148964_IK-textpage.indd

Policy Note

This policy note was developed with supports and comments from different professionals and
practitioners in the field of disaster risk reduction. The policy note was discussed in the Inter-
national Workshop in Kyoto in July 2008, followed by the Side Event in the Kuala Lumpur Minis-
terial Meeting in December 2008. Comments from all the participants in these events are
highly acknowledged, with special reference to P. Dhar Chakrabarti, Jessica Mercer, Julie
Dekens, Ilan Kelman, Derek Elias, Peter Bates and Christel Rose.

Kyoto University

Rajib Shaw

Yukiko Takeuchi

Noralene Uy

SEEDS

Anshu Sharma

Team Members

This project is funded by European Union

“The European Union is made up of 27 Member States who have decided to gradually link
together their know-how, resources and destinies. Together, during a period of enlargement of
50 years, they have built a zone of stability, democracy and sustainable development whilst
maintaining cultural diversity, tolerance and individual freedoms. The European Union is com-
mitted to sharing its achievements and its values with countries and peoples beyond its
borders.”

Disclaimer

“This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents
of this publication are the sole responsibility of UN/ISDR secretariat and can in no way be
taken to reflect the views of the European Union.”

Contact Details

Rajib Shaw
Associate Professor
International Environment and Disaster Management Laboratory
Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
Yoshida Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, JAPAN
Tel/ Fax: 81-75-753-5708
E-mail: shaw@global.mbox.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Web: http://www.iedm.ges.kyoto-u.ac.jp/

Design & Layout

Takayuki Moriyama and Safer World Communications

Cover Photo: SEEDS / Sarika Gulati

Research on the phenomena of disasters in
the Asia-Pacific region over the past decades
has resulted in a wealth of knowledge on
the strong link between environment and
disasters, and between human practices and
the environment. Human practices that
evolved over centuries have been tested
by time and proven to be sustainable and
effective in both reducing disasters and
managing unavoidable hazards.

Anthropological research of many traditional
communities of the Asia and the Pacific
have documented a wealth of indigenous
knowledge that are passed down from
generations and are internalized by
the communities through a process of
socialization and are part of their life styles.
Humanitarian practice in the region by
various organizations working in the area
of disaster reduction and response has
revealed a multitude of undocumented and
overlooked practices in many indigenous
communities. These practices exhibit a

deep understanding and ability to cope with
disasters through local actions. There is a
growing realization that such practices must
be acknowledged and will form the basis
for a holistic approach to disaster reduction
that links indigenous knowledge with modern
technologies.

Undoubtedly, there is compelling evidence
for the Asia-Pacific region to recognize
and strengthen its wealth of Indigenous
Knowledge for providing local solutions to
global problems of increasing disasters and
climate change impacts.

This Policy Note aims to provide a
directional path for mainstreaming Indigenous
Knowledge in Disaster Risk Reduction by
national authorities and ministries of disaster
management, ministries of education,
institutions of higher education in disaster
management, and international and national
NGOs in Asian countries.

Indigenous Knowledge

Disaster Risk Reduction

Policy Note

Preamble 1
Context 1
Entry Points 4
Thematic Focus

Policy Tools

Action Agenda 15

Contents

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

n digenous Knowledge (Indigenous
Knowledge) is the basis of community

coping practices that have helped vibrant
communities survive natural calamities
over centuries. The Asia Pacific region
is particularly rich in such bodies of
knowledge. Ancient civilizations, a multi-
hazard context, frequent disasters,
diverse geo-cultural communities and
large populations dependent on scarce
resources have all led to the evolution
of very low cost ways of life that include
Indigenous Knowledge and disaster risk
reduction (Disaster Risk Reduction) in a
very strong yet inconspicuous way.

While such local practices are based on
sound principles of interaction between
humans and nature, the policy context for
disaster management in most countries
in the region has evolved from the
governance domain. Most countries have
tended to work with relief codes and
with an approach of being prepared for
delivering calamity relief. The emergency
r e s p o n s e s y s t e m s b a s e d d i s a s t e r

management models adopted from the

west have generally overshadowed the
Disaster Risk Reduction aspect of disaster
management, and particularly Indigenous
Knowledge within Disaster Risk Reduction.
The recent initiatives for development of
national and local disaster management
plans in many countries in the region
have recognized this limitation, but have
so far been able to address it in very
limited ways.

In spite of increased investments in the
area of disaster management in recent
decades, the losses continue to mount.

There is an evident gap between practice
and policy. The need to bridge this gap
with adequate recognition of the domain
of indigenous knowledge and local coping
capacities is very urgent. There is a
strong need to recognize the potential of
community knowledge and actions, and of
switching to a bottom-up approach that
uses appropriate community practice as
the base for policy formulation.

Preamble

Context

he disaster incidences in the Asia-
Pacific region have demonstrated

a distinctly increasing trend over recent
decades. The region experiences some
of the world's worst hazards - frequent
earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, cyclones
and annual monsoons. It also includes
many of the world's megacities - those
with more than 8 million people - so the
number of people exposed to hazard
risks in the region is very high. There
is abundant evidence that disasters
disproportionately affect developing
countries. Between 1991 and 2005, more
than 90% of disaster deaths and 98%
of people affected by disasters were
from developing countries (OFDA/CRED

International Disasters Database EM-
DAT). Moreover, disasters are increasing
in number and size every year due to
a number of factors including rapid
population growth, urbanization and
climate change.

D i s a s t e r s a r e n o t t h e i n e v i t a b l e
consequence of hazards. A volcanic
eruption on an uninhabited Alaskan
island is unlikely to be a disaster, but a
similar eruption in the densely populated
Asia–Pacific region could be catastrophic.
It seems inevitable that the Asia-Pacific
region will see one or more ‘mega-
disasters’, seriously affecting millions of
people, during the 21st century. Some

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

researchers have predicted that an earthquake
with a million fatalities could occur in the
Himalayan belt of South Asia and some of the
megacities in China, Indonesia or the Philippines
could also be potential theatres of such a mega
disaster. In addition, the population explosion in
the mega-deltas of Asia, combined with increasing
vulnerability to climate change, indicates that a
flood or cyclone event affecting tens of millions of
people is also likely.

Preliminary assessment of hazard risk in the
Asia–Pacific region highlights the potential for the
region to experience a mega-disaster affecting
millions of people during the coming century.
While the scale of such a disaster may seem
greater than any recorded so far, this projection is
not only because the Asia–Pacific region is home
to intense geological and meteorological activity,
but also because of the region’s burgeoning
population, which has increased more than fivefold
during the 20th century. People in the region
are increasingly vulnerable because of trends
such as rapid urbanization and their tendency to
concentrate in areas especially prone to hazards.
Because of the threat disasters pose to the
progress of development, hazard risk management
will continue to increase in importance in
international development policy in the Asia–Pacific
region (Assessing disaster risk in the Asia-Pacific
region: Australian Government. www.ga.gov.au)

At the same time, the understanding on disaster
risk reduction (Disaster Risk Reduction) has
improved significantly since the early nineties,
with prime landmarks for the movement being
the Yokohama Strategy and the subsequent
Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA). Against these
developments the appreciation for indigenous
knowledge has remained primarily anecdotal.

There are many references to incidences of
local people predicting impending earthquakes or
cyclones by observing natural signs such as animal
behavior, changes in characteristics of ground
water sources, and abnormal weather phenomena,
but fewer documented and verified evidences.

One of the very few documented pieces of
work in this area is ‘Community Monitoring and
Preparedness for Disasters’ (COMPREND; formerly
the United Nation Global Programme for the

Integration of Public Administration and the
Science of Disasters).

While the recognition and incorporation of
Indigenous Knowledge in Disaster Risk Reduction
efforts has been dismally insufficient, there is
compelling evidence that Indigenous Knowledge
has the potential to provide solutions for reducing
disasters at many levels. Recognized in a
scientific approach, such knowledge unravels a
vast domain of approaches and tools that can
be applied in the current context with appropriate
adaptation and adjustments.

The Disaster Reduction Hyperbase initiative
(http://drh.edm.bosai.go.jp/) has given due
importance to Indigenous Knowledge, and has
elaborated the concept of Transferable Indigenous
Knowledge (Transferable Indigenous Knowledge),
as the traditional art of disaster reduction that
is indigenous to specific region(s) but having
potential to be applied to other regions and
having time-tested reliability.

In addition, DRH identifies the following criteria for
Transferable Indigenous Knowledge:

Understandable to users

•

Implementable (usable, doable)

•

Originated within communities, based on local

•

needs, and specific to culture and context
(environment and economy)
Provides core knowledge with flexibility for local

•

adaptation for implementation
Uses local knowledge and skills, and materials

•

based on local ecology
Has been proven to be time tested and useful in

•

disasters
Is applied or applicable in other communities or

•

generations

With a similar understanding, efforts have been
made in very recent times to identify and
document Indigenous Knowledge based Disaster
Risk Reduction practices from the region. The
UNISDR publication ‘Indigenous Knowledge Good
Practices and lessons Learned from Experiences
in the Asia-Pacific Region 2008’ highlights the fact
that even before we came up with high technology
based early warning systems, or standard

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

operating procedures for response, numerous
local communities worldwide have prepared,
operated, acted, and responded to disasters
using indigenous methods passed on from one
generation to the next. The publication brings
together a collection of Indigenous Knowledge
based Disaster Risk Reduction practices from
communities across the region. It also identifies
the usefulness of integrating Indigenous Knowledge
with modern technology to create appropriate
solutions.

The approach of balancing modern technology and
indigenous knowledge, however, has to be taken
up with adequate caution. There is a need to
recognize the good knowledge assets that already
exist in local communities, and at the same time
there is wisdom in adopting and benefiting from
the advances that current science offers us.

There is no defined line of equilibrium between
the two. It is a transitional domain, which has
to be worked with in a highly contextual manner
that delivers benefits without undermining related
assets. The core issue, besides finding solutions
to physical and economic dimensions of Disaster
Risk Reduction, is one of avoiding cultural invasion
that so often comes as part of the package with
technologically advanced disaster management
solutions.

Within the overall developmental and disaster
management fields, the HFA now defines the
collective approach being taken by governments,
practitioners, academia and the civil society. The
framework, particularly through the identified
priorities for action, provides ample scope for
indigenous knowledge to play an integral role in
a concerted global effort to reduce the impact of
disasters. The concept of Indigenous Knowledge
for Disaster Risk Reduction integrates well with
all the priorities of action laid down under the
HFA: Indigenous Knowledge can contribute to
the institutional basis for implementing Disaster
Risk Reduction, particularly as a local priority;
Indigenous Knowledge is a valuable tool for
identifying, assessing and monitoring disaster
risks and enhancing early warning at the local
level; Indigenous Knowledge can be very useful
part of education for strengthening a culture of
safety and resilience at the local level; Indigenous
Knowledge very effectively reduces various

underlying risks associated with unsustainable
development; and Indigenous Knowledge can very
effectively strengthen disaster preparedness for
effective response at the local level. The HFA has
a direct linkage on creating wider understanding
on Disaster Risk Reduction issues through
awareness, assessments, innovation, education
and institutionalization. Education has a strategic
role in all of these, and this has implications on
strategically mainstreaming Indigenous Knowledge
in the field of disaster and development education.

The holistic approach advocated by the HFA, and
increasingly becoming the way forward for nations
faced with recurrent disasters, is a resource
intensive process. The costs being incurred in
disaster reduction efforts are increasing, and
yet failing to have a desirable level of impact.

Furthermore, the societies worst afflicted by
recurrent and large-scale disasters are from
the underdeveloped or transitional economic
groups, thereby making such investments more
burdensome. Reliance on a balanced system
of indigenous knowledge and technological
applications presents itself as a viable option in
the face of financial concerns of disaster reduction
works, with Indigenous Knowledge offering a very
cost effective approach to Disaster Risk Reduction.

Efforts to recognize and promote indigenous
knowledge need to be coordinated and synergized
with other fora and initiatives taking up similar
or aligned approaches. Regional initiatives on
science, education and in particular the DESD
offer valuable opportunities.

The current understanding of Indigenous
Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction emerges
from a series of events organized and publications
brought out during 2007-08 by UNISDR, Kyoto
University, European Commission, DRH Asia, SEEDS
and other Asian role players. Some of the main
events in this regard are:

Transferable Indigenous Knowledge meeting in

•

Delhi in February 2007: initial discussion and case
study experience sharing
Transferable Indigenous Knowledge meeting in

•

Delhi in February 2008: Indigenous Knowledge
action agenda discussion

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Indigenous Knowledge Good practices

•

document: November 2007 to June 2008:
Provide key emphasis areas
Transferable Indigenous Knowledge for

•

DRH and Beijing workshop in February
2008: Discussion on Indigenous
Knowledge usage, practice and
documentation

Indigenous Knowledge workshop in July

•

2008 in Kyoto University: Policy discussion
on thematic Indigenous Knowledge
sectors
SAARC Disaster Management Centre

•

study on Indigenous Knowledge for
Disaster Risk Reduction in South Asia
Third Ministerial meeting in December

•

2008: Indigenous Knowledge Side event
to discuss the policy note

Entry Points

ndigenous knowledge can be difficult
to define and identify, since in many

cases it emerges more as a way of life
rather than a set of specific initiatives or
tools. Having said that, there are a large
number of individual practices that can be
highlighted as specific disaster reduction
mechanisms. These practices, however,
need to be viewed with caution when seen
without their larger contexts. The approach
to integration of indigenous knowledge in
disaster risk reduction thus needs to be
based on universally applicable principles
illustrated with locally contextual practices.

The policy level initiatives on Indigenous
Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction
thus fall into the seemingly ambiguous
area between the abstract concepts of
Indigenous Knowledge and the relatively
new and yet emerging paradigms of

Disaster Risk Reduction. In this light,
certain specific entry points need to be
identified as engines that can provide the
initial thrust needed to get `Indigenous
Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction’
on the agenda of regional, national and
local decision makers. The International
Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and
Disaster Risk Reduction: From Practice to
Policy, held at Kyoto University in 2008,
identified the following generators or areas
of influence for current issues related to
Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction:Based on this approach, the
workshop identified entry points for work
on the issue of Indigenous Knowledge for
Disaster Risk Reduction in the Asia Pacific
Region. These are briefly described as
follows:

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Priority Thematic Areas

he first level of entry is through thematic
focus areas that offer a rich body of existing

Indigenous Knowledge that needs to be harnessed
and applied back with appropriate inclusion of
technological and managerial innovations. The
thematic focus areas identified as priority themes
are: mountain ecosystems, coastal zones, river
basin management, water management and

housing. In addition there are other areas such
as arid ecosystems, small island systems and
others that can be taken up as the next stage
intervention themes, but the initial focus may be
kept on select areas in order to do justice to the
work with limited resources towards starting the
initiative and getting initial thrust. These thematic
focus areas are discussed in the following section.

Climate Change and Food Security

he argument for contextualization assumes
further critical proportions in the light of

recent trends in the area of climate change
induced disasters. The rapid pace of change in
the climatic context over the past few decades
has outpaced the ability of local coping systems
to adapt through a process of testing and
changing in a practice continuum. Further,
communities are faced with a new starting point
from which to cope, where some of the existing
indigenous practices are no longer viable. The
implications of finding the right balance between
technology and local practices assumes greater
importance in this regard. Technology can help

reduce vulnerabilities to accelerated changing
conditions while indigenous knowledge can
support seamless integration of these practices
into the local context. In addition, communities
that have developed local practices to cope with
certain conditions over time, such as drought
or flood, can provide lessons and strategies for
other communities newly facing these conditions.

Food security issues are being answered in
various situations through a combination of new
and more resilient crop varieties and cropping
systems. The element of Indigenous Knowledge,
though recognized, needs to be incorporated more
significantly in the process.

Rural Development

ndigenous knowledge, through its very definition,
finds its natural home in rural societies that have

evolved over centuries and through generations.

The implications of rural development initiatives,
and of migration from rural to urban areas, are
very direct and potentially detrimental to the
survival and continued adaptation and application
of indigenous systems. Rural development
thus forms a very crucial area for appropriately
designed systems of integrating the traditional
with the modern. The rural development field
has very wide and diverse applications, ranging

from farming and livestock rearing to local
resource management, education, health and
social securities. As a developmental approach
to disaster management, Disaster Risk Reduction
offers virtually all subsets of physical, social and
economic development for Indigenous Knowledge
integration of Indigenous Knowledge. Participation
in governance, an ongoing theme for global good
governance work, forms a very viable base for
such work, since participation and Indigenous
Knowledge are both rooted in local perceptions,
understanding and appropriate application.

Urban Risk Reduction

n contrast to the rural context, the urban
environment may be alien for indigenous

knowledge. The very pronounced basis of
economic gains that drives the urban engines
and pulls migrant populations to work and live
in cities denies the space for rural ways of life.

At the same time, within urban areas and urban

communities there are subsets that retain, or
have the potential to retain, and deploy adapted
indigenous systems in their new settings. This
is of importance since more than half of the
Asia-Pacific people will live in cities soon, and a
majority of these people will live in sub-standard
conditions in fast growing but ill serviced urban

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

centres at high risk of urban disasters.

The context of climate change induced
‘migration storms’, water stresses leading
to ‘urban droughts’, and the social
implications of a widening gap between the
urban rich and urban poor sets the stage
for intensive work on urban risk reduction
with a human face. As a melting-pot

of cultures, practices and wisdom, the
city offers a wide range of Indigenous
Knowledge ingredients for finding innovative
new solutions based on traditional inputs.

As an emerging theme of future concerns,
urban risk reduction needs urgent attention,
and as an area of lost social roots, it also
needs inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge.

Thematic Focus

ndigenous knowledge is embedded
in countless communities throughout

the world, each with their own local
environmental, social, cultural, economic
and political contexts. While this
knowledge is intrinsically tied to these
local conditions, there is potential for
specific principles and practices to be
transferred between communities in order
to further support disaster reduction.

Several subsets of indigenous knowledge,
organized by thematic group, provide
areas where knowledge themes are more
closely connected due to similar contextual
details. Within these thematic groups,
sets of principles of indigenous knowledge
can be applied to all communities living
in that context, easing the process of
transferability.

Gender and Inclusion

t the humanitarianism and rights
level, social inclusion is an issue that

deserves special attention when working
with indigenous knowledge and disaster
reduction. Caution needs to be maintained
regarding the fact that indigenous systems
often come with their own baggage of
social practices that can, and sometimes
have been, interpreted as discriminatory.
Besides inclusion of marginalized groups,
the aspect of gender anåd disaster needs
to be highlighted with specific emphasis
within the inclusion discourse. It must
also be noted that some knowledge is
held by specific groups or members of
a community, restricted to one gender,
or to certain religious and spiritual
leaders, midwives, or healers. In this
case, women often hold unique knowledge

unknown by others in the community, and
therefore must be included in decision-
making related to disaster reduction due
to the added value of their insight and
knowledge. The subject of gender and
disaster has attracted attention in recent
years, primarily from the approach of
addressing the gender divide and fulfilling
the special needs of women in emergency
situations. The strength of women’s groups
in Disaster Risk Reduction has begun to be
realized, and work on women’s self help
groups has gained ground. The link of
Indigenous Knowledge with gender based
work in specific, and social inclusion work
on a general level, however still requires
significant attention from the point of
research, identification of opportunities, and
development of applicable models.

Mountain Ecosystem

ountain ecosystems have unique
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : t h e v a r i e d

environment at different altitudes, the high
number of hazards faced (earthquakes,
forest fires, flash floods, landslides
and avalanches), poor accessibility and

infrastructure, scarce livelihood opportunities
and a fragile eco-system. Further, modern
developments have produced factors
such as out-migration, children leaving
villages to get better education, and the
detrimental environmental impacts of ad-

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

hoc development projects, all of which contribute
to increasing vulnerability in mountain areas.

Indigenous Knowledge provides very valuable
guidelines that can make new development
approaches appropriate. For example, in the
northern Chitral district of Pakistan, the risky
nature of the mountainous environment means
there are few areas where people can reside.

Local inhabitants, however, are able to successfully
interpret their landscape, translating the signals

provided by large rocks or the flow of the river
into knowledge about where and how to settle.

Specific local practices also exist in mountainous
areas, such as slope farming to reduce erosion,
glacier grafting to control water predictability,
and vertical transhumance to diversify crops and
livestock. These practices, developed over a
history of habitation and experience relating to
the local environment, provide valuable knowledge
which allows mountain communities to pursue
livelihoods in the face of risky environments.

Mountain ecosystems have unique characteristics:
the varied environment at different altitudes, the high
number of hazards faced (flash floods, landslides and
avalanches), and the need for people to protect their
livelihoods through coping mechanisms for natural
resource use. Such areas have been going through socio-
economic changes, a determining factor in Indigenous
Knowledge transferability, which include immigration,
children leaving villages to get better education, and the
increase of development projects in mountain areas. An
equation for the transferability of Indigenous Knowledge
can be:

Transferability = (usability or adaptability) x (environment)

Here, two factors are taken into account: the adaptation
to the given landscape as well as the change in
environment. If the point is reached where the
community can no longer cope with the rapidly changing
environment, external inﬂ uence is needed.

It must also be noted that environment can be read
in multiple ways: enabling environment, social

environment, physical environment, etc. In addition,
the concept of rationality needs to be viewed along with
usability/adaptability, such that the people’s perception
can be seen in contrast to the surrounding environmental
elements. When these two factors are interlinked and
remain positive, there can be transferability.

An issue requiring detailed assessment is that of
external intervention and when it is needed. It is agreed
that external influence can help prevent negative
consequences of disasters; however, any external
intervention must be done in cooperation with the
community, using a participatory approach. It needs to
be examined who holds the decision making power.

It is generally observed that in the past, decision
making was always with the people. Today, it is often
with governments and partly with NGOs. Indigenous
Knowledge is valuable and can be transferred if the
decision making power stays with the people.

(International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction: From Practice to Policy - Kyoto University, 2008)

Coastal Zones

oastal zones are among the hotspots of
impending disasters, threatened by cyclones,

storm surges, sea erosion, flooding, sea level rise
and tsunamis. Many of these events are expected
to become increasingly severe due to climate
change. In addition, many of the issues related
to pollution, poor development and resource
management filter down to the coastal areas,
causing devastating impacts on coastal livelihoods.
Since most communities living in coastal zones are
directly or indirectly dependent on fishing, drop
in fish yield is an economic risk associated with
coastal zone mismanagement. Coastal ecosystems

are also negatively impacted by pollution,
development in sea ports and climate change,
destroying coral reefs and mangroves which offer
additional protection from impending hazards.
Further, due to close proximity to the source of
tsunamis, earthquakes, and the sudden changing
nature of storms, early warning becomes a key
issue for coastal communities.

The inhabitants of these coastal areas have
been developing mechanisms to survive and
adapt to such hazards for centuries. They are
rich in indigenous knowledge relating to the

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

There are several speciﬁ c cases of Indigenous Knowledge
in coastal zones that can be transferred. From there,
key characteristics can be extracted and principles
from these examples can be applied to all cases. These
characteristics of coastal zone Indigenous Knowledge
included the following:

Relates to the water/ocean, its behavior as well as

•

wind/weather conditions
Characteristic of social system, generally smaller,

•

close-knit communities
Use of local materials (sand, thatch)

•

Involvement of ecological elements (mangroves,

•

coral reefs, rocky shores)
Disseminated in small family groupings

•

Closely related to fishing and farming practices -

•

livelihood of inhabitants

Transferable elements of these characteristics that aﬀ ect
the changing lifestyle of coastal communities need to be
studied in detail. Four basic elements felt important for
reducing risk in coastal areas and transferable to most
coastal communities are:

Maintain coastal defenses through mangrove

•

protection and coral reef protection, using
designated protected areas for mangroves, sea
grass beds, ﬁ shing areas, etc.
Promote the research and use of medicinal

•

properties of resources for coping mechanisms
The simplicity of the knowledge, making practices

•

cheap and available locally
More specifically, thatch house construction is a

•

valuable technique which could be used in other
coastal areas

Several general policy recommendations can be made
relating to two categories: education and Disaster Risk

Reduction. Under education, the following may be
considered:

Encourage the respect and consideration of

•

indigenous knowledge as valid knowledge, taught
in formal settings
Teach communities to protect coastal ecosystems

•

and to understand their beneﬁ ts; This can begin by
restricting damaging coral reef practices and the
cutting of wood from mangroves
Educate about early warning systems, how to

•

recognize and respond; Organize community on
where and how to evacuate and be prepared
Develop exchange programs, sharing of information

•

between local indigenous communities and local
immigrant communities, between communities
who have experienced a disaster and those who
have not, between different coastal communities
and diﬀ erent generations within local communities

With regards to policy recommendations relating
to Disaster Risk Reduction, the following may be
considered:

The need for genuine consultation with indigenous

•

communities regarding Disaster Risk Reduction and
development projects by Disaster Risk Reduction
practitioners and policy makers.
The support of chiefs and Indigenous Knowledge

•

holders as those with power over policy related to
Disaster Risk Reduction
The conservation and reliance on existing local

•

social institutions.
The consideration of development impacts

•

informed by Indigenous Knowledge
The continuation of incorporating Indigenous

•

Knowledge into non-traditional, contemporary
Disaster Risk Reduction approaches/mechanisms

coastal environment and how to live in harmony
with it, much of which is manifest in survival
and livelihood strategies. Several key principles
apply to most indigenous knowledge held by
these communities, which helps highlight areas of
transferability between coastal communities around
the world. Coastal indigenous knowledge relates
to the water or ocean and its behavior, as well
as the wind and weather conditions. Coastal
communities also tend to be smaller, close-knit
communities and their knowledge often reflects
this characteristic of the social system. Many

times this is illustrated in valuable knowledge
dissemination techniques, passing down information
through small family groupings. The use of local
materials is also an important element of coastal
indigenous knowledge, such as using sand or
thatch for construction. Finally, most of the
knowledge is closely related to fishing and farming
practices, which constitute the livelihood of
coastal inhabitants. The revival and appropriate
application of such knowledge principles can
substantially support ongoing efforts to increase
resilience of coastal communities.

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Building from the general policy recommendations,
speciﬁ c implementation-oriented recommendations can
be made relating particularly to coastal communities.
These included: the incorporation of indigenous
communication systems (sounds, flags, etc.) into early
warning dissemination; the incorporation of Indigenous
Knowledge into technological systems such as early
warning systems and Potential Fishery Zone information
being derived from Remote Sensing Data (if scientific
information is not available, moving seamlessly between
scientific and indigenous knowledges); recognizing and
developing safe places during disasters; and creating
protection buﬀ ers (at least 100m) of mangroves. Finally,
the following challenges facing coastal zone communities
and their Indigenous Knowledge need to be addressed:

Many of the issues relating to pollution, resource

•

management, etc. ﬁ lters down to the coastal areas
Development often comes directly to the coastal

•

areas via ports
There is often no access to other geographical

•

elements (hills to run to) either due to absence of
these formations or no ownership rights
Globalization and modernization of fisheries

•

changes Indigenous Knowledge
It is sometimes diﬃ cult to interpret modern sources

•

of knowledge in relation to Indigenous Knowledge
and understandings
It is necessary to determine the best ways

•

to disseminate early warning information to
communities and increase their awareness

Disasters and climate change are impacting coastal

•

ecosystems, such as destroying coral reefs.
Changes in technology are making traditional

•

knowledge less signiﬁ cant
Increasing populations are upseting natural

•

balances
There is difficulty transferring knowledge to

•

different topographies even among coastal
communities
It is difficult to learn and access knowledge from

•

highly isolated communities

Further, the diﬀ erence between indigenous and scientiﬁ c
knowledge and the challenge of integrating the two
needs to be examined. The validation of Indigenous
Knowledge is important to promote this integration.
The knowledge must be translated to be understood
by both the government and local people. Work must
be done to validate the Indigenous Knowledge by
explaining it in a contemporary way. The difference
between the communication techniques of traditional
indigenous communities and the scientific community
was discussed, emphasizing the need for the two groups
to develop a way to communicate. It also needs to be
emphasized that indigenous communities need to be
given the opportunity to speak.

(International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction: From Practice to Policy - Kyoto University, 2008)

River Basin Management

iver basins have been the cradles of
civilizations across history, and offer a

rich abundance of indigenous knowledge on
sustainable development and disaster risk
reduction. Riverine communities live within
two prominent extremes—floods and droughts.

In between there is a wide range of issues
including sustainable agriculture, urban regions
and energy generation. River basins vary in
their very character and context as they move
from mountain areas through plains and finally
to deltaic eco-systems. In each one of these
there is a unique source of lessons, indigenous
knowledge, and a space for applying appropriate
technologies and processes, generated by several
distinctive factors. These factors range from

cultural and socio-economic context, to climate
regime and geomorphology, to past experiences
relating to certain types of disasters.

Globalization also plays a role in shaping the
knowledge of indigenous communities. Guided by
the duality of living and coping with or without
water, local communities have developed valuable
indigenous knowledge techniques for river basin
management which can be valuable for all
communities in this context.

Facing inundation/flood, erosion and drought,
indigenous strategies have evolved to protect
livelihoods, build safer houses, secure food
storage, and develop early warning systems.

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Key elements that belong to Indigenous Knowledge,
including housing, food, environment, health, livelihood
and land use have been identiﬁ ed. The transferability of
this knowledge depends on the commonalities of certain
Indigenous Knowledge generators between those
creating the Indigenous Knowledge and those looking to
use this knowledge. If the two groups face similar risks
and have similar contexts then the knowledge is more
likely to transfer.

The impact of a changing climate on Indigenous
Knowledge and its transferability need to be addressed
when talking of river basin management. Both
modernization and climate change have contributed
to and will continue to contribute to many shifts in the
environment that will affect Indigenous Knowledge
related to RBM. Examples of these changes include
increasing rainfall, higher temperatures, globalization
and consumerism, seasonal fluctuations, salinity
changes, flash floods, CO2 emissions, industrialization,
and increased information technology. Therefore,
communities will have to adapt from worse conditions in
the future, beginning at a diﬀ erent starting point.

Two different stakeholders have been identified, those
of Indigenous Knowledge (individual, community, civil
society, CBOs and local government), and those of
scientiﬁ c knowledge (scientists, researchers, technicians,
government, institutions and external agencies). These
two groups of stakeholders will need to work together

in order to incorporate both types of knowledge into
Disaster Risk Reduction policy. A dialogue is needed
between the two in order to determine the best
strategies.

At the same time, strong distinction between Indigenous
Knowledge and scientific knowledge have also been
challenged. It is argued that the two concepts should
be better harmonized. In addition, a community as a
whole does not always hold the Indigenous Knowledge,
sometimes there are specific groups or rural experts
which are the only holders of this knowledge. These
people must be identiﬁ ed in order to manage disasters.

Further, the challenges of transferability, including
the affordability of transferring the knowledge or
practice and the consideration of the context of both
communities (those holding the knowledge and those
adopting it) need to be addressed. Often NGOs do not
do a thorough assessment of the existing situation to
determine the current context and the existing resources
that can be used. Another challenge highlighted is
the speed at which knowledge is adapted to other
communities. Sustainability becomes a problem if
technology is rushed somewhere, which has happened
in the past.

(International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction: From Practice to Policy - Kyoto University, 2008)

These areas of knowledge have allowed river basin
communities to survive and flourish throughout
history, and their value can be further shared
among communities facing similar threats to help
reduce vulnerability.

River basin management has three major
phenomena that can lead to a number of
strategies:

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Water Resource Management

ater has been the theme for many
disaster management efforts. Water is

the leading cause of disasters globally, and its
management can offer the much needed resilience
to communities struggling with its abundance or
dearth. With the increase of extreme water related
events, as well as the growing divide between
water demand and available water resources,
changing environments are putting water resource
management further at risk.

There are technological as well as process issues
involved in the management of water resources,
and indigenous knowledge has much to offer
for both. Indigenous technology has produced
specific practices which can be transferred to
many different communities, such as evaporation
control by using underground canals, water
storage by tank systems, water transfer by gravity,
and traditional weather forecasting. In addition,
elements of management, such as community
rule, community-based decision-making, and
collaboration with local government can be found
in indigenous knowledge and provide further
insight into successful protection and distribution

of water resources. Finally, indigenous knowledge
also teaches unique ways of disseminating
information related to water, using stories,
proverbs, songs, poems, and festivals to pass on
valuable lessons.

Regardless of its value, much indigenous
knowledge is being lost. The dying wisdom
of harvesting water in indigenous communities
through innovative means has been documented
to some extent, but not applied in true measure.
The indigenous system of water councils for
equitable distribution and community level
management of water exist, but now mostly in
isolated case studies. It is important to recognize
what indigenous knowledge can offer to the
increasingly prominent issue of water management.
With the forces of climate change, many
communities will experience a changing water
situation, either increasing or decreasing the
typical amount of resources. Therefore, water
management provides a unique opportunity
for transferring indigenous knowledge between
communities, which must be further explored.

Housing

ernacular or traditional housing has been
well documented in many parts of the world,

and has often proven to be more resistant to
disasters such as earthquakes when compared
to modern buildings. Often this is so because
modern buildings, particularly in the developing
world, are constructed using modern materials not
appropriate for the local context, and with grossly
inadequate skills. Traditional housing utilizes local
materials and locally available technology and
artisans. This technology is successful because it
has developed over time, tested by local
phenomena, and influenced by local conditions
such as culture or climate. With the changing
environment, vulnerability related to poor housing
construction is increasing. Vernacular practices
are being lost over generations, due to the
lack of respect for these traditions and their
diminishing use. The impacts of several important
forces, such as modernity, climate change and

development, are also changing the environments
and the way people live in their house over time.

Nonetheless, it is proven that traditional housing
can protect lives and secure livelihoods. There
are innumerable anecdotes surrounding every
large earthquake recounting how old, traditional
buildings such as local temples, mosques or forts
survived the disaster while newly built, modern
buildings collapsed. Several components of
housing need to be analysed and incorporated in
sensitive disaster reduction and response policies,
including local materials, construction technologies,
and building management systems. There is a
need for an increase in research and development
as well as training and education related to
traditional housing. Housing provides a valuable
opportunity to integrate indigenous and modern
technologies by learning from traditional cultures
while transitioning into modern societies.

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

The basic principles of Indigenous Knowledge relating to
water resource management include:

Diversity: fulfilling the needs of local people/

adapted to local culture, climate, environment,
geography, etc.
Equality: common property, resource sharing,

interest balancing
Environmentally friendly: multiple purpose, reuse,

conservation
Economically sustainable: local materials, no need

of extra energy for water transferring (use of
gravity)

Three transferable elements of Indigenous Knowledge for
water resource management are: Technology (or speciﬁ c
practices which could be transferred) such as evaporation
control by using underground canal, water storage by
tank system, water transfer by gravity and traditional
weather forecasting; Elements of management, such as
community rule, community-based decision-making,
and collaboration with local government; and Elements
related to methods of transfer, including the use of
songs, stories, poems, festivals, beliefs and proverbs to
transfer Indigenous Knowledge relating to water resource
management.

Two impacts of Indigenous Knowledge from a changing
environment are: impacts to water resources, which
includes a general difference between water demand
and available water resources (like water scarcity) as
well as increasing extreme events; and impacts to
Indigenous Knowledge question whether Indigenous
Knowledge is still applicable and whether it is evolving
with the changing environment. In addition, the need
for adaptation in several different areas: technology,
management, crop and livelihood diversity and self-
checking or an enhancement of social capital needs to be
addressed.

The question on how to link can Indigenous Knowledge
and the decision making of the local government also
needs to be tackled. Two approaches can be taken: one
related to management and regulation, emphasizing
the need for community-based decision making as well
as hierarchical management among diﬀ erent levels and
between governments, and the second related to the
conservation and promotion of Indigenous Knowledge,
highlighting documentation, dissemination, education
and awareness. There are also several challenges in the
future, such as the increase of more extreme events and
large scale disasters, the decreasing of water resources
and the change of spatial climate patterns. There is
therefore a stronger need for local solutions to these
global changes.

A n i m p o r t a n t i s s u e t o b e l o o ke d i n t o i s t h e
commercialization of water. Recently, there has
been an intervention of the private sector into water
management. There is general agreement that water
should not be privatized since it poses an additional
danger of either losing or not utilizing valuable
Indigenous Knowledge relating to water management,
since Indigenous Knowledge is usually public belonging
to the people. There must be an eﬀ ort made to get the
private and community groups together, though a private
intrusion on Indigenous Knowledge can be dangerous.

Another important issue is the relevance of Indigenous
Knowledge on water resource management to the
urban sector. Which Indigenous Knowledge principles
can be applied to the urban sector? There are several
examples from India, Sri Lanka, Maldives and China
of how indigenous practices could be used in an urban
environment. Examples include indigenous practices
for collecting rain water, using groundwater/wells,
and decreasing sediment in the water. Many of these
techniques could be adapted to urban contexts, and
possibly improved with modern technology.

(International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction: From Practice to Policy - Kyoto University, 2008)

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Indigenous housing (IH) can be defined as vernacular
housing, traditional housing and local housing. There are
several speciﬁ c features of IH: including local materials,
locally available technology and artisans, evolved
over time, and influenced by local conditions such as
culture and climate. Influences can be local, including
local resources, culture, the community’s lifestyle and
existing skill/technologies, as well as external, perhaps
relating to the economy. Housing does not stand alone.
With regards to transferability, its holistic property may
make it difficult to transfer from place to place, and
even from generation to generation, given the changing
environments, the impacts of modernity and the way
people live in their house over time.

There are several reasons for discussing and studying IH.
The work is done with an objective of reusing existing
local wisdom in order to reduce community vulnerability
which may be increased with changing conditions. It
provides an opportunity to learn from indigenous
communities with an insight into the transferability to
Indigenous Knowledge. It helps promote sustainable
development, especially with the integration of
indigenous and modern technologies. It also allows for
successful transition into modern societies. Finally, this
knowledge is part of a cultural identity which should be
preserved and celebrated.

There are several issues associated with transferring
indigenous housing knowledge. Since modern housing
has a high status in many communities there is no respect
for the traditional life styles. In addition, indigenous
artisanship to carry out these IH techniques is fading.
In many cases, a traditional form is being transferred,
but it is either incompatible with the materials and
technologies used or it is not applied in the correct way

(such as applying the wrong orientation or location). It
must also be noted that the impacts of climate change
are making it even more diﬃ cult to transfer and reduce
community vulnerability.

There can be several policy suggestions related to
housing and Indigenous Knowledge. There is a need
for an increase in research and development as well as
training and education relating to IH. Local tourism
should be encourages, which could help develop an
interest in IH and generate good employment for local
artisans who hold indigenous techniques. There is a need
for increased awareness about this knowledge and its
value. Local resource management and decentralization
of many of these processes should be improved in order
to support the cultural identity of IH and utilize the
indigenous techniques.

It needs to be emphasized that there is a need to make
indigenous techniques more feasible, preserve them,
and make them more attractive in the modern context.
Reviving indigenous practices is not always possible in
some contexts, and some technologies are not always
safe. It is important not to romanticize this knowledge.

Finally, there should be an effort to preserve IH
techniques; however it must not be lost that the context
is constantly changing. New techniques must also
evolve which take into account climate change impacts
as well as modern technologies. The focus should be on
extracting elements of principles from IH which can be
transferred.

(International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk
Reduction: From Practice to Policy - Kyoto University, 2008)

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Research, documentation and

showcasing

n digenous Knowledge needs to be
recognized and upgraded from a body

of undocumented anecdotal practices to
a validated body of applicable knowledge.

The following steps can contribute to this
effort:

Understand and establish the value of

•

Indigenous Knowledge in present context,
and build a foundation for its integration
with other knowledge and operational
systems
Systematically document the Indigenous

•

Knowledge on disaster risk reduction in
traditional communities
Test the value of Indigenous Knowledge

•

and identify appropriate practices for
replication and scaling in the context of
current science
D e m o n s t r a t e t h r o u g h n a t i o n a l a n d

•

regional pilot programs the applicability of
Indigenous Knowledge with appropriate
adaptation, as an input to awareness and
advocacy work

Education

ducation is the most elementary
and important tool for the revival

and application of Indigenous Knowledge.

Education can establish the linkages
between Indigenous Knowledge and
modern technology, and also bring about
the connection with local context and
knowledge. Under education the following
aspects can be useful tools for appropriate
application of Indigenous Knowledge in
disaster risk reduction:

Promotion of Indigenous Knowledge as

•

an element of formal education within
the numerous curriculum development
exercises being carried out in the region
for school as well as higher education on
Disaster Risk Reduction

Creation of informal education content on

•

Indigenous Knowledge and its applicability
under the various community based
Disaster Risk Reduction initiatives being
implemented across the region

Advocacy

he most useful frontier for activating
t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f I n d i g e n o u s

Knowledge significantly under Disaster Risk
Reduction work is that of governance.

Inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge in
disaster management, risk reduction,
climate change adaptation and sustainable
development approaches of governments
will pave the way for its widespread
a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t a n d a p p l i c a t i o n .

Advocacy initiatives for the same may be
carried out at various levels:

Advocacy at international for a for inclusion

•

of Indigenous Knowledge in the regional
efforts for institutionalization of the HFA,
and in the DESD initiatives
A d v o c a c y w i t h n a t i o n a l a n d l o c a l

•

governments for inclusion of their local
Indigenous Knowledge as well as adapted
Indigenous Knowledge from other relevant
communities in their disaster management
plans as also climate change adaptation
practices
Dissemination to international and national

•

civil society organizations and academic
institutions towards inclusion of Indigenous
Knowledge and Disaster Risk Reduction in
their respective agendas

Institutional framework

he effort for promotion of Indigenous
Knowledge and its integration in

mainstream Disaster Risk Reduction work
cannot be a one time initiative and
needs a sustained push. An appropriate
institutional set up is required at the
regional level to provide support and
impetus for continued work for promoting
research, education and advocacy tools
discussed above.

Policy Tools

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

Action Agenda

The work done thus far must be consolidated and moved forward. A Regional
Resource Group may be established for pursuing the agenda, and identifying and
linking various community resource groups with an aim of establishing further
linkages.

1: Establishment of Resource Group

2: Documentation and Research

There is a need for cataloguing and documenting Indigenous Knowledge in
Disaster Risk Reduction and developing contextual guidelines based on Indigenous
Knowledge for disaster prone areas. Validation must happen through communities
as well as current science. This can be done through action research and
demonstration that this knowledge works, grounded in the fact that it has been
sustainable and successful. Advantages of improvement and adaptation of this
knowledge must be demonstrated and highlighted.

3: Education

This can be done by using databases of Indigenous Knowledge for curriculum
creation, both for formal and informal education. Then, based on evidence of
success, the knowledge can be appropriately adapted and transferred through
the education system. Inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge must be promoted and
mainstreamed in disaster, environment and development education.

h e i m m e d i a t e n e x t s t e p s f o r
promotion of Indigenous Knowledge

for Disaster Risk Reduction in the Asia
Pacific need to include engagement
with policy makers, making a clear
commitment to the issue, developing
a framework for specific actions, and
assigning responsibilities.

The processes for documenting, validating,
educating, advocating, and continued
working need to be spelt out. The
foremost step that needs to be taken
is to identify the roles of different
stakeholders based on strengths and

weakness of different organizations,
institutions and groups. The creation
of a database of Indigenous Knowledge
practices, their analysis and subsequent
recognition of practices with positive as
well as negative consequences needs to
be done before dissemination, education
and advocacy work can be taken
up. Linkage with national and regional
platforms with this as a discussion agenda
can however be initiated immediately.

Seven main issues have emerged as
cross-sectors to work on the overall
agenda discussed above:

Those supporting and recognizing the values of Indigenous Knowledge must engage

in a regional policy discussion. The body of promoters of Indigenous Knowledge

should subsequently engage with a wider spectrum of regional and national

stakeholders for integration of Indigenous Knowledge in Disaster Risk Reduction,

disaster management and developmental sectors under the umbrella of sustainable

development.

4: Policy Advocacy

There is a need to create an environment that cuts across the techno-legal, socio-

economic as well as cultural regimes. A wide policy engagement will pave the

initial way for this, but it must be followed up with a multi-pronged approach

that can include influencing current areas of work that have a potential for

incorporating and promoting Indigenous Knowledge. These can include initiatives

such as DRH-Asia, various school safety initiatives, various tsunami rehabilitation

and risk reduction initiatives, HFA and DESD program etc.

5: Enabling Environment

6: Change Agents

Agents for change must be identified at both the policy level, i.e. the right

legislators and administrators, and the community level, i.e. the right local leaders

and influential citizens.

7: Special Focus Areas

Several specific focus areas can help to guide policy initiative on Indigenous

Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction so that it becomes comprehensive,

appropriate and appealing. These can include gender, urban risk, climate change

adaptation and food security.

Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction

p u b l i s h e d i n 2 0 0 9

EUROPEAN UNION

European Union
Delegation of the European
Commission Bangkok, Thailand
Tel: +66 2305 2600/2700
Fax: +66 2255 9113
Web: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/
index_en.htm

International Startegy for

Disaster Reduction

UN International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction for Asia & the Pacific
UNESCAP Building - 4th Floor, Section B,
Rajdamnern Nok Avenue - 10400
Bangkok - Thailand
Tel: +66(0)2 288 2745
E-mail: isdr-bkk@un.org

Kyoto University
International Environment and
Disaster Management Laboratory,
Graduate School of Global
Environmental Studies
Yoshida Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto
606-8501, Japan
Tel/ Fax: +81-75-753-5708
E-mail: iedm.gsges@gmail.com
Web: http://www.iedm.ges.kyoto-u.ac.jp/

SEEDS
15/A First Floor,
Institutional Area,
Sector-IV, R.K. Puram
New a, India
T: 91-11-26174272
F: 91-11-26174572
W: www.seedsindia.org
E: info@seedsindia.org