Explore the vast range of titles available.

For millennia Indigenous communities worldwide have maintained diverse knowledge systems informed through careful observation of dynamics of environmental changes. Although Indigenous communities and their knowledge systems are recognized as critical resources for understanding and adapting to climate change, no comprehensive, evidence-based analysis has been conducted into how environmental studies engage Indigenous communities. Here we provide the first global systematic review of levels of Indigenous community participation and decision-making in all stages of the research process (initiation, design, implementation, analysis, dissemination) in climate field studies that access Indigenous knowledge. We develop indicators for assessing responsible community engagement in research practice and identify patterns in levels of Indigenous community engagement. We find that the vast majority of climate studies (87%) practice an extractive model in which outside researchers use Indigenous knowledge systems with minimal participation or decision-making authority from communities who hold them. Few studies report on outputs that directly serve Indigenous communities, ethical guidelines for research practice, or providing Indigenous community access to findings. Further, studies initiated with (in mutual agreement between outside researchers and Indigenous communities) and by Indigenous community members report significantly more indicators for responsible community engagement when accessing Indigenous knowledges than studies initiated by outside researchers alone. This global assessment provides an evidence base to inform our understanding of broader social impacts related to research design and concludes with a series of guiding questions and methods to support responsible research practice with Indigenous and local communities.

Addressing complex social-ecological issues requires all relevant sources of knowledge and data, especially those held by communities who remain close to the land. Centuries of oppression, extractive research practices, and misrepresentation have hindered balanced knowledge exchange with Indigenous communities and inhibited innovation and problem-solving capacity in all scientific fields. A recent shift in the research landscape reflects a growing interest in engaging across diverse communities and ways of knowing. Scientific discussions increasingly highlight the inherent value of Indigenous environmental ethics frameworks and processes as the original roadmaps for sustainable development planning, including their potential in addressing the climate crisis and related social and environmental concerns. Momentum in this shift is also propelled by an increasing body of research evidencing the role of Indigenous land stewardship for maintaining ecological health and biodiversity. However, a key challenge straining this movement lies rooted in colonial residue and ongoing actions that suppress and co-opt Indigenous knowledge systems. Scientists working with incomplete datasets privilege a handful of narratives, conceptual understandings, languages, and historical contexts, while failing to engage thousands of collective bodies of intergenerational, place-based knowledge systems. The current dominant colonial paradigm in scientific research risks continued harmful impacts to Indigenous communities that sustain diverse knowledge systems. Here, we outline how ethical standards in researcher practice can be raised in order to reconcile colonial legacies and ongoing settler colonial practices. We synthesize across Indigenous and community-based research protocols and frameworks, transferring knowledge across disciplines, and ground truthing methods and processes in our own practice, to present a relational science working model for supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research. We maintain that core Indigenous values of integrity, respect, humility, and reciprocity should shape researcher responsibilities and methods applied in order to raise ethical standards and long-term relational accountability regarding Indigenous lands, rights, communities, and our shared futures.

The need to recognize diverse actors, their knowledge and values is being widely promoted as critical for sustainability in contemporary land use, natural resource management and conservation initiatives. However, in much of the case study literature, the value of including indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in the management and governance of landscapes tends to be overlooked and undervalued. Understanding ILK as comprising indigenous, local and traditional knowledge, this systematic review synthesizes how ILK has been viewed and incorporated into landscape-based studies; what processes, mechanisms and areas of focus have been used to integrate it; and the challenges and opportunities that arise in doing so. Queries from bibliographic databases (Web of Science, JSTOR, Scopus and Africa Wide) were employed. Findings from the review underscore that the literature and case studies that link landscapes and ILK are dominated by a focus on agricultural systems, followed by social-ecological systems, indigenous governance, natural resource management, biodiversity conservation and climate change studies, especially those related to early warning systems for disaster risk reduction. The growing importance of multi-stakeholder collaborations in local landscape research and the promotion of inclusive consultations have helped to bring ILK to the fore in the knowledge development process. This, in turn, has helped to support improved landscape management, governance and planning for more resilient landscapes. However, more research is needed to explore ways to more effectively link ILK and scientific knowledge in landscape studies, particularly in the co-management of these social-ecological systems. More studies that confirm the usefulness of ILK, recognize multiple landscape values and their interaction with structures and policies dealing with landscape management and conservation are necessary for enhanced sustainability.

Indigenous Knowledge (IK) is increasingly involved in the contemporary management of natural resources. Tribal wildlife management programs in the United States may be uniquely positioned to effectively and ethically integrate their IK. While a narrow focus on the body of IK and a particular management activity may suffice for project-level integration efforts, herein we consider how IK integration at the programmatic level may be best supported. We propose a holistic conceptual framework of preconditions including sovereignty, the North American Model management, funding, cultural resources, stakeholder support, and programmatic leadership. We assess the current status and common challenges with each precondition and illustrate their potential roles for a more lasting and pervasive integration of IK into tribal wildlife management programs.

Indigenous revitalization includes community-led healing from intergenerational land-based trauma. Yet given colonial legacies that perpetuate the devaluation of Indigenous knowledge and dispossession of Indigenous lands, healing in Indigenous communities presents particular challenges. Such challenges can include responding to western models of bureaucratic governance that replicate historical trauma in governance relations. Building on existing frameworks of Indigenous political ecology, we consider the importance of resisting colonial legacies that can influence Indigenous environmental governance. We do so by discussing community-led revitalization and resurgence in the Karuk tribal community, and an exemplar case of family-based management systems for caretaking ceremonial trails in the mid-Klamath (Northern California, USA). Through this case, we consider the interdependent functions of family-based governance and tribal government institutions for collective decolonization and healing. Our analysis of family-based management provides insights into the sociopolitical and ecological dynamics of healing in diverse Indigenous communities, and explores more inclusive models for Indigenous environmental governance.

Indigenous Knowledge Systems arise from place-based relationships with the world in concert with healthy ecosystems, which encompass Non-Human People. Assuming conservation science fundamentally reaches for the goal of healthy, functioning ecosystems, conservation from non-Indigenous and Indigenous perspectives may share similar purposes. However, if dominant western cultures engage with Indigenous ones toward shared conservation goals without critical use of decolonial thinking and challenging some of the basic tenants of western culture, violence against Indigenous Knowledge Systems may ensue. Drawing mainly from lessons in a Canadian context, I highlight several points to help avoid violence against Indigenous Knowledge Systems. These points challenge western scientists to think on the nature of knowledge, consider their own worldview and those of Indigenous Peoples, explore concepts of Ethical Space, consider science as a tool, challenge basic terminology, consider scales in thinking, delve into thought structures as tools, and center Indigenous Knowledges. We must all push towards the flourishing of all knowledge systems, including those of both human and Non-Human People, to face biodiversity and climate crisis and to shift some fundamental assumptions of dominant Western Knowledge Systems.

A high prevalence of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) among Aboriginal children in northern Australia is coupled with low understanding among families. This has negative impacts on children's health, limits opportunities for prevention and suggests that better health communication is needed. During an RHD echocardiography screening project, Aboriginal teachers in a remote community school created lessons to teach children about RHD in their home languages, drawing on principles of community‐led development. Access to community‐level RHD data, previously unknown to teachers and families, was a catalyst for this innovative work. Careful, iterative discussions among speakers of four Aboriginal languages ensured a culturally coherent narrative and accompanying teaching resources. The evaluation demonstrated the importance of collective work, local Indigenous Knowledge and metaphors. As a result of the lessons, some children showed new responses and attitudes to skin infections and their RHD treatment. Language teachers used natural social networks to disseminate new information. A community interagency collaboration working to prevent RHD commenced. Action to address high rates of RHD must include effective health communication strategies that value Indigenous Knowledge, language and culture, collaborative leadership and respect for Indigenous data sovereignty.

Indigenous Peoples have developed and stewarded complex knowledge systems that have contributed to thriving societies. With continued threats to Indigenous lifeways, there is increasing need to further protect traditional ecological knowledges (TEK). We carried out a qualitative study to explore Indigenous community perspectives on stewarding and protecting TEK while identifying gaps in community-level protections of TEK. We conducted ten semi-structured interviews in December 2024 and one focus group in January 2025 with Indigenous Peoples in the southwestern United States. Reflexive thematic analysis through open coding was carried out using qualitative software. Six overarching themes were characterized in the interviews, which overlapped with findings from the focus group, including the following: (1) Historical and current barriers impact the sharing of TEK; (2) Preserving our language is necessary for intergenerational transmission of our TEK; (3) Our TEK reveals changes to our Lands; (4) Protecting our Lands and medicines is vital to our health; (5) We must take the time to learn our TEK for future generations; and (6) We need to protect our TEK. Our research highlights the importance of supporting Indigenous communities’ capacities to protect their TEK for personal, community, and environmental well-being.

For many millennia, Indigenous Australians have been engineering the landscape using sophisticated technological and philosophical knowledge systems in a deliberate response to changing social and environmental circumstances. These knowledge systems integrate profound understanding of country and bring together knowledge of the topography and geology of the landscape, its natural cycles and ecological systems, its hydrological systems and natural resources including fauna and flora. This enables people to manage resources sustainably and reliably, and testifies to a developed, contextualised knowledge system and to a society with agency and the capability to maintain and refine accumulated knowledge and material processes.This book is a recognition and acknowledgement of the ingenuity of Indigenous engineering which is grounded in philosophical principles, values and practices that emphasise sustainability, reciprocity, respect, and diversity, and often presents a much-needed challenge to a Western engineering worldview.Each chapter is written by a team of authors combining Indigenous knowledge skills and academic expertise, providing examples of collaboration at the intersection of Western and Indigenous engineering principles, sharing old and new knowledges and skills. These varied approaches demonstrate ways to integrate Indigenous knowledges into the curricula for Australian engineering degrees, in line with the Australian Council of Engineering Deans' Position Statement on Embedding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives into the engineering curriculum first published in 2017.

PurposeThis article demonstrates how psycho-sociological concepts have a place in disaster risk sciences. It draws attention to the relationship between risk perception and disaster management from Western and traditional viewpoints.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is conceptual and draws from published works. The systematic literature review (SLR) methodology was adopted to analyse existing literature on the subject matter.FindingsRisk perception evolved over centuries and disciplines until it found applicability in modern times. Despite the proliferation of western science-based approaches to risk perception, Indigenous knowledge systems still hold sway over communities’ understanding of risk. These perspectives are enshrined in religious and cultural convictions that become the lenses through which a society assigns cause, effect and remedy to risk events. A deeper understanding of these convictions enables disaster risk management strategies to be better accepted by those at risk and to align with their lived realities.Originality/valueRisk perception becomes the lens through which we better understand the realities and complexities of populations at risk. Indigenous knowledge systems have a strong influence on society’s perception of risk and if they are not harnessed and studied, they will stand in conflict with Western approaches. Hence, the study of the nexus between risk perception and disaster management presents an opportunity for policymakers and practitioners to design risk management solutions that have a higher chance of acceptance and sustainability.