Local Knowledge in UNESCO Workshop in Thailand

I had a great chance to attend the Indigenous and local knowledge dialogue workshop for the IPBES regional assessment for Asia-Pacific which was held in Chiang Mai, Thailand from 26 to 28 June 2016. The workshop was held by the IPBES supported by UNESCO, UNEP, UNDP and FAO. There were three groups of participants in the workshop: experts of local knowledge who were assigned to write down the chapters of a book on indigenous and local knowledge for Asia and Pacific region; those who were holders of the knowledge from local communities; and those who had access to the local knowledge or have written about that in their own countries. Therefore, the workshop was like a dialogue to see how the chapters have to be written. The participants were from Iran, Pakistan, Nepal, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, India, The Philippines, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea.

I am not going to give a full report of the workshop; I think those responsible for the workshop will prepare a report and it can be accessible through the IPBES website. In fact, the workshop was a good learning point for me; to learn more in deep about the local knowledge. One major lesson learned was about the system. Before, I knew that any local knowledge has its own value within a local system; during the workshop, I could feel it; you cannot talk about Qanat in Iran without talking about the local management system that governs it. When one of the colleagues was presenting about the irrigation system based on the local knowledge, I found out how the decision-making process within a local system can have a major role in using the local knowledge. The government could launch a parallel system to the one existing in the local context but it is not clear how these two can work together. The local system plays a major role in practicing the local knowledge. This can also be seen among nomads in Iran where the existing local system brings together all tribal members and without that, the local knowledge will loose its intrinsic value.

For workshop organizers and the authors, the role of women in protecting the local knowledge and their active participation in local systems and management activities was of great importance. I had a chance to talk about the role of women in a project on Qanat revival in Takab, and I was happy to mention that how women have been able to have shares of water from their Qanat.

There were discussions about the policy-making and how the holders of the indigenous and local knowledge have to affect the process of policy-making. I had the chance to talk about the issue in one of the workshops, and I tried to discuss the issue while using the model of a political system raised by Easton.

Other important issues were the local knowledge on seeds and agriculture, watershed management, local knowledge in oceans (raised by the participant from the southern India), drivers in promoting or obstructing local knowledge.

Community Dialogue, a book review

Some months ago, Parvin Pakzadmanesh and Mostafa Pakdelnejad and me (Saeid Nouri Neshat) edited a book in Farsi entitled: "Hamandishi Mahlehee va Jayegah aan dar modiriat mahaleh" (or Community Dialogue and its role in Community Management). The book was published in Tehran by Jameeshensasan publication.

The book has four chapters. The first chapter starts with the concept of dialogue in Iranian culture and continues with the concept of mahaleh (or community) with an aim to show how important is the role that "dialogue" can play in a community. It also studies, in brief, local management in communities that was prevalent in the past in Iran. From there, it reviews how the new structure of communities works in Tehran and suggests that "dialogue" has to be revived in communities. It also defines other necessary concepts such as "facilitator", "community researcher" and "community dialogue". The chapter moves further and tries to show that a dialogue can result in actions and therefore, defines "action plan" as a major result of such interactions at local level.

The second chapter is a conceptual framework. It uses an approach of local development based on "the symbolic interaction" and tries to show that citizens in a city could be neighbors that are responsible for their communities.

The third chapter studies the process of "community dialogue" project implemented by the Tehran Municipality (Research Center) in Tehran. It analyzes the data collected from the dialogues facilitated in 1388 (2009-2010) and 1389 (2010-2011) and proves how effective community dialogues have been organized in Tehran.

The fourth chapter is like a suggested framework for an effective dialogue within a community. Any facilitator or community member needs this part, if they are going to be engaged in a dialogue with certain positive results.  It has many useful points regarding facilitation, training and empowerment, participation, sincerity, trust, decision-making, citizenship, community management, neighborhood councils, differences among communities, special groups in need, special issues in communities, women's participation and involvement, practicality, monitoring and evaluation.

The book has been published in Farsi, and I am thinking to translate the book in English, since I think any community worker needs to read the book.