Braiding Indigenous Knowledge and Science Isn’t Threatening—It’s Transformative

As someone who has spent years in both academic research and hands-on conservation work, I find myself both inside and outside the scientific establishment. I am a scientist. And yet, like many who have worked in real-world conservation, I’ve seen the deep flaws in the way science has traditionally positioned itself as the ultimate authority—often above communities, culture, and ethics.

A recent article titled "Efforts growing to 'braid Indigenous knowledge' into science, UChicago biologist warns" by Kate Roberson (Empire State College, September 28, 2024), highlights a growing debate in environmental science: the movement to integrate Indigenous knowledge systems with Western science. In the article, University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne raises concerns about efforts by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to co-produce environmental knowledge by including Indigenous expertise.

Coyne’s view is not unique. Many academics fear that bringing Indigenous knowledge "on par" with science somehow weakens the scientific process. But this view—that one must dominate while the other submits—is precisely the problem.

The belief that science is infallible or neutral ignores its colonial, extractive, and often unethical history. From animal testing to the displacement of communities in the name of research, the scientific establishment has deep accountability gaps.

When I worked on climate change in Alaska’s North Slope, I saw this firsthand. Scientists from around the world came to study Arctic warming—but many never engaged with the Iñupiat or other Indigenous communities living there.

These residents had observed changes in migration patterns, permafrost, and seasonal cycles for generations. Yet their knowledge was often dismissed, excluded from formal data collection, or treated as anecdotal. That omission wasn’t just disrespectful—it was a scientific failure.

Iñupiat resident in Ukpeaġvik, Alaska (photo by Kaia Africanis)

In my research on the illicit wildlife trade in Africa, I prioritized asking local communities the hard questions—about survival, enforcement, market dynamics, and cultural practices. Their lived knowledge didn’t compete with science—it enriched it. Their insights gave context and clarity to the raw data, revealing what numbers alone never could.

To braid Indigenous knowledge with science is not to replace it. It’s to deepen, humanize, and contextualize it. Indigenous stewards, local communities, and traditional ecological knowledge holders have insights that are not only valid but essential. In conservation, understanding ecosystems demands more than metrics—it requires relationship, history, and trust.

The effort to braid these systems of knowledge, as mentioned in the now-suspended National Academies committee, is not a threat to science—it’s an opportunity for transformation. It reflects a growing awareness that Western science has historically excluded or marginalized non-Western ways of knowing.

And yes, some resistance comes from discomfort around DEI and power-sharing. But if our goal is to build more ethical, inclusive, and effective science, we must be willing to re-examine who we include—and who we don’t.

To my fellow scientists: integrating Indigenous knowledge doesn’t undermine our discipline. It challenges us to be better, more honest, and more connected to the communities we serve.

That’s not a compromise.

That’s growth.

——

Citation: Roberson, K. (2024, September 28). Efforts growing to 'braid Indigenous knowledge' into science, UChicago biologist warns. The College Fix. https://www.thecollegefix.com/efforts-growing-to-braid-indigenous-knowledge-into-science-uchicago-biologist-warns/