Planning between cultural paradigms: traditional knowledge and the transition to ecological sustainability

• Main Author: Lertzman, David Adam
• Language: English
• Published: 2009
• Subjects: Ethnoscience.; Indian philosophy.; Sustainable development.; Indians of North America > British Columbia > Government relations.; Clayoquot Sound region (B.C.)
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/2429/10128

Our world is experiencing a crisis of unsustainability with ecological, socioeconomic, and existential dimensions. Thus, planning for the transition to sustainability is a challenge requiring transformation of the dorrunant cultural paradigm. I address this problem of planning between cultural paradigms by examining the discourse between First Nations Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and Western Science, and identify lessons that contribute to a sounder epistemological basis for planning theory and practice. To link planning theory, sustainability and TEK, I combined literature reviews, interviews and lessons from my experience with First Nations. I derived a cross-cultural analytical framework based on epistemology, cosmology and ontology (ECO), and applied it to planning theory, case studies of the Scientific Panel for Sustainable Forest Practices in Clayoquot Sound and my own professional work. Planning for sustainability must address multiple dimensions. My approach includes biophysical, social and cultural capital, postulating that greater social and cultural capital could decrease consumption of biophysical capital. In this framework "ECO" addresses cultural capital. My analysis of TEK reveals more than just "knowledge," rather a way of life which generates knowledge. I coined the term TEK-Systems (TEKS) to refer to the social and cultural capital, and methodological features of these lotowledge-generating systems. Applying ECO reveals philosophical elements of TEK, that are neglected in the literature. TEKS combine empirical knowledge with other ways of knowing offering alternative models of reality to the cultural mainstream. The Scientific Panel recognized all significant features of TEKS and ECO in my framework, and employed Nuu-Chah-Nulth TEK protocol in their planning model. Various forms of knowledge from wholly different philosophical origins informed complex planning and decision- making process with consensus outcomes. Similarly, the most significant lessons from my professional application was that respect, cultural framing, and community involvement are key professional tools. Planning between cultural paradigms requires recognizing different knowledge systems; including different ways of knowing strengthens planning for sustainability. This approach establishes new terrain for planning theory. It requires inclusive planning and decision- making processes which foster caring, respect and commitment. Enhancing social and cultural capital provides community and spiritual resources for sustainability. Planners need specialized framing to work in these areas.