1 / 8

Session 2

Session 2. Group 1: role of IK, use and what is it. Defined as oral tradition, historical practice, unwritten ‘How to’ information – agric. plus other info….rural communities Self-validating in farmer communities Need to validate IK – much ‘old wives’ knowledge which needs assessment

xaria
Télécharger la présentation

Session 2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Session 2

  2. Group 1: role of IK, use and what is it • Defined as oral tradition, historical practice, unwritten • ‘How to’ information – agric. plus other info….rural communities • Self-validating in farmer communities • Need to validate IK – much ‘old wives’ knowledge which needs assessment • Cultural function of IK (protection and control functions) • Validation of IK by scientists – in situ expts • Loss of IK increasing problem in DC as in developed world • Need to record the IK (e.g. of AI project promoting linkage with IK)

  3. Group 2: differing needs of information between countries, social groups, etc. • Not imposing information • Depends on needs • Can the user get by without the information • Resources in libraries in DC : shortage of materials, resources, etc. • Communications by various means • Expertise – external (consultancies vs. local expertise in-country) perception of greater value with externals • Language problems with external consultants • Partnerships • Pace of information development

  4. Group 3: what can be done to faciliate 2-way info flow - payment • Mediators in flow: extension workers, anthropologists, facilitators in flow of info (multiple flow mechanisms and directions) • Original information collectors included IK, period of loss, rediscovery • IK can be influenced by people collecting it • Some IK has been totally lost • How to pay for this???? • How to value IK so that funding is provided? • Cost of NOT using the IK

  5. Group 4: How does technology impact upon area • Digital technologies driving force – positive influence • Improved access to information • Opportunities for publishers to reduce costs – improve outreach • Increased use of mobile phones (overtaking Internet use) • Greater effort needed in synthesis of vast amount of information • High tech solutions often looked at (google-is-god) • Undervaluing of sources that are difficult to find and transfer • Paper remains an important medium

  6. Group 5: what sort of info is needed by different stakeholders • Same information may be appropriate but needs different dissemination methods/pathways • Libraries cater for researchers in general, but no such ‘body’ caters for other information users/stakeholders

  7. Panel comments • IK vs. scientific – is there a ‘versus’ in this question? A great deal to learn from two interacting and breaking down barriers; collaborative process for mutual benefit • Peer-reviewed material vs. grey material: how reliable is peer-reviewed literature? How relevant and reliable? Quality differences between peer-reviewed jls are also great. • Digital divide exists on different frontiers, not just between DC and developed world • Wise use of variety of media for communicating in local contexts

  8. General comments • ‘versus’ is a clear issue. Much scientific information is not useful in some land management problems. Need to retain much IK (also in western situations) before traditional communities disappear with their IK. • These problems can be addressed with digital solutions : capturing IK and making it availale, where relevant, more widely • Oral histories – problems of classifying, etc. but can we propose solutions? • Access to information has limited anthropologists working with IK. Information can be considered ‘state’ property, etc. How to promote access, which is needed to further promote this information • (IUFRO conference – Florence 2006) • Local people can be suspicious of scientific interest in their knowledge. Sensitivity required • With two-way flow being promoted, Govt. may feel more comfortable with sharing ‘state’ knowledge/information • Information divide between local ownership and common good. Contradictory roles of two communities perception. • Examples of good practice for bridging these two communities • Benefits to local community as custodians of IK, Needs laws to protect and preserve • Large amounts of IK which is not available through Internet. Problem perceived as that of the local communities who have generated it. Is it our problem in resource-rich countries, institutions? • Need for dialogue with the local communities who have and generate information • Communication chain from high-level Govt. down to (or up from) farmers: good practice examples and projects which have reduced Govt. input. How important is this high-level input? • Are we losing the art of good writing? Important in new technology communication as well as traditional communication media • Bypassing paper view vs. paper industry projection of paper use increases • IUFRO taskforces: science policy interface; science/public interface • Greater understanding of how media work for communicating science • Untapped traditional information • Evidence-based research – how can we do this in forestry?

More Related