Best practice is a long way from being established in the acquisition and use of traditional knowledge systems of indigenous peoples. Certain ideals, however, are now apparent.

In acquiring indigenous traditional knowledge:
1. Cause no harm.
2. Define the roles and responsibilities of participants carefully and in line with culture and knowledge systems.
3. Define the information to be collected; specify taboo information as outside the project limits.
4. Establish the use, ownership, and the means to interpret or communicate information at the outset.

Regardless of the practices, it is important to recognize a fundamental difference in the beginning assumptions that each party will have. Most project planners have already decided the project should move ahead, and are concerned with how that should be done. Whereas, most indigenous communities who are being asked to participate, will be assessing why and if the project should go ahead, not how.

Recognize that including traditional knowledge systems in projects requires respect, trust, equity, and empowerment of indigenous peoples and of the traditional knowledge system.

As with any knowledge system, the power of the system is rooted in the experience of many people who have found a means to accumulate that experience into a body of practices and processes that allow greater insight into the world around us than any one person can hope to achieve independently. Traditional knowledge uses indirect indicators that over centuries have proven to predict events accurately. Traditional knowledge models may be mechanistic, but are equally likely to be non-secular or metaphysical explanations.

Respect, trust, and equity are largely attitudinal concerns, whereas empowerment is usually a question of time and money to help build capacity. Empowerment is the easiest to implement, but it is often ignored. Respect, trust, and equity are a function of personal and professional relationships. In indigenous communities, trust and respect can take years to achieve, especially in those locations where indigenous peoples have been repressed. Equity is easy to describe, but difficult to achieve when vastly different frameworks for two systems of knowledge, such as science and indigenous traditional knowledge must work together in harmony, and where they will frequently come to different conclusions.

The four elements all work together.

Respect for traditional knowledge systems means that the techniques used are valid means of gathering and interpreting information about the project variables. Trust is an important facet of the relationship between the participants in acquiring and using the knowledge and understanding that comes from traditional knowledge. A scientist trusts the logical framework within which he or she works. The same is true for the traditional knowledge practitioner. To work together, both groups must be able to trust the work of the other.

Equity is one of the most troublesome. Equity assumes that one system is no better or worse than another. To work together in an integrated fashion, all systems of knowledge must recognize their strengths and weaknesses and work to bring the systems together in a complementary fashion, meshing the strengths of one with the weaknesses of the other. Equity can become an issue when two systems of knowledge come to different conclusions. The biggest mistake is to assume that one or other system is more powerful. Instead, the differences in conclusions should be taken as a signal that there may not be enough information at hand to come a proper conclusion, or that the question was posed incorrectly, or that there is some other problem. The use of the equity principle establishes a trigger for discussion and renewed investigation.

Empowerment means ensuring that the parties all have the capacity to engage in a meaningful dialogue. It can mean that the project will need to invest some money and time in transferring expertise to the local indigenous peoples. It may mean building the capacity of the proponent staff to understand and be sensitive to traditional ways of thinking. It may be as simple as providing the needed infrastructure so that the local population has a means of participating in the planning and implementation process. Of the four principles, empowerment can most easily be made part of the process, because it just requires time and money. For the same reason, however, it is also the most susceptible to being ignored or short-changed.

Intellectual Property Rights

Intellectual property rights are intended to protect the ownership of the intellectual content of the works of an individual or a legal entity. This concept is complicated when indigenous traditional knowledge is involved. By its very nature, traditional knowledge is communal, not personal. Furthermore, the intellectual property must be physically demonstrable; a written document, a recording of music, a painting or drawing, an electronic record, or some tangible item. Indigenous traditional knowledge is sometimes in this format. Statues, paintings, and drawings that embody traditional knowledge are able to be protected through copyright laws. Recordings of traditional songs, stories, and music are also capable of being protected.

Most traditional knowledge, however, is held in the minds and practices of the people. Most traditions share this knowledge freely among the community members. In fact, sharing is the main means of dissemination of the knowledge. In indigenous societies, the concept of proprietary information or of selling the information is not easily acceptable. A network of entrepreneurial developments based on indigenous traditional knowledge in the form of value-added tangible items that can be protected is available as a model from India in the newsletter "Honeybee."

Protect and transfer to indigenous communities or individuals, any value-added concepts that arise from the indigenous traditional knowledge holders as a direct result of the project.

Problems occur when traditional knowledge is a marketable commodity exploited on a large scale by non-indigenous peoples for the benefit of non-indigenous peoples, especially when there is little or no benefit returned to the original holders of the traditional knowledge. Indigenous peoples are usually happy to share their wisdom on an individual basis, but not if it is commercialized, distorted, trivialized, or otherwise debased.

Today, indigenous peoples feel that they, who are the keepers and developers of traditional knowledge, should be compensated for sharing or collecting it, just like any other professional. Governments or corporations do not always agree with the idea that indigenous peoples should be paid for their knowledge. When payment is not forthcoming, indigenous peoples may decline to share the knowledge. Thus, development projects should recognize the potential need to budget for acquisition of traditional knowledge.

Build in opportunities for indigenous peoples to benefit directly from value-added concepts derived from traditional knowledge so the indigenous community benefits from the commercial use of their traditional knowledge.

Project planners will also need to weigh the ethical pros and cons of proceeding with a project if indigenous peoples who will be affected, decline to share their traditional knowledge, whether for reasons such as proprietary interests, or lack of financial support, sacred wisdom or locations, that requires them to hold the knowledge within their own traditions. This may make it impossible to give equal weight to science and traditional knowledge.

Enable indigenous peoples to define the aspects of their traditional knowledge are for public consumption and those aspects that are private and confidential.

Indigenous traditional rights to resources claim that indigenous peoples who have lived on the land for very long periods of time, and who have used the resources of the land for food, lodging, sacred places and events, travel routes, and other non-commercial uses, have the continuing right to the same use of those natural resources. This is an international principle that is upheld by many, but certainly not all countries. In a large number of countries, indigenous peoples are deemed not to have right to land or use of the land without clear legal title. Very few indigenous groups can demonstrate clear legal title. Even within those countries that acknowledge these rights, there is a very wide range of practice associated with them. Most of these countries call for a demonstration that the indigenous peoples lived on and used the resources continuously throughout the entire period.

In Canada, the British Columbia Supreme Court (the Delgamuukw decision) recently recognized the oral traditions, performances, stories, and legends, as evidence in court. The case recognized that in the absence of written deeds, indigenous peoples could use their own traditions as a means of demonstrating continuous use. Importantly the court further recognized that continuous physical presence was not the only criterion. Periodic, long standing cycles of visits or the presence of sacred objects or graves also demonstrated traditional rights to the land.

Respect and protect indigenous traditional rights to natural resources.

To apply traditional rights to resources in development projects is not difficult if the land will not be significantly changed. In development projects where the land is changed, travel routes are cut off, sacred places trespassed, or subsistence hunting, gathering, or fishing capacity is reduced, then indigenous rights will have been impaired or lost. A logical first step to avoid these problems is to engage the indigenous peoples in a survey of the potential problems involved in the project plans. Most of the issues will be easily addressed, but at least two may difficult. Indigenous peoples may be reluctant to disclose sacred places or special hunting and gathering areas. Yet the indigenous community will want them left alone. The traditional knowledge of the regional communities, as well as the locations that are off limits can then successfully, but without conflict be used together by the local community to define their best options.

Ask where the development would best take place, do not ask where development should not take place.

Traditional Indigenous Peoples as Part of the Land

Indigenous peoples live in traditional fashion on about 20% of the world’s land mass, often in areas of nature least affected by industrial and market-based economies. Their use of the land includes subsistence, the development of culture, and a sense of identity. Indigenous peoples regard themselves as part of the land, not as owners of the land. Their inherent sense of sustainable use and protection is quite different from the view of land as a resource. Changes to the land through development projects have effects that ripple through the entire fabric of their existence. Modern development and progress is important to indigenous peoples. They understand that development projects may have a major benefit to their life styles and health, but they are also aware that these projects pose a potential risk that may degrade their environment by removing natural resources or polluting the land on which they live. Indigenous peoples need to live and develop according to their own decisions and traditions on the same land in the face of projects that routinely alter their fundamental conditions of life.

By contrast, non-indigenous societies have generally come to view natural areas as potential commercial reservoirs of natural resources. Changes that occur in these areas are distant from most non-indigenous societies, so have no immediate effect on them. Thus, for a non-indigenous person living in a typical urban or sub-urban environment, the shift from natural areas to developed areas is rarely seen to have negative effect, and is almost always viewed as progress. In fact, natural resources are often considered wasted unless extracted and put to "use."

The survival of indigenous peoples is directly tied to the maintenance and sustainable use of a healthy and vibrant ecosystem. The earth is as a "mother", honoured for nurturing and sustaining them. From her they draw their traditions, culture, and subsistence. For most indigenous peoples, the particular land on which they were born and on which they have lived is as important to them as a mother; to take away "their land" and offer them some other parcel of land, or something else in recompense is to profoundly misjudge the essence and importance of their relationship to a specific landscape.

Recognize that indigenous peoples feel that they belong to the land, so they may not easily accept changing it, or their relationship to it, in any radical way.

Development: Differences in Perspective

One of the most difficult aspects of project planning and initiation is when the aspirations of the planners are mismatched to those of indigenous peoples. While the proponents may be convinced that their project will be of huge benefit to many people, these "benefits" may not be seen as beneficial by indigenous peoples.

Engage traditional knowledge systems before initial decisions have been taken to help predict the impacts of a project and be prepared to abandon the project or vastly modify it if there is a risk of harm to indigenous peoples.

Deep differences in perspectives about what land and its resources should be used for, often create difficulties between indigenous and non-indigenous interests in reaching mutually acceptable courses of action regarding development projects. Major projects almost always have a dramatic impact on the environment and culture. If indigenous peoples are involved, the effects are always potent. Indigenous peoples rarely want major change in the environment, because their livelihoods depend on the traditional ways of living with the land. If a forest is cleared for urban development, lumber, agriculture, or mining, the changes may be sufficient to render the traditional ways of living on the land inoperable, or ineffective. In the worst instances, great harm can be done to indigenous peoples. Projects that have the potential to cause harm include major development projects to extract natural resources, projects to provide infra-structure support systems in both urban and rural areas, or policy changes in the way a government body deals with development projects. Handled well, and with the informed co-operation of the indigenous peoples, these projects also have the potential for great benefit.

Leave broad margins for error in predictive models, and include the socio-economic costs of the often invisible economy of "women's work" and the special vulnerability that indigenous women face.

Past practices have varied immensely in their attention to the needs of indigenous peoples. Best practices are those that are careful of the needs and rights of indigenous groups. By incorporating these best practices, and by utilizing the traditional knowledge of the people, disputes can be avoided. Specific areas to include in mutually agreed protocol include land ownership and use, traditional rights to natural resources, repair of environmental damage, impact of socio-economic factors potentially leading to dysfunction and dislocation, and significant changes in cultural systems. At the present time in many countries, development projects are a priority that sometimes supersedes indigenous human rights.

A sustainable project must ensure that no harm comes to any party from the development activity, and that in the best case, mutual benefit to all parties results. The most useful approach is to recognize that there are deep differences in perspectives, and that these differences can be viewed as opportunities to work together, rather than in conflict.

Participation

Indigenous customs vary widely from one place to another. Assuming a single approach or process will suffice for all indigenous peoples is a big mistake. For example, haggling over prices in some cultures is expected, whereas in others it is insulting. Looking into another’s eyes during negotiations can be necessary or unacceptable. Sitting, kneeling, standing, and squatting all have special meaning in different indigenous cultures. Gender equality is accepted in some, not in others.

Understand the local customs and etiquette and train staff who will interact with indigenous peoples before contact.

Because indigenous peoples are, by definition, a nation or sovereign group, or self-governing body within a nation, it is especially important to include them in project planning and implementation in ways that preserve their autonomy and unique status. Thus, for projects that directly affect them and their relationship to the land, assuming that indigenous peoples are simply part of the stakeholder group, is not sufficient. They are much more tied to the land than an "interest group." On the other hand, if they are only indirectly affected, and if that affect is unlikely to change their relationship with the land, then inclusion as a stakeholder group is sufficient, assuming their autonomy is preserved.

Distinguish between local and indigenous communities, and ensure both have roles; local communities as stakeholders in the dominant culture, and indigenous peoples as a group with special traditional rights.

Decision-making and representation in indigenous communities is usually not similar to methods employed by non-indigenous peoples. Therefore, the methods that must be employed to include indigenous peoples and their traditional knowledge in an effective manner will not be a simple extension of methods used with other non-indigenous peoples.

Make the participatory approach fit the cultural sensitivity of the indigenous community. Successful strategies variously include round tables or talking circles, training the trainers, co-management, and participatory action research. For example, in some, but certainly not all, indigenous communities, a strict hierarchy of status is maintained. The elite do not ask for or receive advice from the lower ranks. Women, in some societies, might suffer if they attempted to participate. In these situations, the head man makes all the decisions that would typically be required in a project design. A project might call for round-table discussions of all stakeholders, but to insist on it could cause real harm to people, reduce the credibility of the project, and insult the local culture.

A successful strategy to avoid these problems is to empower the local people to train their colleagues in the area of competence relevant to the project. In this model, the CIDA project develops a training module to train the trainers. Over time, the infusion of information and the development of trained people allows the project to evolve in tune with the local indigenous community. This also tends to have a more lasting impact because the local people will have adapted to local conditions and will make the project their own.

In other indigenous communities, decisions are made only on a consensus basis with all members of the community participating, including women and children. In these communities, there is a strong desire to see the equivalent participation by the personnel on a project. They want to see and talk to the people from the hands-on worker right up to and including the Chief Executive Officer of the corporation or Minister of a government. In these situations, round table or talking circles can be successfully used independently or in combination with a program of training the trainers.

Participation by indigenous peoples as autonomous groups is an essential ingredient to developing both mutual understanding and consensus to set strategic objectives, define a chain of expected results, identify underlying assumptions and risks, and select appropriate performance indicators.

A few simple questions can help guide the planning process.

Indigenous Representation
Will the project encourage the local indigenous community develop a representative group on basis of skills? What about a liaison to neighbouring communities? Will the proponent and community establish personal and professional links? Is there to be a network of communications and discussions established amongst indigenous communities and proponent? Finally, is there evidence being collected to determine if CIDA projects will have better representation of the indigenous traditional knowledge and indigenous communities, and that they are more sensitive to indigenous issues by using traditional knowledge?

Within the joint ventures or participatory research, are team members assigned from the indigenous community? Will time and work be remunerated? Will the indigenous peoples feel they can influence the project? Are women specifically recognized as members of the team? Are the special skills and knowledge of women included?

Joint Ventures
What proportion of the monitoring and evaluation of the project from the perspective of traditional knowledge is to be carried out? Are there formal or informal partnership or joint venture agreements with the indigenous community? Does the project invite the indigenous community to begin joint classification of land use, joint assessments of impacts, joint decision-making? Ultimately is there to be some form of equity share or joint venturing in the project between the indigenous community and the project?

Non-Indigenous Representation
Are local communities to be contacted and distinguished from indigenous communities? Are other stakeholders identified and represented as distinct from indigenous group? Will the discussions and negotiations use some form of round table, community mentors or other means? Finally, is the project anticipating and measuring indicators for an increased level of satisfaction among stakeholders?

Capacity Building and Capacity Maintenance
Will a socio-economic capacity needs-analysis be carried out? Are arrangements being made for quality translation? Are capacity-building workshops or training programs planned for both indigenous peoples and for project staff? Will a mechanism be identified for sustaining the capacity acquired in the project? Will financial assistance be provided so that participation will be possible by indigenous peoples? Finally, doee the project intend to collect evidence of indigenous peoples participation? Is there likely to be any socio-economic benefit or harm done to the community?

Partnering with Indigenous Traditional Knowledge Holders

Acquire and use traditional knowledge systems through indigenous peoples who are experts and respected as holders of traditional knowledge by the indigenous community. Traditional knowledge is not something that can be picked up by a non-indigenous person in a short period of time. Furthermore, it is not generally available in written form. Include indigenous peoples as integral to a project that affects them, in both interpretation of the knowledge and as decision-makers in the project. Include traditional knowledge early and as an honest complement to scientific or western approaches.

Experience with indigenous peoples from around the world demonstrates that successfully incorporating traditional knowledge in project planning and implementation requires a relationship of trust. Trust is developed by discussions with village elders, speaking about the project in ways that can be understood by community members, working directly with the indigenous communities to develop joint plans for impact studies, mixed teams to carry out research, project planning, and other aspects of environmental and cultural decision-making. To be able to use and understand traditional knowledge requires a long-term commitment, respect for indigenous culture, and a willingness to spend the time and effort to listen and learn. Most communities are cautious about how it is to be used, fearing that it may be misinterpreted or used to damage the community. Because CIDA projects, and many other projects, require disclosure of most of the information, there may be some reluctance to share the information. When sacred sites are involved, the community may be reluctant to disclose their location, to prevent project activities from unknowingly blundering into areas that should be avoided.

Developing self-sustainability is an integral part of traditional knowledge systems. It is beneficial to include their knowledge systems in both the interpretation of the knowledge and in its implementation by relying on credible traditional knowledge holders.

Co-Management
When indigenous knowledge is used in its original context, and in partnership with science or other western technical approaches, the combination is a powerful tool. Important examples are to be found in resource management, where both science-based managers and native hunters, trappers, or fishermen work together giving equal weight to both types of knowledge. It is best when the process of project development and acquisition of traditional knowledge is seen as participation, not consultation The practice of co-management works better if a hands-off style of governing the actions of on-the-ground members of the co-management team is used. Because the traditional information base is not easily written down, members should be chosen from the non-indigenous side who are not sceptical of traditional knowledge and process. The intimate relationship and trust amongst team members needs to be maintained to keep the authority and power of co-management. In a few cases, forcing co-management on aboriginal communities caused the loss of valued traditional knowledge without proper compensation for the knowledge. Though sometimes difficult, co-management experience can be extremely positive.

Participatory Action Research
Create a partnership between traditional indigenous knowledge systems and the knowledge systems used by CIDA through complementary action plans, participatory action research, joint ventures, capacity-building and -maintenance, and co-management techniques. Traditional indigenous knowledge about the environment usually begins with the assumption that the people have been given the responsibility to respect the wild things and to live in harmony with them. Thus, it has many aspects that complement the aspirations of sustainable project planning, and it has the advantage of long and intimate experience with the local area.

Engaging the local people in participatory action research and co-management of the project outputs can significantly enhance the knowledge base for the entire project, encourage consensus, and manage the outcomes and impacts in a community-based iterative fashion.

If science or technology is relevant to the project, the best way to integrate traditional knowledge holders is to use what is increasingly termed "participatory action research." Western and traditional knowledge practitioners operate from the very beginning as equal partners, but with different roles. The development of indigenous knowledge in the project would take shape as follows:

1. research and later monitoring is carried out by local people in the local language
2. research and monitoring is controlled by the community through a community steering committee
3. the research or monitoring teams and the steering committee evolve the interview protocol and guidelines for the project
4. all information is verified by the steering committee and the interviewees first, then by the Elders or other designated traditional knowledge experts

Credibility of Indigenous Traditional Knowledge
Traditional knowledge that comes to a project is a product both of the people from generations past and of the present-day people who preserve and augment its accuracy. However, it is transmitted to the project only by present-day people, not all of whom have the capacity to transmit the knowledge well. When designing a project it is well to consider a few points:

1. Assess the credibility of sources of traditional knowledge by using the community as a source of credentials.
   • Does the project intend to ensure that the traditional knowledge holders who will be partnering with the project come with community blessing?
   • How will the project ensure that the community agrees on how to make decisions?
   • What will the project do to come to an agreement with the community decision-making process?
   • Does the indigenous group need to establish a legal entity?
   • Will the indigenous knowledge system become a credible aspect of the CIDA decision-making?
   • Finally is the project planning to assess acceptance for the project by the indigenous community?
2. In finding a balance with indigenous traditional knowledge and western knowledge, a formal agreement should be established on the relationship between knowledge bases?
   • How will they be weighted?
   • How does the project plan to integrate them?
   • Does the project plan to provide the community with a science/management interpreter/advisor, if it wishes to have one?
   • What processes will be established in the project to ensure the community feels it has a good understanding of how the two knowledge bases will work together? How will the project be described to the community in terms that the indigenous peoples can understand?
   • What safeguards will the project use to assess if the community fully understood the project and its implications?

Using science and traditional knowledge together in co-management or participatory action research can be a powerful tool to improve the effectiveness of projects, but it requires a relationship based on trust and respect for each other’s information and for the different methodologies used.

Aquisition Protocol

Recognize the autonomy of indigenous peoples by observing their protocol for what is modern, ancient, public, and private traditional knowledge, by respecting their classification of land use, including sacred and traditional uses that may preclude development, and by acknowledging their traditional rights to resources and intellectual property rights.

Because the concept of ownership, as practised in western societies, is not often not a part of the traditions of indigenous peoples, finding ways to respect their sensibilities about the knowledge is important to project success. Indigenous peoples also expect to receive information and benefit back for the effort that put into providing non-indigenous peoples with their knowledge. This can be as simple as ensuring that copies of research reports are given to the community, or it can be as dramatic as providing the infrastructure to allow the indigenous community to develop its own GIS hardware and software.

Protocols for acquisition of traditional knowledge should be defined by the indigenous community and agreed to by all parties. Protocols can be quite simple but are usually based on two aspects; information already available, and information still to be acquired. The main variables of the protocol define who is to be involved, the way in which the participants are to be involved, the type of information to be acquired or that is off-limits, the use to which the information is allowed to be put, who owns and controls the use of the information, and finally, what financial arrangements are made for acquisition and subsequent use (especially if revenue is to be generated directly from the use of the traditional knowledge in the form of products or services).

Protocols for acquisition of traditional knowledge should be defined by the indigenous community and agreed to by all parties.

Language translation can be difficult. One technique that helps is to have translation made from one language to another then back again to check its accuracy. Unfamiliar terms (such as ionizing radiation) may not have a cognate term in an indigenous language. An Elder or a group of Elders can be asked to make up a new term and agree on its translation.

Checklist of Important Points

1. Traditional Rights:
   • intellectual property rights,
   • traditional rights to resources, and land ownership
   • no loss of rights to indigenous peoples without appropriate compensation
   • traditional knowledge access agreements
   • community empowered through meaningful consultations and capacity-building and -maintenance
   • community knowledge treated with equity and respect
2. Impact Assessments:
   • identification potential risks from societal impacts of alcohol, drugs, diseases, migration to cities, exposure to new cultural environments
   • community participation in identifying potential risks to the indigenous community from direct impacts on the environment
   • joint cost-benefit analysis
   • joint assessments of impact
   • processes minimize damage and maximize benefits to indigenous peoples
   • measurement of sustainablility
3. Communication:
   • community and project each define spokesperson to media
   • community participation in the definition of team spokespersons and roles
   • on-going means of adjusting the roles of members of the indigenous community and the proponent as interpreters of information to the community and to the media
   • a constant flow of information to relevant and interested people and stakeholder groups
   • language translations for indigenous groups
4. Conflict Resolution:
   • conflict resolution mechanism determined early and jointly with the community
   • means to handle conflicts early, rather than late
   • means to establish a third party arbitrator or mediator or ombudsman as a means of conflict resolution if needed

Scheduling with Indigenous Peoples

Develop a time schedule with early-warning indicators, and means of communication, including translation to indigenous tongues, that is sensitive to indigenous needs and capacities.

Indigenous peoples who live on the land are also tied to the rhythm of the land, its seasons, and the movement of wildlife. For many people, the hunt or the gathering occurs at a particular time of year, or it does not happen. Failure to meet these cyclic imperatives can be dangerous for indigenous peoples. Therefore it is essential that in planning the schedule for a project, if indigenous peoples and their knowledge are to be involved, a flexible schedule will be required. This can be worked out in advance with the local people, but may need some interpretation to know what their priorities will entail.

Early warning indicators are a good idea for both sides. All parties can agree that at certain stages a milestone should be met. Problems usually arise when the agreed on milestone is missed. Work schedule may be defined by time frames, but these are often not effective because indigenous people have their own internal needs and schedules that are not easily adjusted. Instead of time scales, it is sometimes better to use indicators based on their traditions. For example, a task will need to be completed before the first harvest, but after the solstice festival. This also explicitly acknowledges that indigenous traditions and necessary community work have been established as part of the project schedule.

Instead of using time scales in project planning, it is sometimes better to use indicators based on the traditions of indigenous peoples.