UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Working with Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in large‐scale ecological assessments: Reviewing the experience of the IPBES Global Assessment

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13705

Auteurs

Pamela D. McElwee · Álvaro Fernández‐Llamazares · Yildiz Aumeeruddy‐Thomas · Dániel Babai · Peter Bates · Kathleen A. Galvin · Maximilien Guèze · Jianguo Liu · Zsolt Molnár · Hien T. Ngo · Victoria Reyes‐García · Rinku Roy Chowdhury · Aibek Samakov · Uttam Babu Shrestha · Sandra M. Díaz · Eduardo S. Brondízio

Année déclarée

2020

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:19:39.963419+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:19:39.963419+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Aigine Cultural Research Center · Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · Centre d'Écologie Fonctionnelle et Évolutive · Clark University · Colorado State University · ELTE Research Centre for the Humanities · HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research · Hungarian Academy of Sciences · Indiana University · Indiana University Bloomington · Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats · Institut de Recherche pour le Développement · Institute of Ethnology · Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal · Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services · Michigan State University · Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre · UNESCO · United Nations Environment Programme · Universidad Nacional de Córdoba · Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · University of Helsinki · Université de Montpellier · École Pratique des Hautes Études

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Abstract There have been calls for greater inclusion of Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in applied ecosystems research and ecological assessments. The Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Global Assessment (GA) is the first global scale assessment to systematically engage with ILK and issues of concern to Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC). In this paper, we review and reflect on how the GA worked with ILK and lessons learned. The GA engaged in critical evaluation and synthesis of existing evidence from multiple sources, using several deliberative steps: having specific authors and questions focus on ILK; integrating inputs from ILK across all chapters; organizing dialogue workshops; issuing calls for contributions to identify other forms and systems of knowledge; and encouraging IPLC to be key stakeholders and contributors. We identify content areas where attention to ILK was particularly important for questions in applied ecology. These include: (a) enriching understandings of nature and its contributions to people, including ecosystem services; (b) assisting in assessing and monitoring ecosystem change; (c) contributing to international targets and scenario development to achieve global goals like the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the Sustainable Development Goals and (d) generating inclusive and policy‐relevant options for people and nature. However, challenges in engaging different knowledge systems were also encountered. Policy implications. The Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Global Assessment (GA) demonstrated the importance of Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) to global biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management. Initiatives seeking to engage Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) can learn from the experience of the GA. Successfully bringing ILK into assessment processes and policy arenas requires a deliberate framework and approach from the start that facilitates recognition of different knowledge systems, identifies questions relevant at various scales, mobilizes funding and recognizes time required and engages networks of stakeholders with diverse worldviews. In turn, fostering inclusion of ILK and partnering with IPLC can help future assessments understand how natural and cultural systems co‐produce each other, identify trends of change through diverse biocultural indicators and improve sustainable development goals and policies.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W3046109062

DOI

10.1111/1365-2664.13705

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Écosystème

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13705
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W3046109062

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w168237287 · CITES
• openalex:w1894087381 · CITES
• openalex:w1988638360 · CITES
• openalex:w1990764941 · CITES
• openalex:w2002289717 · CITES
• openalex:w2024546172 · CITES
• openalex:w2030008280 · CITES
• openalex:w2031330365 · CITES
• openalex:w2082596553 · CITES
• openalex:w2096170391 · CITES
• The IPBES Conceptual Framework — connecting nature and people · CITES
• openalex:w2098635935 · CITES
• openalex:w2108570746 · CITES
• openalex:w2120567916 · CITES
• openalex:w2122925767 · CITES
• openalex:w2133182694 · CITES
• openalex:w2150433460 · CITES
• openalex:w2161586297 · CITES
• openalex:w2176106134 · CITES
• openalex:w2185777446 · CITES

9 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.