Berkes, Fikret

This open-access e-book https://doi.org/10.4060/cd4289en provides a human-centred perspective, building on the expanding horizon from biological management to inter- and transdisciplinary governance. Of particular interest to commons scholars and practitioners, the volume engages with the enclosure of the aquatic commons through the privatization of resource rights. The rapid growth of the “Blue Economy” marginalizes small-scale fisheries and threatens the ability of oceans to meet SDG1 (No Poverty) and SDG2 (Zero Hunger) goals. Ostrom’s design principles for collective action indicate that fishers need to be able to exclude other uses/users; without this ability, collective action and community-based conservation cannot work.

Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in IPBES terminology or Indigenous knowledge (IK) has been characterized as a knowledge-practice-belief complex. In many cases, the worldview of IK is relational, providing potential cognitive and emotional pathways for collective action to deal with climate change. That is, IK-holders tend to identify with the environment in which they live through relations across individuals, groups, and other-than-human parts of the ecosystem. For example, many Indigenous peoples in the Canadian North talk about three Rs – respect, reciprocity and relations (relationality) in which relations refer to the intimate and holistic knowledge of the land and feelings of kinship with other beings (e.g., Tsawalk: A Nuu-chah-nulth Worldview, by Umeek).

How can the knowledge and insights of Indigenous peoples be turned into practical action for local benefit? Wildfires have been a major problem in the Canadian mid-North, especially in 2023/24. Focusing on wildfires, we have sought ways to build community resilience through community-level disaster risk reduction (DRR) plans using the intimate local knowledge of the land. In recent years, DRR has replaced the former reactive approach to disasters by promoting interdisciplinary, anticipatory perspectives (e.g., UN Sendai Framework for DRR, 2015-30).

However, many countries (including Canada), still seem to be using a reactive and fragmented approach with many specialized agencies (e.g., for emergency evacuation, cookie-cutter firebreaks). Holistic proactive planning for DRR can benefit from knowledge co-production with local people who know their forests (e.g., forest renewal cycles; dry and wet areas; soil conditions). As government managers do not have this kind of detailed knowledge, standard procedures cannot be used, and individual plans must be co-developed. Our ongoing team project focuses on three sites in northern Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, looking for IK on forest burning and developing widely applicable methodologies. Part of the objective is community empowerment and knowledge decolonization.

The UN Sendai Framework recognized the need for making our communities safer and more resilient to disasters by shifting policy goals from “managing disasters” to disaster risk reduction (DRR) and building resilience through multi-level partnerships. For DRR and building community resilience to disaster shocks, this study posits that social learning, a process of relational development (primarily institutional) and sharing knowledge through iterative reflections on experience, is key to changing the conventional linear logic-based, reactive framework into one based on learning-by-doing (adaptive management). The latter approach is characterized by iterative rounds of testing and learning from the disaster experience of local and Indigenous peoples to inform subsequent policy and practice. Towards this end, a three-round Policy Delphi process was pursued with the participation of 18 international DRR and SES (social-ecological systems) resilience scholars, practitioners, and public officials.
Weak policy frameworks; operational, cultural and educational/training silos; and domination of technical knowledge were identified by the participants as major challenges in the development of institutional relationships and the transmission of learning. Delphi participants emphasized forward-looking, resilient solutions that leave the system better prepared to deal with future change, a fundamental departure from dealing with disasters reactively. Further, adopting a complex systems approach and using a SES perspective help view disasters in a more holistic social and environmental context, with due regard to the human dimension. Incorporating more social science to balance technical knowledge enhances transdisciplinary understandings. Social learning can be best developed among all participants through engagement in the learning process itself. Doing so requires building social capital (including trust relationships) between communities and government agencies, strengthening networks and partnerships, and working towards knowledge systems that are egalitarian and open to diverse values.