121 Learning across Boundaries Being often critical components of the majority of supply chains providing humanity with food, water, fuel, medicine, clothing, shelter or hospitality, biological resources are being affected by a vast number of stakeholders. As supply chains run across countries and regions with, potentially, different perceptions and approaches towards biocultural resources, rights and justice, use or protection, coordinated discussions about impacts of various practices at the stages of material sources, production, packaging or consumption would have to take place. It is necessary to identify decisions that balance actions and their local/ global implications. The variations of interests in biocultural resources have implications not only at the level of global or national supply chains but also within local communities. For example, the RCEs’ regional stakeholders whose livelihoods directly depend on biodiversity and those whose relations with ecosystems are not directly experienced often coexist. For both types of stakeholders (global and local), sustainable use of bioresources closely relate to critical aspects of learning and knowing, in particular development of systems conducive for sustainable resource use (including growth and investment strategies that do not explicitly value biodiversity) and change of culture of production and use: Preference towards more sustainable practices that are based on the knowledge and appreciation of bio-cultural diversity along the supply chain would require significant system innovations across countries and production sectors. Such, more sustainable, consumption-production systems seek new forms of incentives that secure fair and just distribution of benefits for resource use among the local and global stakeholders. New culture of using and consuming in the professional or personal domain is necessary to create preferences that lead to sustenance and revitalisation of ecosystems. Such, often radical, changes in priorities are a challenging task as implications for different choices have to be understood and negotiated for different groups, including marginalised and disadvantaged. RCEs present promising opportunities in the ambition to balance sustainable development priorities in the communities and along the supply chain. Relations that have already been established among the RCEs constitute a possibility to develop learning and research consortia that are required to address the biodiversity issues along the supply chain and across the regions. Learning for an Intercultural Context As mentioned in the editorial, a lack of sufficient theoretical approaches for understanding cultural practices is a key element for decision-making. From the indigenous worldview there are certain unique features of traditional knowledge such as non-dualistic, dynamic, informal, secret and sacred, spiritual, timerelated and nonlinear nature. Methods are also intuitive and meditative, with an emphasis on reciprocity. While applying modern frameworks, these elements may not be well recognised. This poses certain issues in learning of such elements in a formal, institutional framework, wherein several inter-related bio-cultural complexities might not be secured. RCEs, however, appear to begin addressing this. For example, RCE Guatemala showcases a unique model of integration of traditional wisdom of Mayan heritage in higher education programmes. RCEs could offer a promising setting for preserving and growing the diversity of contemporarily relevant traditional knowledge that currently, in many communities, is limited to a few traditional knowledge holders and is at risk of disappearing. Through growing trust and community links at the levels of values, knowledge and practices, such learning could be strengthened. Mainstreaming and Upscaling Bio-cultural Diversity-oriented Practices To be more effective, the actions of the RCE community have to align more effectively with the development processes working with questions of bio-cultural diversity. In the area of biodiversity, this strategy is supported by global attention to the Aichi Targets that, among other things, highlight the importance of the awareness of biodiversity values, needs for their integration into development strategies, and the request of attention and actions from all stakeholders. One of the five strategic goals is explicitly dealing with the “implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building”. Benefiting from aligning, together with other networks, their actions to the Aichi Targets, the RCEs could in turn demonstrate the strategies of going beyond awareness-raising by engaging NGOs, businesses, governments, universities, schools and communities in addressing biodiversity concerns. Going further, it would require more systematic and practical engagement with like-minded networks and initiatives, including those initiated under the auspices of the Convention on
Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity
To see the actual publication please follow the link above