaptive management plans (Berkes et al 2000, Moller et al 2004, Stephenson and Moller 2009, Ruiz-Mallén and Corbera 2013.…”

Culturally Grounded Indicators of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems

“…Th e Mauri Meter quantifi es Indigenous values in a holistic and relatively simple way, thus making the indicators more useful than separate considerations that may be diffi cult to act upon. Janet Stephenson and Henrik Moller (2009) suggest that recognizing that science and Indigenous knowledge are founded in very diff erent belief systems may open the way to resolving some of the tensions between them. While translation between worldviews and contexts is fraught (West 2005) and care must be taken with the integrity and robustness of the approaches developed, many of the case studies above demonstrate that bringing disparate types of knowledge into conversation has led to eff ective coproduction of new ways of knowing.…”

Interdisciplinary progress in approaches to address social-ecological and ecocultural systems

“…Yet the importance of this knowledge is becoming more widely recognized by scientists and scientific institutions around the world. Stephenson and Moller (2009), in discussing the interrelations between local knowledge and modern science, emphasized the value and need to integrate both forms of knowledge capital, providing that both are taken within their respective cultural, spiritual and social contexts. They argued that scientists need to go beyond the false dualism (local knowledge versus science) which emphasizes a superiority of one form and inferiority of the other, and towards an understanding of the role that different knowledge bases can play in the future of conservation and environmental management.…”

“…Such partnerships are critical if these systems are to be better understood. Thus there is a need in future conservation research for both modern science, which emphasizes knowledge seeking, and local knowledge, which emphasizes knowledge holding (Stephenson & Moller 2009). …”