It has been argued, in a number of forums, that theories imported from the West have not been able to find innovative solutions to Africa’s dilemmas. In many instances, solutions from this sphere were grafted on the African social milieu with no consideration for adaptation at all.
To buttress the point, Ndangwa Noyoo argues in his research paper titled “Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Their Relevance for Sustainable Development: A Case for Southern Africa” that “Africa has indeed had its share of experimentations and it is high time that countries on the continent utilize development theories that incorporate indigenous knowledge systems”.
According to Noyoo, another point of departure of the present discussion is a contention “that organically-driven forms of harnessing natural resources should serve as a starting point as endeavours to harness natural resources begin in Southern Africa. For centuries, it has been only the colonial form of modernity that has been propagated in the region. To this end, modernity has also exacerbated environmental degradation in Southern Africa, and its corollary – modern technology, has been quite detrimental towards efforts aimed at fostering sustainable development”.
In a nut shell, what are indigenous knowledge systems (IKS)? IKS refers to the complex set of knowledge, skills and technologies existing and developed around specific conditions of populations and communities indigenous to a particular geographical area.
IKS constitute the knowledge that people in a given community have developed over time, and continue to develop. It is the basis for agriculture, food preparation, health care, education and training, environmental conservation, and host other activities. IKS is embedded in community practices, institutions, relationships and rituals.
Central to this definition is the idea of knowledge ownership. Here, the local population has privy to this knowledge as it has been handed down from generation-to-generation within their context. Therefore, IKS becomes relevant in so far as it is not imported or imposed from outside.
The moot point here is that solutions are easily availed to local decision-making processes as IKS interacts with the environment due to the fact that it also encompasses: technology, social, economic, philosophical, learning and governance systems. Furthermore, indigenous knowledge has made, and can still make a significant contribution to resolving local problems.
The research paper acknowledges that Southern Africa is renowned for its mining of rich minerals such as gold, diamonds, copper and semi-precious stones like amethysts, emeralds, etc. From Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, to Zambia and Zimbabwe, mining has become, after several decades, the mainstay of the economies of these countries.
“However, modern technology has in some cases, had devastating effects for the development of the Southern African region. It is crucial to bear in mind that in the SADC region, the mining sector contributes about 60 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Thus, mining activities are inextricably bound up with environmental degradation which has taken place over the last 75 years or so, when mining at large scale began. Mining has also been cited as second to agriculture in terms of environmental degradation”, the research papers explains.
The paper further notes that there is a lot of commercial agriculture in the region as well, that is predominantly the domain of white expatriate farmers. In many instances, commercial agriculture, introduced on a large scale, foreign crops such as tobacco for export to the western markets.
“These crops have not been kind to the environments of Southern Africa. The usage of pesticides like DDT and fungicides also added their strain on the local eco-system. Surely the blame should be put at doorsteps of modern technology that came with colonialism. We argue that there are better forms of modernity that can be of use to the region, but these have not been utilized at all. The manner in which Western nations are clamouring for organic technology is just one example in the case of IKS”, argues Noyoo vehemently.
It is also pointed out that large scale technological change can be quite harmful to the environment and does lead to the dislocation of communities’ livelihoods. In the developing world, the decades of the 1950s, 60s and 70s were characterized by capital intensive development projects such as hydro-electricity dams. The World Bank was the main schemer of such projects.
“Again, there was less appreciation of the local environment by the so-called experts, and due attention was not paid to the consequent environmental degradation, and the social costs that would emanate from their interventions. In Southern Africa, the initial project of this nature can be traced back to the 1950s when communities were uprooted from their environment in the name of development. The Kariba dam that was conceived for Northern Rhodesia (present-day Zambia) and Southern Rhodesia (president-day Zimbabwe) is a case-in-point whereby the negative social consequences of dam construction are still being felt by the present-day Gwembe-Tonga of Zambia”, it is submitted.
The other project of note is the Lesotho Highland Water Project (LHWP) which saw the displacement of indigenous communities, affecting at least 20 000 people. The LHWP has exacerbated Lesotho’s scarcity for cultivated land, by pushing peasants onto soil more vulnerable to erosion.
Noyoo argues that to crown it all, “even the social fabric has suffered this new ‘invasion’ as there has been an increase in social problems consequent to dam construction, including a dramatic increase in AIDS, alcohol abuse and livestock theft”.
In a different dimension, the author delves into the greenhouse effect or the depletion of the ozone layer by industrial gasses which in his views are neither myths nor fallacies, “but a reality that has devastating effects to those who have not even played any part in destroying mother earth, such as Southern Africans”.
According to Noyoo, Southern Africa has been ravaged by droughts and floods, which have only compounded social problems such as hunger, disease and lack of shelter. Again, these natural calamities can be ascribed to the consequences of modernity.
The research study acknowledges that since all SADC countries rely heavily on the exploitation of natural resources and the environment in their economies, the region must put in place harmonized measures and strategies for proper management of natural resources – many of which are shared.
“However, following Western paradigms will not help matters at all. It is imperative that indigenous knowledge systems take center-stage in regional efforts of development, but at a political or macro level where governments in Southern Africa can begin to consciously reify this form of knowledge, through regional protocols and agreements.
The author of the study further reiterates that indigenous knowledge has profound roles to play in conserving Southern Africa’s environment as well as to promote sustainable ways of utilizing the region’s natural resources for the common good of all inhabitants – human or otherwise.
Moreover, development activities that work with and through indigenous knowledge, and organizational structures have several important advantages over projects that operate outside them. Indigenous knowledge provides the basis for grassroots decision-making, much of which takes place at the community level through indigenous organizations and associations where problems are identified, and solutions are determined.
“Southern African communities have built their own body of knowledge and beliefs which, have been handed down generations through oral traditions. This knowledge touches on the relationship between living beings and their environment, encapsulating a system of organization, a set of empirical observations about the local environment, and a system of self-management that govern resource use,” it is emphasized.
