TEK and Interdisciplinary Research

Question

In our literature review we've found that there seems to be a widely shared view that the study of TEK is inherently interdisciplinary. Yet, we've come across few good examples of successful interdisciplinary research.

To your knowledge, which disciplines have shown the most interest in TEK? To what extent can one distinguish different approaches to TEK and its use among different disciplines? across the (blurred) lines between the natural and social sciences? more applied or more academic approaches?

Do you know of specific cases where an interdisciplinary approach to TEK proved successful or particularly fruitful? What about failures of this approach?

Have you personally been involved in interdisciplinary research on TEK?

Best Regards: Jamie, Kathy, Emily, & Sue

---

Responses

From: Gene Anderson

I, among others, have worked with biologists--seems to go fine if both have some understanding of the other's world. I think there is a problem when anthropologists know no biology and biologists know no anthro. Geographers are well qualified to do TEK research, and I talk with them some, though I have not worked with them. I have also dialogued with political scientists about general theory, but not tried field work. I guess one could potentially work with anyone, if there were some mutual comprehension.

best--Gene Anderson

From: Darrell Posey

I DIRECTED THE INTERDISIPLINARY KAYAPO PROJECT WITH 20 SCIENTISTS FROM 18 DISCIPLINES, BUT HAVE NOTHING I CAN EASILY SEND ON THIS ... AT THIS TIME.

DAP

From: Patricia Cochran

Attached is information on a project the Alaska Native Science Commission is currently engaged in, titled "Traditional Knowledge and Radionuclides". We have recently completed our Southeast Alaska Regional Meeting (in addition to the Northwest Alaska Meeting) and are compiling information for our database. This project is receiving a good deal of attention from communities, agencies and scientists as an example of how western science and native knowledge interact.

Patricia Cochran

Attachment:

Traditional Knowledge and Radionuclides Project

"The most important concern is our world we live in. People all over this world are ruining the world. Even in the United States, things such as testing bombs is a wound that will never heal. A world that will never grow plants again. This world that we live in must be protected. Where will our children, grand children and great grandchildren live if this world is ruined?" Herman Toolie, Savoonga, Alaska

The Alaska Native Science Commission (ANSC) and the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER), University of Alaska Anchorage, have recently received a three-year grant from the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, for a Radionuclides and Traditional Knowledge project.

This project follows ISER/ANSC's two-year study of Contaminants and Native Food. Alaska Natives have many concerns about radionuclides and other types of contamination. They are constantly reminded about the close proximity of the former Soviet Union and the potential for transboundary migration of radionuclides from this area. During the era of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons, subsistence consumers of caribou were, perhaps, the most exposed individuals in the western hemisphere. The most important ecological pathway for radionuclides in the Arctic is the lichen-reindeer-caribou-human food chain. After Chernobyl, the cesium-137 in lichen peaked in 1986-87 at levels that are comparable to the peak in fallout from nuclear weapons tests. While current data from Canada suggests that radionuclide contamination in the lichen-caribou-human food chain is not a problem in the Canadian north, we do not have corresponding first-hand information for Alaska.

A dominant theme voiced by many Alaska Native communities has been their belief that they live in the shadow of nuclear radiation from military practices from the former Soviet Union, Project Chariot, Amchitka and from more than 640 military sites in Alaska. In addition, communities report observations of changes or abnormalities in wildlife - for example, lesions in fish and caribou livers, hairless seals, the color of Eskimo tea, tumors and sores in birds, fish, marine and land mammals. And virtually every community speaks of a deeply held concern over the diminished health of its members.

The first year of the Radionuclides and Traditional Knowledge project is designed to use traditional practices and protocols to gather traditional knowledge about radionuclide concerns across five major regions of Alaska. This will be done by convening a series of regional meetings with key members of communities to document issues, concerns, understandings and questions from these communities. Information about first-hand observations of changes in their environment or ground-truthing will also be documented. Year two is dedicated to a second series of regional meetings and a synthesis meeting. The purpose of the regional meetings is to enable communities to consider the implications of their own knowledge of environmental changes and scientific information. The purpose of the synthesis meeting is to enable scientists and communities to identify common and divergent understandings of environmental change and the role of radionuclides and other contaminants. In years two and three a community grant program will support Alaska Native grassroots action projects to address community concerns about radionuclides.

The first regional meeting for northwestern Alaska was held in Nome on September 30 - October 2, 1998. Native elders, hunters, gatherers, scientists and resource managers met to discuss and map observations of changes in their environment and document other issues of concern to their communities. A sampling of their concerns include:

• Abnormalities in fish populations in relation to known hazardous sites;
• Increasing numbers of bears and beavers and the effect they are having on human health, fish populations and streams and terrestial habitats;
• Higher cancer rates in particular communities surrounding known nearby hazardous sites;
• Increase in Alzheimer's disease;
• Die off of species of seabirds and waterfowl, abnormalities, fewer and more fragile eggs, change in migration patterns;
• Changes in weather, ice and currents - years of dirty ice, decrease in ice thickness, wetter and windier conditions, changing frequency and intensity of storms;
• Contaminants coming from Russian nuclear power plants, dumping of waste;
• Plants that taste different, healing power affected, new locations of berries, early/late berry production, plants not existing anymore;
• Need for testing for contaminants - key species to test, testing of people, local training for collection and testing, monitoring station locations.

A summary report of the Nome meeting is currently being compiled.

For additional information, contact:

Patricia Cochran, Executive Director
Alaska Native Science Commission
3211 Providence Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
(907)786-7704