Table 1.
Aspirations for supporting ILK systems and associated ecosystem stewardship, supportive actions and potential risks involved.
| Aspiration | Supportive practice | Risks | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| ILK recognized as a valid and legitimate source of knowledge in decision-making | Recognize ILK experts and engage with and respect ILK holders as legitimate representatives of distinct epistemic traditions | Undermining legitimacy of local experts and institutions | Kimura and Kinchy 2016, Eitzel et al. 2017, Ban et al. 2018 |
| ILK recognized as management practices, governance mechanisms, and decision support | Identify and recognize procedures and tools for generating relevant information for community decision-making | Goals, metrics and methods are externally codified and imposed on ILK holders | Pearce and Louis 2008, Housty et al. 2014, Sterling et al. 2017, Dacks et al. 2019 |
| IPLC understanding of local social–ecological systems, including human–nature relationships, are valued and taken into account | Use participatory, collaborative and culturally appropriate methods to represent local knowledge and perspectives | Universalism (science as a superior knowledge system) hides or erases the cultural specificities of people-places relationships | Turnbull 1997, Bryan 2009, Johnson et al. 2016, Torrents-Ticó et al. 2021 |
| Local-scale or culturally identified problems are addressed, potentially empowering local agency | Involve IPLC in identifying the topics to be addressed from the outset of the collaboration | Quality assurance and replicability are emphasized over self-determined priorities | Acharya et al. 2009, Luzar et al. 2011, Chandler et al. 2017, Wheeler et al. 2020 |
| Knowledge governance is developed jointly and iteratively in mutual agreement | Implement free, prior, and informed consent iteratively throughout the initiative and develop joint protocols for knowledge sharing jointly. Support communities in assessing potential risks of sharing knowledge | IPLC loose access to and control of knowledge. | CBD 2004, 2011, Hill et al. 2020, Wheeler et al. 2020 |
| IPLC are embraced as knowledge, stake-, and rightsholders | Discuss and agree with representatives of IPLC on mutually agreed terms and procedures for collaboration | IPLC are expected to participate in CS as unpaid volunteers | Johnson et al. 2016, Fernández-Llamazares and Cabeza 2018 |