本土知识与减缓气候变化的重叠:系统审查的证据

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
N. Chanza, Walter Musakwa, Clare Kelso
{"title":"本土知识与减缓气候变化的重叠:系统审查的证据","authors":"N. Chanza, Walter Musakwa, Clare Kelso","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2024.1344931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is now increasing acknowledgement of the role of indigenous and local people (ILP) in climate change, particularly in impact assessment, mitigation and adaptation. However, the methods and ways on how exactly indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) can be used in climate change action largely remain fragmented. While a growing share of scholarship has addressed the overlaps between ILK and adaptation, limited attention has been given on practical ways of working with indigenous communities to enhance knowledge of implementing mitigation actions. Without clearly articulated indigenous-sensitive methods for ILK integration in mitigation science, holders and users of this knowledge may remain at the boundaries of climate change action. Their knowledge and experiences may not be used to guide effective greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction activities. There are also fears that hurriedly and poorly developed mitigation projects that ignore indigenous and local communities may infringe their customary rights and livelihoods. To contribute to improved guidance on meaningful involvement of ILP in climate change mitigation, this study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) to systematically review literature that links ILK and climate mitigation. We do this by (a) Identifying case studies that examine the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation from Scopus and Web of Science databases (n = 43); (b) analysing the methods used for engaging indigenous people in these studies; (c) determining the knowledge, ways, practices and experiences of ILP that show mitigation benefits; and (d) highlighting the direction for participatory engagement of ILP in mitigation research and practice. We have added to the emerging but fast growing knowledge on the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation. This intersection is evident in three ways: (a) Validation and application of concepts used to understand carbon sequestration; (b) GHG emission reduction mainly from natural resource dependent livelihoods involving ILP; and (c) the application of participatory methodologies in research and the practice of climate change mitigation. We conclude that studies that focus on the intersection of ILK and climate mitigation need to use indigenous-sensitive methodologies to give more benefits for climate mitigation objectives while recognising the rights of ILP.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overlaps of indigenous knowledge and climate change mitigation: evidence from a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"N. Chanza, Walter Musakwa, Clare Kelso\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fclim.2024.1344931\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is now increasing acknowledgement of the role of indigenous and local people (ILP) in climate change, particularly in impact assessment, mitigation and adaptation. However, the methods and ways on how exactly indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) can be used in climate change action largely remain fragmented. While a growing share of scholarship has addressed the overlaps between ILK and adaptation, limited attention has been given on practical ways of working with indigenous communities to enhance knowledge of implementing mitigation actions. Without clearly articulated indigenous-sensitive methods for ILK integration in mitigation science, holders and users of this knowledge may remain at the boundaries of climate change action. Their knowledge and experiences may not be used to guide effective greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction activities. There are also fears that hurriedly and poorly developed mitigation projects that ignore indigenous and local communities may infringe their customary rights and livelihoods. To contribute to improved guidance on meaningful involvement of ILP in climate change mitigation, this study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) to systematically review literature that links ILK and climate mitigation. We do this by (a) Identifying case studies that examine the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation from Scopus and Web of Science databases (n = 43); (b) analysing the methods used for engaging indigenous people in these studies; (c) determining the knowledge, ways, practices and experiences of ILP that show mitigation benefits; and (d) highlighting the direction for participatory engagement of ILP in mitigation research and practice. We have added to the emerging but fast growing knowledge on the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation. This intersection is evident in three ways: (a) Validation and application of concepts used to understand carbon sequestration; (b) GHG emission reduction mainly from natural resource dependent livelihoods involving ILP; and (c) the application of participatory methodologies in research and the practice of climate change mitigation. We conclude that studies that focus on the intersection of ILK and climate mitigation need to use indigenous-sensitive methodologies to give more benefits for climate mitigation objectives while recognising the rights of ILP.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Climate\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Climate\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2024.1344931\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2024.1344931","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现在,人们越来越认识到土著和当地居民(ILP)在气候变化中的作用,特别是在影响评估、减缓和适应气候变化方面的作用。然而,关于如何在气候变化行动中准确利用本土和当地知识(ILK)的方法和途径在很大程度上仍然是零散的。虽然越来越多的学术研究探讨了本土和地方知识与适应之间的重叠问题,但对于如何与本土社区合作以增强实施减缓行动的知识的实际方法却关注有限。如果没有明确提出将土著知识纳入减缓科学的土著敏感方法,这些知识的持有者和使用者可能仍然处于气候变化行动的边缘。他们的知识和经验可能无法用于指导有效的温室气体减排活动。还有人担心,匆忙和拙劣地制定忽视土著和当地社区的减排项目可能会侵犯他们的传统权利和生计。为了更好地指导土著和当地社区有意义地参与气候变化减缓工作,本研究采用了系统综述和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA),系统综述了将土著和当地社区与气候减缓工作联系起来的文献。我们的做法是:(a) 从 Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库(n = 43)中找出研究土著知识与减缓气候变化重叠问题的案例研究;(b) 分析这些研究中土著人参与所使用的方法;(c) 确定土著语言学习的知识、方式、实践和经验对减缓气候变化的益处;(d) 强调土著语言学习参与减缓气候变化研究和实践的方向。我们补充了关于国际学习与知识和气候变化减缓重叠的新兴但快速增长的知识。这种交叉体现在三个方面:(a) 验证和应用用于理解碳固存的概念;(b) 温室气体减排主要来自依赖自然资源的生计,其中涉及综合物流方案;(c) 在减缓气候变化的研究和实践中应用参与式方法。我们得出的结论是,关注 "土著和当地社区 "与气候减缓交叉问题的研究需要使用对土著问题有敏感认识的方法,以便在承认土著和当地社区权利的同时,为气候减缓目标带来更多益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Overlaps of indigenous knowledge and climate change mitigation: evidence from a systematic review
There is now increasing acknowledgement of the role of indigenous and local people (ILP) in climate change, particularly in impact assessment, mitigation and adaptation. However, the methods and ways on how exactly indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) can be used in climate change action largely remain fragmented. While a growing share of scholarship has addressed the overlaps between ILK and adaptation, limited attention has been given on practical ways of working with indigenous communities to enhance knowledge of implementing mitigation actions. Without clearly articulated indigenous-sensitive methods for ILK integration in mitigation science, holders and users of this knowledge may remain at the boundaries of climate change action. Their knowledge and experiences may not be used to guide effective greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction activities. There are also fears that hurriedly and poorly developed mitigation projects that ignore indigenous and local communities may infringe their customary rights and livelihoods. To contribute to improved guidance on meaningful involvement of ILP in climate change mitigation, this study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) to systematically review literature that links ILK and climate mitigation. We do this by (a) Identifying case studies that examine the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation from Scopus and Web of Science databases (n = 43); (b) analysing the methods used for engaging indigenous people in these studies; (c) determining the knowledge, ways, practices and experiences of ILP that show mitigation benefits; and (d) highlighting the direction for participatory engagement of ILP in mitigation research and practice. We have added to the emerging but fast growing knowledge on the overlaps of ILK and climate change mitigation. This intersection is evident in three ways: (a) Validation and application of concepts used to understand carbon sequestration; (b) GHG emission reduction mainly from natural resource dependent livelihoods involving ILP; and (c) the application of participatory methodologies in research and the practice of climate change mitigation. We conclude that studies that focus on the intersection of ILK and climate mitigation need to use indigenous-sensitive methodologies to give more benefits for climate mitigation objectives while recognising the rights of ILP.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信