16 preparation. This is aggravated by the lack of state support and protection of traditional knowledge experts, healers and practitioners. In order to address these critical challenges, there is a need to identify and provide healers with legitimate space to work naturally and comfortably. RCE Kodagu members like CEE, KMFT, Forestry College, Nirmala Kodagu and Samvruddi Trust also need to provide them with capacity building and training wherever and whenever required. The RCE, being well positioned to facilitate co-engaged learning, would need to further ensure stakeholder participation in the revival of interest in traditional medicine and healing among the general communities. By doing so it could provide a platform for intra- and inter-generational sharing of traditional knowledge, conservation practices and sustainable use of resources. Further engagement with local, regional and global networks of traditional knowledge experts, healers, medicinal plant experts, institutions like FRIHT or UNU-IAS, companies, governmental departments, and others toward the creation of understanding and sharing of traditional medicine and healing practices is required. Further networking with Asia-Pacific RCEs, African, Latin American, indigenous communities in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Europe and others will help build understanding and solidarity in matters of conservation of traditional healing practices and sustainable use of natural resources. This kind of networking also helps in exchanging knowledge, methodologies and sustainable practices. Organisations such as UNU, UNESCO , WHO, UNDP, IUCN, UNEP are involved in providing the platform, expertise, and opportunities for meeting and exchanging issues, experiences and providing technical as well as financial support for conservation. Therefore, collaborative projects and collective efforts involving different stakeholders, funding agencies and policymakers will go a long way in devising and executing sustainable conservation policies and facilitating efforts in this very important area of human endeavour. References Kushalappa and Kushalappa. 1996. Preliminary Report: Impact Assessment of Working in the Western Ghats Forests. In College of Forestry, University of Agricultural Sciences - Bangalore, Ponnampet. pp.1-58. Kalam. 1996. Sacred groves in Kodagu district of Karnataka. Pondy paper on Social Sciences. French Institute, Pondicherry. Uthappa, K.G.. 2004. Land Tenures, Land Holdings, Tree Rights of Kodagu. Kodagu Model Forest Trust, Coorg. Kushalappa, C.G. and S. Bhagwat. 2001. Sacred groves: Biodiversity, threats and conservation. In: Shaanker, U.R., K.N. Ganeshaiah and K.S. Bawa (eds.) Forest Genetic Resources: Status, Threats, and Conservation Strategies, (pp. 21-29.), Oxford and IBH, New Delhi. Bhagwat, S.A., C.G. Kushalappa P.H. Williams and N.D. Brown. 2005a. A landscape approach to biodiversity conservation of sacred groves in the Western Ghats of India. Conservation Biology. 19(6): 1853-1862 Mani & Kumari 2010. Education for Sustainable Development in Fragile Areas. Paper presented and published in proceedings of 14th UNESCO - APEID conference, Bangkok. Bhagwat, S.A., C.G. Kushalappa P.H. Williams and N.D. Brown. 2005b. The role of informal protected areas in maintaining biodiversity in the Western Ghats of India. Ecology and Society. 10(1): 8. 113
Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity
To see the actual publication please follow the link above