Part 3: “Global” vs. “local” knowledge
“Some of the people with the greatest understanding of biodiversity on the planet are almost completely removed from the policy dialogue”,
say Nigel Crawhall, Khalissa Ikhlef, Peter Bates, Joseph Karanja and Serena Heckler of UNESCO.
Considering the global crises we currently see and the ones we must expect, we should ask ourselves whether the knowledge we need to tackle these crises or the know-how to build on it is already out there, we are just not listening.
The “Global North” has established itself as the source of “global knowledge”, priding itself on being developed and as part of that, having accrued an immense amount of complex technical knowledge, for example, on climate tech or building water dams. At the same time, a holistic perspective is often left out, one that includes the part where the “Global North” is also mostly responsible for many of the crises we’re seeing today, such as the climate crises.
This perceived dominance of expertise can be dangerous. This danger is often exhibited by a form of white saviourism and comes from the idea that someone in the “Global North'' thinks they know better. The story around Renee Bach, which was recently released as an HBO documentary series is exemplary. It is about a white American opening a children’s clinic in Uganda with no medical training, yet performing medical procedures, essentially disregarding the well-trained medical staff in Uganda. As a result of which over a hundred children lost their lives in her care.
Where this perceived knowledge-dominance stems from is one question. The other is how we can move on from it. In my previous blog, I included an example from Rwanda’s ambassador to Germany who explained that, contrary to Germany, Rwanda managed to get rid of plastic bags. Germany could look at available knowledge and experiences for the challenges it faces. Yet, this kind of knowledge does not flow in a two-way stream.
We know that there are communities out there that have been dealing with the repercussions of, for example, climate change or injustice, for a long time. Because they were forced to deal with these challenges, they had to use or develop ways of dealing with these challenges. Nevertheless, as put in an article by the UNESCO team around local and indigenous knowledge: "Certain forms of knowledge, certain voices, narratives and belief systems have been devalued." So even if these communities found ways that work in their context and could potentially be applied to others, they rarely make it to the global dialogue around these issues.
Knowledge and multilateralism
If the crises we face are global, it also becomes essential to consider all knowledge available and to give equal weight to such knowledge. Just as the case made for multiple knowledges to be included in the SDGs.
Localisation is big on the agenda right now. Every major organisation has pledged, in one way or another, to localise. Although only the minority of organisations are able to openly and transparently reflect on their progress. One example is provided by Peace Direct who reflect on their progress on partnerships.
The current development and humanitarian system is built on unequal power dynamics which inherently also translate into almost one-directional flows of knowledge and centralised decision-making. Here, I’d like to make the case that more and more, there is a need to reinforce and reform multilateralism to be fit for purpose. Not to say that there are no issues or power imbalances with current multilateral solutions - there definitely are. As Daniel Perell and Heba Aly put it put it: “Indeed, this system of international cooperation is no longer fit for purpose; it struggles to cope with the multiple unresolved crises we face, often because it lacks the appropriate jurisdiction, sometimes because it does not have adequate resources, at times because it lacks the conceptual framework to effectively diagnose the problems and bring about credible solutions, and most often, because it is deemed fundamentally unfair.”
But they go on to say: “One can both support the UN for its achievements and acknowledge the need for its transformation.”
In the current set-up, as phrased by Rana B. Khoury and Emily K.M. Scott in The New Humanitarian, “[…] international aid actors are actually reinforcing their power through these processes. The system still determines whether local actors are worthy humanitarians, if they’re capable of receiving funding, how much core support costs they’re allowed, who can participate in coordination meetings, and even who is able to respond to crises in their own countries. […] In other words, international actors still have the power to let local actors into the humanitarian club – or to keep them out.”
Where do we go from here?
In the previous sections, I tried to add some meat to the discussion around how the current system comes short to include and value various sources of knowledge. While, at the same time, making the case that exactly this is necessary to move us forward.
Creating an equal playing field for knowledge sharing and learning
“They [new and complex emerging problems] need to be tackled by different knowledge systems and they need to be tackled together. That’s where you start talking about things such as “knowledge co-production.” Nigel Crawhall, Khalissa Ikhlef, Peter Bates, Joseph Karanja and Serena Heckler.
Achieving an equal playing field for knowledge sharing requires intentional strategies to recognise and value different types of knowledge. This includes understanding that knowledge is not merely a product, but a complex commodity shaped by systems and processes. It is crucial to ask not only what someone knows but also how they acquired that knowledge and the systems that facilitated this process (IPBES, 2017).
Including multiple knowledges, including local and indigenous knowledge
Incorporating multiple knowledges, especially local and indigenous knowledge, into development cooperation and humanitarian responses are vital for sustainable and effective outcomes. Indigenous and local knowledge systems offer unique insights and methodologies that can significantly contribute to identifying sustainable practices. These systems should be integrated through collaborative efforts such as knowledge co-production, which involves various stakeholders working together to generate and apply learnings.
Submitting lessons from local contexts
In humanitarian crises, stories matter more than data, research found. What this means is that the narratives from on the ground during humanitarian interventions have an effect on the decisions taken during humanitarian responses. Hence, it is key how we obtain stories, who hears them and how we evaluate them, as described in the podcast “Rethinking Humanitarianism by the New Humanitarian.
Local contexts provide invaluable lessons that can inform broader strategies and policies. In humanitarian crises, narratives and stories from the ground are critical. The way we obtain, share, and evaluate these stories is crucial. Therefore, it is essential to listen to these narratives, understand their context, and incorporate them into our response strategies.
Moreover, countries like Malawi are taking significant steps towards localisation by proposing legislation that mandates international NGOs to partner with local NGOs and allocate a substantial portion of their programming to local entities. This approach not only empowers local organisations but also ensures that knowledge and resources are utilised in ways that are culturally and contextually appropriate (Vince Chadwick in Devex Newswire).
To move forward, it is necessary to create systems that recognise and value diverse knowledge sources and that include multiple knowledges. It is imperative that we submit and listen to lessons from local contexts. By doing so, we can foster a more inclusive, equitable, and effective approach to knowledge sharing and learning.
I want to conclude this piece with an example I came across in Cairo, Egypt. In the so-called garbage-city of Cairo live the “Zabbaleen”. The Zabbaleen are informal no-institutionalised garbage collectors responsible for profitably recycling up to 80% of the mega-city’s garbage. It is one story that has been covered to some extent. However, one can imagine the extent to which we might be able to learn from it and the Zabbaleen’s approach to recycling.
With this sneak-peek into a fascinating story, I want to end this piece with a call for submissions. Have you come across interesting, fascinating, impressive stories and lessons from different contexts that have not yet been heard?
Comment below or send them to me. I’d like to collect them as part of this series and give them the space to be shared.
Development Matters // Knowledge Matters.
Sarah Abdelatif is a social entrepreneur in organisational learning and international development and the Co-founder of Propel – a team who built a solution to democratise knowledge and transform learning for NGOs and INGOs to accelerate the needed systems change.