Upload
isabella-garrett
View
228
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Click on this Figure to Return to Web Database
Traditional Knowledge & Contaminants Project
Bringing Together Traditional- and Research-based
Knowledge
www.nativeknowledge.org
Table of Contents
What this project is about About this regional meeting Review of your concerns Tour of the database Research-based knowledge Research summary choices
Why “radionuclides”?
Alaska Natives have voiced their concerns about radionuclides:
Russian subs Project Chariot Medical Experiments
Where did this study come from?
In response to Native concerns, the US Congress authorized funds to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Traditional Knowledge and Contaminants Project
This project is the result.
Philosophy of project
The most important components of capacity to take effective action are ownership and trust.
We mean by ownership that tribes take responsibility for their own lives.
We mean by trust that tribes trust the world in which they live - the natural environment, the efficacy of their own actions, and the actions of others
Are we only interested in radionuclides?
We are interested in all sorts of changes in the natural environment.
Radionuclides may or may not have anything to do with these changes.
The goal of the project is
To help federally recognized tribes in Alaska to identify and address their concerns about radionuclides, other types of contamination, and about environmental change.
Practical outcomes
Show how traditional Native methods can help understand concerns and solutions
Provide grants to Alaska tribes to take action and devise their own solutions
Build a common agenda based on local- and research-based knowledge
Provide a web database to promote interaction and accumulation of knowledge.
We are working with federally recognized tribes in Alaska
EPA has a legal mandate to work with federally recognized tribes on a government to government basis
When we use the more common phrases,”Alaska Native communities” and “Alaska Natives”,
We refer to the 227 federally recognized tribes in Alaska.
Who is leading the project?
The Alaska Native Science Commission
The Institute of Social and Economic Research
The actions of federally recognized tribes.
We are using a holistic approach. Taking radionuclide concerns for example:
Local military sites
Uptake by fish and animals
People eat fish & animals
Local military sites
Atmospheric fallout
Atomic bomb testing
Nuclear accidents
Uptake by lichen
Caribou eat lichen
People eat caribou
Local military sites
Uptake by fish and animals
People eat fish & animals
Project Chariot
Nuclear testing
Atmospheric fallout
Atomic bomb testing
Nuclear accidents
Uptake by lichen
Caribou eat lichen
People eat caribou
Local military sites
Uptake by fish and animals
People eat fish & animals
Medical experiments, x-rays
Project Chariot
Medical experiments
Russian nuclear wastes
Atmospheric fallout
Atomic bomb testing
Nuclear accidents
Uptake by lichen
Caribou eat lichen
People eat caribou
Russian Nuclear plant wastes
River runoff to the Arctic Ocean
Uptake by migratory animals
Sea ice containing radioactive sediments
Ocean currents containing radioactive sediments Uptake by local
animals
People eat marine mammals & fish
Old Russian submarines
Local military sites
Uptake by fish and animals
People eat fish & animals
Medical experiments, x-rays
Project Chariot
Amchitka tests
Sources and Pathways
The usual approach to assessing contaminant risks is to start with possible sources and pathways
Sources and Pathways
Research
There is research on each source and pathway:
Sources and Pathways
Research
Science Assessment
Researchers normally then assess risks based on their findings
Sources and Pathways
Research
Science Assessment
Science-based conclusions
Government agencies then normally issue advisories about what is safe to eat
Sources and Pathways
Research
Science Assessment
Science-based conclusions
Community response?
Community responses may not be what is expected
Community Concerns Sources and Pathways
Research
Science Assessment
Science-based conclusion
Community response?
Community-based model Western Model
We are using a community-based approach
Community Concerns Sources and Pathways
Research
Science Assessment
Science-based conclusion
Community response?
Community-driven Research
Community-based model Western Model
We help communities to identify their own research priorities
Community Concerns Sources and Pathways
Research
Community Assessment in context of cultural and nutritional values
Science Assessment
Science-based conclusion
Community response?
Community-driven Research
Community-based model Western Model
Communities are best able to put testing results in context
Community Concerns Sources and Pathways
Research
Community Assessment in context of cultural and nutritional values
Science Assessment
Community-based conclusions and action
Science-based conclusion
Community response?
Community-driven Research
Community-based model Western Model
Communities can decide what is best for themselves; research can help them
Project Tasks
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
ongoing
Year 1 Regional Meetings
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.
Denali Arctic Science Conference
Arctic Science Conference
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Denali Arctic Science Conference
Arctic Science Conference
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
1999-2000
Year 2 Regional Meetings
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Sept. 19-21 2000
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Community small grants program
Community small grants program
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Community small grants program
Year 3 Statewide assessment meeting
Statewide Assessment Meeting
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Community small grants program
Year 3 Statewide assessment meeting
Sharing of experience with Native communities, scientists, agencies
Sharing the experience
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Community small grants program
Year 3 Statewide assessment meeting
Sharing of experience with Native communities, scientists, agencies
Database development
Database development
Year 1 Regional Meetings:
Talking circles to share Native knowledge on environmental change
Year 1 Synthesis Meeting:Communication of Native knowledge to scientists.Review of science knowledge and priorities
Year 2 Regional Meetings:
Implications of Native and science knowledge for action.
Year 2 Synthesis Meeting:Shared knowledge & prioritiesDifferences between Native and science perspectives.
Community small grants program
Year 3 Statewide assessment meeting
Sharing of experience with Native communities, scientists, agencies
Database development
Documentation of process
Project Tasks
The goals for Yr.2 workshops are:
Learn of your concerns Introduce you to the Alaska
Traditional Knowledge and Native Foods Database
Summarize research-based knowledge
Get your “take” on research-based knowledge.
Regional Meetings
Changes,
Possible Causes of Changes,
Ideas for Action
“Take” on Research
Who are the participants?
Members of federally recognized tribes who have depended on natural environments for time beyond memory,
Who are keen observers of natural environments,
And who hold the knowledge of elders that can help all of us to understand.
Participants
My grandpa used to say: You will live through a big change of weather.
Catherine Attla, Huslia
Participants
“I think that we are raising a lot of good perspectives here because of how we are approaching this.” David Sam, Sitka sitting next
to Elaine Abraham, Yakutat
Agenda Day 1 Review your concerns about
environmental change Introduce summaries of
science knowledge Get your “take” on science
knowledge relevance to your concerns
Agenda Day 2:
Introduction to the Traditional Knowledge and Native Foods Database
Summaries of research-based knowledge
Your “take” on these summaries
How were participants selected?
Regionally Invitations to federally recognized
tribal governments to nominate participants
Assemble groups of 20-25 men and women from different communities who are active hunters, gatherers, Native scientists, and elders.
How we are conducting the meetings
“A healthy village is a circle whose people are safe within its fold. Love, understanding, kindness, culture, history, goals, truth - these make the circle strong and protect the village, the family, the individual.”
Harold Napoleon
Basic rules of the Talking Circle
Respect for confidentiality Respect for each person in the circle Each person is given a chance to
speak without interruption or comment
The Traditional Talking Circle
The traditional facilitator begins the circle with prayer, singing, or drumming; establishing rules; and setting the tone for the circle.
She or he may use a symbolic object (e.g., rock, feather, or prayer stick) in the circle.
Circle process
The circle generally begins with traditional introductions. The circle goes clockwise in respect for the cycle of life and mother earth. Each person in the circle gets a chance to share if they choose to.
The circle may go around multiple times to give those who want to share more time to do so. There is normally a beginning, middle and a closure. The circle ends with a closing prayer.
A Traditional Talking Circle is used to:
Promote understanding, sharing and trust. This is key to participants feeling secure in sharing knowledge that is cultural or sacred and knowing that their information will be used in respected and appropriate ways.
An important part of the process is the sharing of food and gift-giving as is the usual community practice.
Recording what people say
To record the meeting, the scribes sit outside the circle and type the remarks of participants.
Each day the scribes return the comments to participants for review. General themes and actions are also reviewed by participants.
Consent forms are reviewed with all participants before asking for their signature.
Draft report documents in their entirety are also sent to all participants before the final report is prepared.
Native participants have shared many common concerns:
Cancers Fish abnormalities Local contaminated sites Russian sources of contaminants Plants changing in taste Desire to test for contaminants Influx of beaver Caribou showing signs of poor health Changes in weather, ice, lakes Changes in diet, use of tobacco,
medicines