Luossa and Laks
When technoscience and state policy interact with indigenous knowledges and practices they usually do so asymmetrically. Within relations of domination indigenous knowledges are treated as ‘beliefs’ or ‘culture’ whereas technoscience qualifies as ‘knowledge’ or truth. This paper explores one such in...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Société d'Anthropologie des Connaissances
2020
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journals.openedition.org/rac/2198 |
id |
ftopenedition:oai:revues.org:rac/2198 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftopenedition:oai:revues.org:rac/2198 2023-05-15T17:39:24+02:00 Luossa and Laks Law, John Joks, Solveig 2020-01-31 http://journals.openedition.org/rac/2198 en eng Société d'Anthropologie des Connaissances Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1760-5393 http://journals.openedition.org/rac/2198 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess sámi salmon policy fisheries policy local ecological knowledge (LEK) indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) technoscience postcolonialism nature/culture dualism ontological singularity metaphysics practice science and technology studies (STS) info:eu-repo/semantics/article article 2020 ftopenedition 2020-02-02T01:14:13Z When technoscience and state policy interact with indigenous knowledges and practices they usually do so asymmetrically. Within relations of domination indigenous knowledges are treated as ‘beliefs’ or ‘culture’ whereas technoscience qualifies as ‘knowledge’ or truth. This paper explores one such interaction: a controversy in north Norway and Finland between biological modellers and policymakers on the one hand, and Sámi fisherpeople on the other. The scientists and the policymakers argue that salmon numbers are falling in the Deatnu (Tana) river as a result of overfishing, and seek to limit fishing. Local fishermen partially agree, but argue that other factors (and especially the protection of predators) are also crucial. They also resist restrictions being imposed on local (and often Sámi) driftnet fishing practices. The paper treats this controversy as epistemological, political and metaphysical, with a particular focus on the last of these. The metaphysical assumptions enacted by technoscience –and in particular its commitments to nature-culture dualism and a singular ‘one-world’ ontology– are explored. These commitments are shown to be absent in Sámi practices. It is argued, following other work in postcolonial anthropology, that those embedded assumptions prevent technoscience and policy practices from recognising metaphysical difference, and so allow policymakers and scientists to refuse the possibility that there might be multiple and different worlds. The paper concludes by arguing that if less dominatory relations between science and policy on the one hand, and Sámi practices and knowledges on the other, are to be achieved it will be important to attend: (a) to the down-to-earth material practices of knowledge production; and (b) to the significance of metaphysical difference within and between those practices. It will also be important: (c) to create ways of knowing that recognise and enact differences rather than hoping to seek consensus. Article in Journal/Newspaper North Norway OpenEdition Norway Tana River ENVELOPE(28.395,28.395,70.503,70.503) |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
OpenEdition |
op_collection_id |
ftopenedition |
language |
English |
topic |
sámi salmon policy fisheries policy local ecological knowledge (LEK) indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) technoscience postcolonialism nature/culture dualism ontological singularity metaphysics practice science and technology studies (STS) |
spellingShingle |
sámi salmon policy fisheries policy local ecological knowledge (LEK) indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) technoscience postcolonialism nature/culture dualism ontological singularity metaphysics practice science and technology studies (STS) Law, John Joks, Solveig Luossa and Laks |
topic_facet |
sámi salmon policy fisheries policy local ecological knowledge (LEK) indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) technoscience postcolonialism nature/culture dualism ontological singularity metaphysics practice science and technology studies (STS) |
description |
When technoscience and state policy interact with indigenous knowledges and practices they usually do so asymmetrically. Within relations of domination indigenous knowledges are treated as ‘beliefs’ or ‘culture’ whereas technoscience qualifies as ‘knowledge’ or truth. This paper explores one such interaction: a controversy in north Norway and Finland between biological modellers and policymakers on the one hand, and Sámi fisherpeople on the other. The scientists and the policymakers argue that salmon numbers are falling in the Deatnu (Tana) river as a result of overfishing, and seek to limit fishing. Local fishermen partially agree, but argue that other factors (and especially the protection of predators) are also crucial. They also resist restrictions being imposed on local (and often Sámi) driftnet fishing practices. The paper treats this controversy as epistemological, political and metaphysical, with a particular focus on the last of these. The metaphysical assumptions enacted by technoscience –and in particular its commitments to nature-culture dualism and a singular ‘one-world’ ontology– are explored. These commitments are shown to be absent in Sámi practices. It is argued, following other work in postcolonial anthropology, that those embedded assumptions prevent technoscience and policy practices from recognising metaphysical difference, and so allow policymakers and scientists to refuse the possibility that there might be multiple and different worlds. The paper concludes by arguing that if less dominatory relations between science and policy on the one hand, and Sámi practices and knowledges on the other, are to be achieved it will be important to attend: (a) to the down-to-earth material practices of knowledge production; and (b) to the significance of metaphysical difference within and between those practices. It will also be important: (c) to create ways of knowing that recognise and enact differences rather than hoping to seek consensus. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Law, John Joks, Solveig |
author_facet |
Law, John Joks, Solveig |
author_sort |
Law, John |
title |
Luossa and Laks |
title_short |
Luossa and Laks |
title_full |
Luossa and Laks |
title_fullStr |
Luossa and Laks |
title_full_unstemmed |
Luossa and Laks |
title_sort |
luossa and laks |
publisher |
Société d'Anthropologie des Connaissances |
publishDate |
2020 |
url |
http://journals.openedition.org/rac/2198 |
long_lat |
ENVELOPE(28.395,28.395,70.503,70.503) |
geographic |
Norway Tana River |
geographic_facet |
Norway Tana River |
genre |
North Norway |
genre_facet |
North Norway |
op_relation |
info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1760-5393 http://journals.openedition.org/rac/2198 |
op_rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
_version_ |
1766140173987348480 |