Indigenous climate knowledges

This article describes, assesses, and explains the growing status of indigenous knowledges (IKs) in climate science and politics. Informed by a critical environmental perspective we review the literature on traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), explore the contested nature of this concept, and ide...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
Main Authors: Heather A. Smith, Karyn Sharp
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Iks
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:3:y:2012:i:5:p:467-476
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:3:y:2012:i:5:p:467-476 2023-05-15T13:01:21+02:00 Indigenous climate knowledges Heather A. Smith Karyn Sharp https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185 unknown https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185 article ftrepec https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185 2020-12-04T13:31:18Z This article describes, assesses, and explains the growing status of indigenous knowledges (IKs) in climate science and politics. Informed by a critical environmental perspective we review the literature on traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), explore the contested nature of this concept, and identify the numerous epistemological obstacles to the appropriate and respectful inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge. While we believe that TEK and Western science are complementary, the inclusion of TEK in climate science and politics has been uneven. In support of our argument, we present a framework for assessment of degrees of inclusion of TEK and apply the framework to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), and the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). We find that the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol do not account for either indigenous peoples or indigenous people's knowledges. The AR4 includes some references to indigenous peoples but they are often buried in regional chapters. The ACIA is the most inclusive of all the documents examined and represents an important starting point for the inclusion of IKs. Based on the findings of our assessment, we conclude with recommendations for moving forward with greater inclusion of IKs. WIREs Clim Change 2011 DOI:10.1002/wcc.185 This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Sociology/Anthropology of Climate Knowledge Article in Journal/Newspaper ACIA Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Arctic Climate change RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) Arctic Iks ENVELOPE(144.043,144.043,59.640,59.640) Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 3 5 467 476
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description This article describes, assesses, and explains the growing status of indigenous knowledges (IKs) in climate science and politics. Informed by a critical environmental perspective we review the literature on traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), explore the contested nature of this concept, and identify the numerous epistemological obstacles to the appropriate and respectful inclusion of traditional ecological knowledge. While we believe that TEK and Western science are complementary, the inclusion of TEK in climate science and politics has been uneven. In support of our argument, we present a framework for assessment of degrees of inclusion of TEK and apply the framework to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), and the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). We find that the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol do not account for either indigenous peoples or indigenous people's knowledges. The AR4 includes some references to indigenous peoples but they are often buried in regional chapters. The ACIA is the most inclusive of all the documents examined and represents an important starting point for the inclusion of IKs. Based on the findings of our assessment, we conclude with recommendations for moving forward with greater inclusion of IKs. WIREs Clim Change 2011 DOI:10.1002/wcc.185 This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Sociology/Anthropology of Climate Knowledge
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Heather A. Smith
Karyn Sharp
spellingShingle Heather A. Smith
Karyn Sharp
Indigenous climate knowledges
author_facet Heather A. Smith
Karyn Sharp
author_sort Heather A. Smith
title Indigenous climate knowledges
title_short Indigenous climate knowledges
title_full Indigenous climate knowledges
title_fullStr Indigenous climate knowledges
title_full_unstemmed Indigenous climate knowledges
title_sort indigenous climate knowledges
url https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185
long_lat ENVELOPE(144.043,144.043,59.640,59.640)
geographic Arctic
Iks
geographic_facet Arctic
Iks
genre ACIA
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment
Arctic
Climate change
genre_facet ACIA
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment
Arctic
Climate change
op_relation https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.185
container_title Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
container_volume 3
container_issue 5
container_start_page 467
op_container_end_page 476
_version_ 1766270317930479616