[P2P-F] a new type of platform?

Sat Jul 30 10:44:51 CEST 2011

Michel and all,

Thanks for the pointer Michel but I'm not sure that those examples are very
pertinent in this context.  I think that indigenous traditional knowledge as
has been pointed out is highly contextual as is its documentation or
formalization and is quite different in form and substance from  "open
information/open data" as we in western developed countries understand this.

One element of this knowledge is that there may be cultural restrictions on
its access/use within the specific cultural context i.e. there may be
cultural limitions on who can use what knowledge and for what purposes and
to disregard these limitations/practices without full regard for the owners
of the traditional knowledge is not only deeply disrespectful but it might
be very destructive of the local culture and even on the knowledge that is
being "captured".

One other important consideration here is that for many indigenous peoples
their knowledge may be a resource, in many cases the only resource available
to them in providing a means for participating in the larger society.  Thus
calls/demands for "open knowledge" in these instances may be an updated form
of colonialism -- acting in such a way as to deprive indigenous people of
the opportunity to take some material advantage of their cultural and
environment parallel to similar processes where other resources such as land
or raw materials might similarly have been stolen by outsiders.

I would personally be very cautious in any attempt to transpose notions of
"open" or even p2p directly to traditional/indigenous societies without
first undertaking a major process of cultural understanding and translation.

Best,

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org
[mailto:p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org] On Behalf Of Michel
Bauwens
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2011 2:43 PM
To: P2P Foundation mailing list
Cc: nina
Subject: Re: [P2P-F] a new type of platform?

Hi Devin,

THere is indeed a long tradition of traditional people using documentation
and networks to further their cause,

for them as for us, it's part of an arsenal of means they can use,

but the context of technology use matters, i.e. is it under their own
control, or not, is it used or not, for the benefit of outside forces,

Michael Gurstein, at OKCON11, pointed to some famous case studies where
'open documentation' was used preferentially by those already privileged,
thus increasing rather than decreasing power differentials...

Michel

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Devin Balkind
<devin at sarapisfoundation.org> wrote:

I don't think you're making an argument against documentation, but you are
making an argument for access to resources.  I consider knowledge a resource
and it's documentation one of many ways to make that resource useable.  

The following is from the website you cited:

Example: The Potato Park community biocultural database (Peru)

A database of potato varieties and biocultural systems became necessary to
hold the information collected by communities through action research. The
database uses free (open source) software to administer data entry, access
and use, since this is compatible with customary practices of free and open
sharing of knowledge. The free software DRUPAL platform is creating a
database based on three Andean principles of reciprocity, duality and
equilibrium. The database also uses GIS technology and audiovisual equipment
for recording resources and knowledge.

http://biocultural.iied.org/tools/community-biocultural-registers

Since there is no link to the dataset and considering your post, I'm
wondering whether you think this database should be public and accessible
via the internet. 

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:35 AM, jmp <m.pedersen at lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:

On 28/07/11 09:20, Karl Robillard wrote:
> Nicholas,
>
> The importance of OSE is not primarily in what is being produced, but
*how* it
> is being produced.  The knowledge of production is being openly shared
with
> the expressed goal of replication and abundance.  Doing this is just as
useful
> for producing food forests as it is for tractors.  If you see that
traditional
> knowledge is disappearing then you only need to document and share it to
stop
> that from happening.

For info / some related implications, from a different perspective.

The latter part - especially "... then you only ..." - parallels a
common and widespread conception of traditional knowledge that is
problematic, in its reduction, at least insofar as the context of
indigenous people is concerned. It ignores the material and physical
reality of knowledge as doing: traditional knowledge is practices
embedded in bio-cultural systems -- not merely information that can be
documented ex-situ.

It is precisely this reduced conception of traditional knowledge - i.e.
that it can be documented to protect it - that many indigenous movements
and empathetic researchers are arguing and working against, because it
is devastating to many communities (another set of socio-economic
conflicts arises from the so-called benefit sharing that accompanies
this approach, but that is a tangent here).

It is a conception manifested in the UN, WIPO, state and corporate
"intellectual property" approaches to the "protection" of traditional
knowledge. Indeed, it forms central part of contemporary international
political economy - and market expansion - as it has the purpose of
spreading the very the idea of private, exclusive ownership of knowledge
and intellectual property generally, while seeking credibility through
"protection" of minorities and vulnerable groups, whose cultures in turn
are undermined as market relations or the cash economy advances onto
their territory. The protection myth, in this context, functions to
extract information (recipes, species info etc.) from knowledge
practices, but let's the bio-cultural systems in which they exist
wither. Some background info here: http://biocultural.iied.org/

Documenting some "knowledge" does nothing automagically for a knowledge
practice, except that in the case of traditional, medicinal knowledge
practices, it - with obvious intentions and effects - facilitates
commercialisation of the information extracted from a given knowledge
practice. Museums are full of dead knowledge.

In other words, you can document as much, say, shamanic knowledge as you
like, but if there is no access to forest, land and the required
resources - i.e. bio-cultural systems - in which those knowledge
practices traditionally unfold, then it is merely information in an
abstract form on paper (or in bits).

If you want to preserve knowledge practices about living on and with the
land - i.e. about growing stuff - then the first step is to secure
access to land in order to be able to practice. Knowing by description
how to grow something won't put food on the table unless there is land
to practice on. Knowing by acquaintance won't either, hence many
cultures facing land grabs, deforestation, climate change etc. are
losing their traditional knowledge not because it is no longer known, or
undocumented, but simply because they become uprooted and have nowhere
to grow, to end on ecologicals metaphors.

-martin

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

-- 
Devin Balkind
Director, Sarapis Foundation 
devin at sarapisfoundation.org
@devinbalkind

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net 

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation 

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110730/395e4ff3/attachment.htm 