"We Dance around in a Ring and Suppose": Academic Engagement with Traditional

Knowledge
Author(s): Henry P. Huntington
Source: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 42, No. 1 (2005), pp. 29-32
Published by: University of Wisconsin Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40316635
Accessed: 05-01-2018 08:39 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40316635?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Arctic Anthropology

This content downloaded from 213.55.76.173 on Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:39:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 "We Dance Around in a Ring and Suppose":
Academic Engagement
with Traditional Knowledge
Henry P. Huntington

Abstract The concept of "traditional knowledge" describes not a single entity, but a diverse and
complex set of ways of knowing. Debates about the appropriateness of particular approaches to
the study of traditional knowledge may miss the point in conflating not only the various forms of
traditional knowledge, but also the different ways in which academic study engages that knowl-
edge. Rather than seeking resolution in favor of a particular approach to the study of traditional
knowledge, we should recognize that different ways of studying traditional knowledge are more
a product of different academic perspectives than of qualities inherent to traditional knowledge.
In this view, different approaches are entirely appropriate, if they suit the particular purposes for
which traditional knowledge is sought. Instead of seeking to find the "right" way to study tradi-
tional knowledge, we should be clearer about our aims, assess each study in its own light, and
learn from the various experiences researchers have had with different approaches.

We dance around in a ring and suppose term that can be defined, at least in opposition to sci-
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows. entific knowledge (e.g., Stevenson 1996), or it is a
Robert Frost, "The Secret Sits" plurality of ways of knowing that defy simple cate-
gorization (e.g., Agrawal 1995). And so on.
Introduction My point is not that those who study tradi-
tional knowledge do not understand their subject.
Traditional knowledge has been the subject of con- To the contrary, a great deal of excellent work has
siderable research and writing in the past two been done to advance the field, and disagreement
decades, yet there remains no general agreement is the sign of a healthy debate, not of uncertainty or
about what it is or how (and whether) outsiders inadequate understanding. The problem lies in the
should study, use, and otherwise interact with it. use of a single concept, often called "traditional
The literature contains an array of divergent and, knowledge,"
at implying that there is such an entity,
times, conflicting views. Traditional knowledge that it is singular, and that it can be defined. It fur-
offers a valuable contribution to ecology and con-ther suggests that the knowledge is held in a partic-
servation (e.g., Johannes 1981), or a way of co- ular way and that there is thus a proper way to
opting indigenous peoples into western systems study it and depict it. While some diversity of
of power (e.g., Nadasdy 1999). Traditional knowl- approaches may be possible, the presumption is
edge should be taken in the narrative form in which that their appropriateness is determined largely if
it is transmitted within a culture (e.g., Cruikshanknot entirely by the properties of traditional knowl-
2001), or it can be distilled into facts to be consid- edge. The purpose of this paper is to argue that,
ered within the current scientific paradigm (e.g., rather than defining the study of traditional knowl-
Huntington 2000). Traditional knowledge is a useful edge by any inherent qualities that that knowledge

Henry P. Huntington, 23834 The Clearing Drive, Eagle River, Alaska 99577

ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 29-32, 2005 ISSN 0066-6939
© 2005 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

This content downloaded from 213.55.76.173 on Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:39:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 30 Arctic Anthropology 42:1

may possess, we can

engagement with
ing the characteristics
that have been taken.
What Is Traditional Knowledge? traditional
I said earlier that there is in the literature a single traditional knowledge is one amorphous lump or
concept, which I refer to herein as "traditional
knowledge." In fact, the literature is full of many
different terms, used not quite synonymously, but
which nonetheless refer to the same general idea:
knowledge that is accumulated and held by a group versus biology, must be recognized as impositions
of people and that exists outside of, though it may
interact with, knowledge generated in scholarly or inherent properties of traditional knowledge, but
academic pursuits such as science. Among the
terms used are traditional knowledge, traditional
ecological knowledge or TEK, indigenous knowl-
edge, local and traditional knowledge and wisdom,
various permutations of these and similar words,
and terms specific to certain groups or peoples
such as the term "Inuit qaujimajatuqangit" There
are numerous points in favor of and against each
of these, with the result that no one term has yet
gained currency over the others. I use "traditional
knowledge" here because it is at least widely recog- gle approach to studying or documenting it is
nized and does not imply or require that its holders likely to suit all purposes. Ingold and Kurttila
belong to a particular group.
Just as there are many terms for this knowl-
edge, many definitions have been attempted.
Berkes (1999:8) uses as a working definition "a
cumulative body of knowledge, practice, and
belief, evolving by adaptive processes and
handed down through generations by cultural
transmission." Huntington (1998:237) refers to "the ways in which academic engagement shapes our
system of experiential knowledge gained by con-
tinual observation and transmitted among mem-
bers of a community." Johnson (1992:4) calls it "a
body of knowledge built up by a group of people
through generations of living in close contact with
nature." Pierotti and Wildcat (2000:1335) offer a
broader definition of a way of thought that includes
1) respect for nonhuman entities as individuals,
2) the existence of bonds between humans and
nonhumans, including incorporation of nonhu-
mans into ethical codes of behavior, 3) the impor-
tance of local places, and 4) the recognition of
humans as part of the ecological system, rather
than as separate from and defining the existence
of that system.
They go on to say that traditional knowledge
is inherently multidisciplinary because it ... is not
only the basis for indigenous concepts of nature
but also for concepts of politics and ethics. There
are therefore no clearly defined boundaries
between philosophy, history, sociology, biology,
and anthropology in indigenous thought.
(Pierotti and Wildcat 2000:1335)
This last better
point is essential unde
with particular empha-
sis on the final three words, "in indigenous
traditional kno
thought." We can take that more of the
broadly to apply aca
to most if not all holders of traditional knowledge:
there is no pattern or custom of dividing knowl-
edge into categories or disciplines in the system of
knowledge. This is not to say that all
a uniform blend of everything together. Still, any
attempts to describe particular aspects of tradi-
tional knowledge, whether in terms of facts versus
beliefs, ethics versus observations, or philosophy
from outside the system, a reflection not of the
of the particular perspectives through which that
knowledge is examined.
The first three definitions quoted above
describe where traditional knowledge comes from
and how it is maintained, but not what it is. The
Pierotti and Wildcat definition gets closer to the
properties of traditional knowledge in terms of the
worldview it reflects. Their definition also implies
that if traditional knowledge spans many of the dis-
ciplines recognized in the academic world, no sin-
(2000:184) make a useful distinction between
"traditional knowledge as enframed in the
discourse of modernity" and "traditional knowl-
edge as generated in the practices of locality." It is
the former concept, that of traditional knowledge
when engaged with those outside the community
of its holders, that is the subject of this paper. The
concept of traditional knowledge and how we
approach it are explored in the next section.
Why Do We Study
Traditional Knowledge?
There are many reasons for studying traditional
knowledge, both academic and otherwise. Each of
these reasons imparts its own particular slant on
how the study is conducted, who is involved, what
information is sought, how that information is
organized and interpreted, and so on. This is not to
say that there are specific methods for various
approaches, nor to imply that studies of traditional
knowledge are biased or flawed. Instead, a compar-
ison across the spectrum of contemporary tradi-
tional knowledge research leads to one of two
possibilities: either a) the studies are indeed exam-
ining the same thing and thus some of the studies
are indeed flawed because their methods of data
collection and analysis are inconsistent with those
used by other studies, or b) the studies are not in
fact examining the same thing, and it is misleading

This content downloaded from 213.55.76.173 on Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:39:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Huntington : Academic Engagement with Traditional Knowledge 31

to place them in the same group or toanother, makein com-which researchers will pursue
parisons at more than a general level.specific As should be
topics and attempt to gather corroborating
clear by this point, I believe that "b" is the more
information from various informants. The study
accurate description. will probably consider each of the observations
Let us consider some hypotheticalseparately, examples. though with some attempt at creating a
The point here is to emphasize key differences cohesive view of in
how the world works. Thus, infor-
approach and conception. The examples mation are
will bemeant
presented and described as a series
as archetypes, and not as examples ofofactual stud-
observations or facts, each of which may be
ies, few if any of which would precisely independently
follow analyzed or compared with external
such a course. A Culture Study focuses on culture
sources.

and cultural views as embodied in traditional The Knowledge Study reveals the str
knowledge. An Ecology Study focuses on ecology knowledge and how it is accumulated, t
and resource management and the contributions and used by individuals and within a gr
that traditional knowledge can make. A Knowledge researchers are likely to select a variety
Study focuses on the nature of knowledge and howmants to examine differences by age an
it is constructed, using traditional knowledge as another factors and to determine how wi
example. Many other examples could be created as aspects of knowledge are shared. Metho
well, each of which would follow the same general likely to include a structured format su
pattern described below. Of the three examples, alltionnaire so that results can be compar
may claim to be studies of traditional knowledge, across the various categories of inform
and each may well have criticisms to make of the study will consider each bit of informat
others, regarding them as deficient in certain of its relation to the whole, comparing
respects. information as well as the overall structure with
The Culture Study examines behaviors and internal and external sources. Thus, information
beliefs that both shape and are informed by accu- will be presented and described in the context of
mulated knowledge and that reflect perceptions of a structure or structures for the organization
the relationships between people and between peo- of knowledge within a particular group.
ple and their surroundings. The researchers are The comparison of these three hypothetical
likely to select informants who are particularly studies should demonstrate that the three pur-
knowledgeable and articulate about their culture poses, approaches, methods, styles of interpreta-
and the meaning of rituals, symbols, actions, and tion and presentation are indeed very different. To
other manifestations thereof. Methods are likely to suggest that the Cultural Study is deficient because
include the collection of extended narratives, by it did not conform to the approach taken by the
means of which informants are encouraged to tell Knowledge Study is absurd. Similarly, to suggest
full stories or describe in detail various events that an Ecology Study is flawed because it presents
and their significance. The study is also likely to information out of context ignores the fact that the
consider carefully the context of each of these use of traditional knowledge in the context of ecol-
elements, recognizing that they do not exist inde- ogy will inevitably take information out of its origi-
pendently but only as part of the larger cultural nal context. Far better that the original researcher
whole. Thus, information will be presented and should make this initial distillation than to leave
described in detail, often by reference to narratives it to the reader, who will at best have less under-
or other forms in which the informants originally standing of the actual study and the holders of this
shared it. Observations are recognized as condi- knowledge, and may know very little about tradi-
tioned by experience and culture, and thus not tional knowledge at all.
amenable to reduction into data points or other Each approach does indeed have much to
simplistic representations. Comparisons with offer the others, and there are certainly ways to
external sources of information are not particularly improve most studies by reference to other
important, since the context is so critical to under- approaches. The varieties of studies of traditional
standing. knowledge are a strength in giving researchers a
The Ecology Study gathers information about larger body of experience to draw on, in which to
the surrounding environment, with or without ref- recognize potential pitfalls as well as useful les-
erence to the role of humans in using and shaping sons. Nonetheless, to regard one approach as
that environment. The researchers are likely to invalid a priori simply because it is different makes
select informants who are experienced hunters, little sense. Instead, I believe it is far more appro-
gatherers, fishers, or travelers, and who can priate to recognize that different studies are in fact
describe what they have seen and learned about the often examining different things, and should be
way that plants, animals, and the physical world judged according to their merits in context, not
behave and interact. Methods are likely to include held to an unrealistic and inappropriate common
question-and-answer sessions in one form or standard.

This content downloaded from 213.55.76.173 on Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:39:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 32 Arctic Anthropology 42:1

Discussion in which academics can engage a vast, diverse

body of knowledge.
Where does this leave us? I have argued that the
concept of "traditional knowledge," by whatever Acknowledgments. This paper is the indirect prod-
uct of
term is used, is misleading in its implication that it several research projects and discussions
refers to a single body of knowledge for whichwith many colleagues, too numerous to name here
but greatly appreciated nonetheless. More directly,
there is an appropriate method of academic engage-
my recent
ment. The term is useful to an extent in reflecting a work thinking about the ideas presented
difference from "scientific knowledge," but even in this paper was supported by the National
Science Foundation, and the paper benefited from
there the distinction is problematic at best (e.g.,
ideas and review from Shari Gearheard. I alone,
Agrawal 1995). The term is also useful in recogniz-
however,
ing a growing area of research, but as illustrated in am responsible for the ideas and opinions
the comparison of hypothetical studies above, expressed
the herein.
use of a single term is problematic here as well.
One approach would be to attempt to recog- References Cited
nize aspects of traditional knowledge, for example
by referring (as is often done, by myself as wellAgrawal,
as Arun
others) to "traditional ecological knowledge," or1995 Dismantling the Divide between Indigenous and
perhaps to traditional cultural knowledge" or Scientific Knowledge. Development and Change
some other qualified subset of "traditional knowl- 26(3):413^i39.
edge." The drawback to this approach is that it Berkes, Fikret
implies that such divisions lie within traditional
1999 Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowl-
knowledge, when in fact they are really distinc- edge and Resource Management. Philadelphia:
tions imposed from without by the various aca- Taylor & Francis.
demics and their disciplines that pursue
Cruikshank, Julie
traditional knowledge in relation to their particu-
lar field.
2001 Glaciers and Climate Change: Perspectives from
Oral Tradition. Arctic 54(4):377-393.
It makes more sense to me to qualify the study
rather than the knowledge, and refer for example Huntington,
to Henry P.
"an ecological study of traditional knowledge" or 1998 Observations on the Utility of the Semi-Directive
"a cultural study of traditional knowledge." Such Interview for Documenting Traditional
formulations are unwieldy, but I believe they more Ecological Knowledge. Arctic 51(3):237-242.
accurately reflect the source of the particular per-
2000 Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge in
spective brought by researchers to their study. Science: Methods and Applications. Ecological
The key point is that we must be clear in our own Applications 10(5):1270-1274.
minds, and in how we present our work, as to
Ingold, Tim and Terhi Kurtilla
exactly what we are doing. The Robert Frost poem
2000 Perceiving the Environment in Finnish Lapland.
from which comes the first half of the title of this
Body and Society 6(3-4):183-196.
paper provides what I find to be a suitable image
for academic engagement with traditional knowl- Johannes, Robert E.
edge. Let us not confuse our own interests with 1981
theWords of the Lagoon: Fishing and Marine Lore in
characteristics of what we refer to as "traditional the Palau District of Micronesia. Berkeley:
knowledge." University of California Press.
Instead, we must plan our studies carefully, Johnson, Martha (ed.)
based both on what we have collectively learned 1992 Lore: Capturing Traditional Environmental
about the many characteristics of traditional Knowledge. Ottawa: Dene Cultural Institute and
knowledge and the study thereof and on the spe- International Development Research Centre.
cific aspects of traditional knowledge that we are
Nadasdy, Paul
focusing on. We cannot address all aspects of the
1999 The Politics of TEK: Power and the "Integration"
study of traditional knowledge at once, and must
of Knowledge. Arctic Anthropology 36(1):1-18.
acknowledge our limitations and also recognize
that other researchers pursue different goals, and Pierotti, Ray and Daniel Wildcat
thus may not conduct their studies as we would 2000 Traditional Ecological Knowledge: The Third
conduct ours. Each study should be judged on its Alternative (commentary). Ecological
own merits, in relation to its own goals and meth- Applications 10(5):1333-1340.
ods, and not in comparison with the approaches Stevenson, Marc G.
favored in another context. In this way, we will rec- 1996 Indigenous Knowledge and Environmental
ognize, study, and appreciate the diversity of ways Assessment. Arctic 49(3):278-291.

This content downloaded from 213.55.76.173 on Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:39:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms