How can traditional knowledge be mobilized in a legitimate, credible, and salient way? : A comparative study of three approaches to developing and applying indicators for Aichi Target 18

Abstract: The importance of including indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) and their traditional knowledge (TK) into environmental forums such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is being increasingly recognized. Despite numerousefforts to open up forums and assessment processes to diverse types of knowledge, extensive challenges remain for the full and effective participation of IPLCs at all levels of environmental governance. This paper explores three cases of assessment processes at different levels, where TK has been mobilized for monitoring progress towards Aichi Target 18 of the CBD. Through in-depth interviews with representatives for IPLCs, policy-makers and scientists, the mechanisms for mobilizing TK across scales in ways that are legitimate and credible and fulfill the needs for multiple actors are explored. Findings suggest that community-based monitoring and information systems (CBMIS) have greater potential than top-down approaches for capturing the complexity of social-ecological systems and for monitoring progress towards Aichi Target 18. In addition, CBMIS is embedded in the institutions and ecosystem management of IPLCs, providing a direct link between knowledge and action, hence advancing implementation of the CBD on the ground. However, findings across the three cases also demonstrate that hierarchies between knowledge systems and institutional norms of science constitute substantial barriers for the inclusion of insights and knowledge from local monitoring into national and international processes. Overcoming such barriers requires an increase in focus on the process of knowledge sharing rather than solely on the outcomes. A Multiple Evidence Based Approach, where TK and science are viewed as equally valid knowledge, is suggested as a way forward to mobilize TK in forums such as the CBD. Parallel validation methods and intercultural dialogue between TK-holders, scientists and policy-makers is key for creating processes that are legitimate, credible, and salient among a diversity of actors.