16 minute read
Conversation: Bringing Indigenous knowledge into biomimicry
How can we effectively address global challenges while considering the nuances of the local communities being affected? The idea of universal knowledge and a one-size-fits-all approach to address multifaceted problems like climate change can be appealing in theory, but in practice it can neglect the different needs of different communities. Indigenous knowledge is place-based and considers these differences. Melissa K. Nelson and Sara El-Sayed discuss the importance of including Indigenous peoples and perspectives and how they can help us approach the world’s wicked problems more successfully.
Melissa K. Nelson (Turtle Mountain Chippewa) is a professor of Indigenous sustainability in the Arizona State University School of Sustainability, housed within the College of Global Futures. Nelson is an Indigenous ecologist, writer, editor, media-maker and awardwinning scholar-activist. Prior to joining ASU in 2020, she served as a professor of American Indian studies at San Francisco State University, specializing in Indigenous environmental and Native California Indian studies. She is the editor and a contributor to two significant publications focused on Indigenous peoples’ traditional ecological knowledge.
Sara El-Sayed has a joint position as director of the Biomimicry Center and assistant research professor at the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems. Her research interests include exploring ways to create more regenerative and net-positive local food systems, and exploring the intersection between biomimicry and Indigeneity.
How do Indigenous cultures and innovators from Indigenous backgrounds view the idea or approach of biomimicry and sustainability research?
Nelson: As I always say, no one can speak for all Indigenous people. The diversity of Indigenous peoples is huge. I know people who are adamantly against the idea of biomimicry — not the principles of it, but how it’s being implemented. Then I know a lot of others, those I work with in academia, education and activism, who are super excited about the idea.
Many folks say we were the original biomimics. We knew to look to the plants, to the animals and to the ecosystems we lived in to learn how to flourish, how to grow food, how to build shelter, how to conserve energy, how to be generous like seeds. So much of our traditional Indigenous knowledge systems are rooted in these natural systems. They all give rise to these different lessons about how to live harmoniously, symbiotically, even hierarchically, because there are hierarchies in nature as well. A lot of the Indigenous peoples we’re consulting with on our collaborative projects are very excited about exploring how to bridge Indigenous knowledges, biomimicry and sustainability research.
How has this been incorporated into sustainability, biomimicry and related fields so far?
El-Sayed: From the field of biomimicry, we’re coming in as listeners, to explore and to find ways of creating synergies. The premise of the work that we’ve been doing has been rooted in three big elements. It is rooted in emulation, the one most people hear about, which lets us look to nature to become better listeners to the natural world. We can look to nature’s strategies for inspiration in creating more sustainable solutions for our future, but that’s just one piece of it. The two other elements often get ignored; they are not sexy to the media like innovation is, or like technology is.
Ethos refers to the ethics behind biomimicry, how we show up as human beings and what it means to be on this planet in relation to other organisms, the rocks and water and so forth. Indigenous communities are the masters of this, and the best teachers.
The other piece we talk about in our study of biomimicry is reconnection, this idea that over the past few hundred years, as human beings we’ve become a bit separated from the natural world. We often think of ourselves as apart from it. One of the courses I teach in biomimicry is called Principles of Life. One of the questions I ask the students is, “Are we nature, or are we not nature?” Oftentimes it’s a half-and-half split between people who think we are definitely nature, and the others who say what we’ve done to our world has separated us, that we’re not nature anymore.
So what does it look like to reconnect, to really be part of nature again? Indigenous communities, wherever they are, have those connections. It’s brought in not just from generation to generation, but through storytelling and music and dance. These are an embodiment that the sciences don’t really think about or talk about or incorporate. I think these components are crucial.
Nelson: That’s right. I think the relationship between humans and nature was completely broken down historically through colonialism and this idea that we are at the top of the pyramid. What I love about biomimicry is that these scientists are practicing humility. All science should be about humility and listening and learning from whatever you’re studying, but for some reason it got converted to expertism, scientism, thinking that there’s only one way of knowing the natural world. This basis in separation from the natural world and so-called objectivity leaves out Indigenous sciences and the other local and traditional peoples who have lived in the same home for generations and passed on those ways of growing food and harvesting food and living, rooted in participating in natural systems.
The Indigenous peoples we’re collaborating with are very excited about this because it brings together the best of both worlds to look at innovative solutions. It’s not easy because so much of biomimicry is still rooted in a Western scientific paradigm and through the English language primarily. I’m sure there are many other biomimics from around the world from different languages, where Indigenous knowledges are translated through diverse worldviews and lenses that have very unique classifications, even about plant and animal relationships. It’s a challenging thing to bring together, but that’s what makes it so exciting.
El-Sayed: Biomimicry as an academic field of study is very new. ASU is one of the first universities in the world to offer a program and degrees in biomimicry.
I think there’s an opportunity in the world of STEM education. One of the things we bring to the table is scientific rigor, that process, but we’re also doing it with humility. We try to encourage this idea of quieting your cleverness. In our programs, we take students to different ecosystems and have them not only observe and listen to the organisms, but also hear from people who have been in close connection with these ecosystems. Part of that listening is not just listening to the science, but also listening to the stories and listening to that history and connection.
We are a young field that’s still trying to learn, and I think it’s a great time to engage in these conversations and think about what it means to create a program that is culturally relevant to Indigenous folks, especially to young Indigenous students who are trying to find avenues to exist in the world while still maintaining their own identities, cultural heritage and histories.
You have both brought up that this is more than just the traditional scientific approach — it’s also about storytelling, and the humanities come into play here. Can you share your thoughts on how these things could make the field more accessible?
El-Sayed: My whole argument is that storytelling is something that comes naturally to us as human beings. We tell stories to our children. Stories are very important and innate, like music. I think that these are things that are very accessible and understood by everyone. The question is, how do you weave these things together in a way that makes sense within this academic space as well?
Nelson: We’re focused, both in Indigenous cultures and in biomimicry, on unlearning and then relearning from the natural world. That’s not something you can do superficially.
And so how do we learn? That’s another exciting aspect of biomimicry, reinventing how we learn about the natural world. From Indigenous paradigms, there are multiple ways of learning. The mind is just one of them. The heart is another way of learning, the body is another way and then the spirit. We have this whole sense of reverence for the natural world, that the nonhuman natural world, “biodiversity,” the elements, they have a spirit and they’re not below us, beneath us or less intelligent than us.
Those four different ways of learning have been really reduced and fragmented in higher education. We learn through the rational, cognitive mind, and that’s a great way to learn, but it’s just one way to learn. When you talk about singing and dancing, people think that it’s less rigorous. You get out and try to do a buffalo dance right at sunrise, on the ground, barefoot, and you’ll see how rigorous it is. Or, you go and harvest saguaro cactus fruits that are 60 feet up in the sky and sing the songs so that they fall into your hands.
There’s a different type of rigor with Indigenous knowledge. It’s about broadening the full horizons of how we learn and the type of knowledge we produce. That’s why this dialogue and this weaving together is so important. It’s because of the focus on learning new things about the natural world. In doing so, we learn new things about ourselves as humans.
El-Sayed: This university and this laboratory are really focused on the idea of complexity, and all of this just adds more nuance and more complexity. For example, something wonderful that came up in the podcast series we co-produced was listening to the conversation between Roxanne Swentzell, who is a wonderful Pueblo artist, farmer and seed saver, and Anne LaForti, a biomimic who is focused on learning about the soil.
During that conversation, what came up was this in-depth understanding of the importance of microbes and different types of nematodes, and how the soil is a living ecosystem that we kind of ignore. We’re not being good stewards of it. Anne mentioned how one of her Indigenous friends talked about the microbes as water spirits. Adding these elements, even just in conversations, makes it richer. We can understand microbes not so much as something people dislike and want to avoid; a water spirit is a very different way of thinking about it. It makes you have an affinity to it just by using words that are different.
An important element that Indigenous communities bring is a strong connection to language, even if it’s translated. Because you are raised with such a strong connection to language, it enables everything to have more nuance and complexity. I think it’s just richer.
Nelson: Absolutely. It makes me think of this one Ojibwe word I love. It’s “mashkiki,” which is generally interpreted to mean medicine. When we think of medicine, we may think of going to a pharmacy and getting pills. Mashkiki, literally the etymology of the word, is “strength of the earth.” All medicines come from the earth, right, the strength of the earth? To me, that’s biomimicry.
How do we make sure that Indigenous knowledge is included to assist with solving these knowledge gaps?
El-Sayed: Something that has come up a lot with my students, and with myself as well, in the field of sustainability is how often people feel like they are looking for a North Star. Where’s our ethos? I wouldn’t say there are knowledge gaps as much as there are gaps in what allows us to act differently on this planet. If we think of it as just knowledge, and not an embodied experience in bringing the heart and body into it, then what we’re really doing is greenwashing. What Indigenous knowledge teaches us is how you can bring these pieces together.
Nelson: There are knowledge gaps because there are learning gaps. You asked how to respectfully include this other information? Listen, be respectful, do things differently.
I’ve been fortunate to know some of the leaders of the biomimicry field for several years. It’s no surprise to me that it’s led largely by women who really want to bring back reverence for the natural world and listen in a more humble way to gain new insights and collaborate with Indigenous peoples and other land-based peoples who have been living it for centuries.
An issue I always have with this field is there’s such urgency, the problems are great, the issues are so pressing. Climate change as an example, what are we going to do? We’re going to move faster, faster, faster — I think it should be the opposite. I think we actually have to slow down. We’re part of the slow food movement, which is a global movement that tries to reimagine our relationship with food.
It’s an interesting dilemma with time, because things are urgent. The house is on fire. We do have to make radical change, social change, scientific innovation, but not at the expense of relationships and consent and trust. Consent and trust take a long time to build when they’ve been broken repeatedly throughout history. How do we rebuild that? Historical justice is not generally part of public discourse in America, unless you’re in American Indian studies, or ethnic studies or justice studies maybe. And it is rarely discussed in the sciences.
El-Sayed: It’s a problem that affects the whole world. I come from the Middle East, and we have struggles right now. It’s also politics, right? It’s not just a matter of willingness, but it is a complicated situation.
Nelson: And some conflicts may be insurmountable, but we have to try, especially as educators working with young people who are bright and excited and want to make changes, because the world is in a very dire situation right now.
El-Sayed: I think it requires a little bit of discomfort. Something a lot of people don’t sit well with is questioning their own self, their own beliefs and assumptions, and then trying to have these conversations within their discomfort areas. If you don’t actually think about things and look at them head-on, then you’re not able to find ways forward.
For example, one of the things that we need to reconcile in the world of biomimicry is the tendency to bring natural objects into our workshops. People get so excited to look at them and understand the different functions behind them, whether it’s a feather or a cholla skeleton or something along those lines, but that’s not acceptable in many Indigenous communities. There’s reverence and respect and a story that goes with it. Trying to navigate this, we have no answers.
Right now, we are going to explore it and see what it looks like, but this is in direct contradiction to our different ways of doing things. Part of what we’re going to explore is what this could look like in our future. We’re not going to shy away, we’re going to find ways to solve it.
Within fields like biomimicry and sustainability, there are so many different people impacted by these changes. How do we seek answers in a way that causes the least amount of harm and ensure we are being mindful and respectful?
Nelson: Even though we really do need solutions, we often jump to solutions very quickly, without sitting with the not knowing and the discomfort. Maybe we try to come up with bottom-up solutions rather than top-down solutions, then meet halfway. Experts do have a lot of knowledge and experience and we need to learn from that, but it can’t be at the expense of communities on the ground.
El-Sayed: I was thinking recently about a Lancet article talking about how the Mediterranean diet is the diet we should be proposing to the rest of the world. The Mediterranean diet has a lot of advantages in the composition of the foods, but it is very place-based. This has created a lot of unintended consequences. These topdown approaches become problematic when they haven’t been really thought of in relation to place. With the solutions coming bottom-up, there might be something in between. In this case, there might be some Mediterraneanlike principles that can inspire a solution.
Nelson: This is the idea of universal knowledge. Universalizing knowledge is a very Eurocentric idea of Western science, and maybe some other things like Western religions. Indigenous knowledges would never say what’s good for a Pomo in Northern California is good for an Akimel O’odham in the Salt River, or good for Chumash in Southern California or Quechua in Peru. That would just never come up. This is a huge mindset change that we’re grappling with. Like you said, maybe some general principles you can bring in, but there are very big differences in different places.
El-Sayed: On the topic of principles, in biomimicry we use a set of principles that have been extrapolated from how nature functions. They are very big and overarching. For example, being locally attuned and responsive is a principle. All organisms are locally attuned and responsive to their environments, and they adapt to them. Organisms that live in the Sonoran Desert are perfectly adapted to the monsoons and heat, and they have evolved over centuries to do an entirely different type of photosynthesis called CAM photosynthesis.
I know that scientists want to do this too, have these big overarching principles, but then they have to become localized. They have to be grounded in truth with local communities. There are ways of bringing these two worlds together, but you need to be a good listener. You need to make sure that we engage in those conversations, and see if it works because maybe these principles don’t actually work everywhere.
Nelson: It’s hard work. We’re grappling with a lot of conundrums. There are no simple answers, and yet we need answers. We have to act urgently, but we can’t build relationships and experiment and repair relationships urgently. It has to be done over time with care.
