Research methodologies for the co‐production of knowledge for environmental management in Australia

Abstract

A major challenge exists in gaining wider recognition for the important role that indigenous knowledge can play in research direction-setting and in developing and implementing natural resource management (NRM) strategies. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992 highlighted the importance of indigenous knowledge in producing innovative strategies for sustainable resource management (Veitayaki 1997), the challenge since then has been in identifying pathways of integration for indigenous and scientific knowledge. Moller et al. (2009) document a research project in New Zealand, Kia Mau Te Tītī Mo Ake Tonu Atu (Keep the Tītī Forever), that works from within both the Rakiura Māori and scientific communities to incorporate diverse values to tītī management. They conclude that mātauranga and science have distinct epistemologies that should not be blended but rather should strengthen each other through dialogue. In this issue, several papers provide critique on these notions. Jacobson & Stephens (2009 this issue) argue that the scientific, indigenous and local knowledge traditions need to embrace, respect and value different epistemologies as pathways to pluralistic practice. Berkes (2009 this issue) contributes to the science versus traditional knowledge debate by suggesting a focus upon traditional knowledge as a process, rather than content, and calls for the co-production of knowledge through science and tradi-tional knowledge partnership and dialogue. Further, Agrawal (2009 this issue) locates these comments within a knowledge making context by articulating “indigenous knowledge is here to stay, even if what is represented is forever and always disappearing”. Our contribution to this discussion relates to research methodologies that explicitly embrace the co-production of knowledge. We present two research examples from Australia where the impetus is knowledge evolution and creation for cross-cultural NRM and governance. The methodologies practice multi-directional learning and mutual benefit for everyone involved. This approach promotes cross transfer of skills, for example, by generating or documenting scientifically valid information and strengthening indigenous knowledge and systems, with recognition of the value of indigenous knowledge and systems. Essential to these methodolo-gies is the creation of partnerships based on trust between co-researchers and genuine action research outcomes.