Thinking about the Integration of Indigenous Science and Western Science Knowledge Systems

• In Event: Indigenous Knowledges and Technologies - II

Abstract

The US and Canada convened the Costal Expert Monitoring Group (CEMG) in 2014 as a co-led series of workshops to define criteria for coastal plan effectiveness in response to rapidly changing conditions in the Arctic (Behe et al., 2016). The process used by CEMG to create the effectiveness criteria for the coastal plan had as its goal the integration of both western science and local indigenous knowledge (ibid.). This exploratory paper will examine how the CEMG members originally thought about and applied an integration of western and indigenous knowledge systems in the development of the Coastal Plan. Through an examination of CEMG literature, I will discuss how the CEMG could expand their approach and understanding of integration using the theoretical frameworks of four STS theories. First, I will discuss how Standpoint Theory and Strong Objectivity (Harding, 2015) can be used to help decide on equalization or privileging of knowledge within the two knowledge systems. Second, I will discuss the differences between the CEMG workshop conceptual models created independently by the experts from each of the knowledge systems. I will discuss how Civic Epistemology (Jasanoff, 2005) and Boundary Work (Gieryn, 1983) provide insight into why the experts of these two knowledge systems draw different scientific conclusions. The conclusions of this research suggest that future efforts to integrate Western and Indigenous knowledge systems must both understand the polysemous nature of these knowledge systems and acknowledge how expertise and experts are derived from value-based perspectives.

Author

• Cheri Johnson, Virginia Tech