**3. Learning from Indigenous and Local Knowledge**

After discussing disaster risk reduction, resilience and specifically Indigenous resilience, we focus on one of the major factors: how local and Indigenous knowledge can help build resilience. Indigenous knowledge is not only important for its own sake; it can also lead to mutual learning involving Indigenous peoples, researchers, and policy-makers. Such social learning involves networks of actors, including Indigenous knowledge-holders, and can facilitate adaptive governance to deal with rapid environmental change. This is a subject we return to in the next-to-last section of this paper.

Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) has been defined as "a cumulative body of knowledge, practice and belief, evolving by adaptive processes, and handed down through generations by cultural transmission" [22]. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) uses the same definition but calls it Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) [23]. Indigenous knowledge (IK) may be more broadly defined as local knowledge held by Indigenous peoples or local knowledge unique to a given culture or society. These terms (TEK, ILK, IK) are often used interchangeably. Local knowledge usually refers to knowledge that is rooted in place but not time-tested through multiple generations [22].

Indigenous knowledge is time-tested wisdom. It is important for the knowledgeholders themselves and their communities, for cultural, educational, economic, and political reasons. However, it is also important as a part of the common heritage of humankind. Here, we discuss it in terms of dealing with hazards and disaster-shocks, but it has been used for a wide variety of purposes from conservation to development planning (Table 1). Indigenous and local knowledge can help build resilience in three ways: increasing the range of available knowledge; providing the basis for adaptations; and enabling social learning.

**Table 1.** Practical significance of Indigenous and local knowledge (traditional ecological knowledge (TEK)/Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK)/Indigenous knowledge (IK)) as common heritage of humankind. More details in Berkes [22].


First, Indigenous knowledge increases the range of knowledge available to solve problems. It is important for Indigenous and local peoples themselves, but it is also important to help address global problems. Many of these global issues require the use of different perspectives to understand the full range of their impacts, as in the case of climate change [11]. Indigenous knowledge is important for the co-production of knowledge, defined as the collaborative process of bringing a plurality of knowledge sources and types together to address a problem [24].

The multiple evidence base approach [25] brings together natural science, social science, transdisciplinary science, local knowledge, and Indigenous knowledge. The approach creates the potential for co-producing knowledge, enriching knowledge for insights and

for better understanding, and bridging knowledge systems to make links between multiple epistemologies. This approach has been used by IPBES [23] among others.

Second, Indigenous knowledge is a source of adaptive capacity, as it has the potential to provide the raw material for adaptations in the face of environmental change. Peoples' knowledge and practices are the basis for adaptions, and adaptive capacity is part of resilience. Knowledge provides options and flexibility for dealing with change. For example, the 9000 ha Potato Park in Peru holds some 1300 varieties and cultivars, and helps conserve crop genetic diversity for the world. It is a Biocultural Heritage site, located at the center of origin and diversity of potato in the Andean highlands. It is administered and managed by the local Quechua Indigenous people. The amazing diversity of varieties, adapted to different environmental variables in diverse habitats, is crucial as a source of genes needed for global food security in the face of climate change (summarized in Berkes [26]).

Another example comes from the Bolivian Andes, where Indigenous knowledge helps understand climate variability and change. Indigenous people maintain age-old adaptations for unpredictable environmental change. For example, they cultivate crops in discontinuous plots at different altitudes and different faces (aspects) of slopes. They diversify their holdings so that at least some of the fields produce successfully in a given year. Indigenous peoples note local and regional variations in climate change effects: violent rains, erosion and hail damage to crops in the highlands, but drought and unpredictable rain in the valleys. These differences in the local spatial scale do not show up in scientific climate change models [27].

Third, Indigenous knowledge can help build resilience, not only for Indigenous communities but society as a whole, when collaborative networks include researchers and policy-makers. For example, in Canada, regional and national policies have benefited from Indigenous knowledge and experience in two areas of environmental change: Arctic ecosystem contamination and climate change impacts and adaptations [28]. The coproduction of knowledge and collaboration through mechanisms such as natural resource co-management lead to mutual learning at multiple levels of governance from local to national. The beginnings of co-management in Taiwan between the government and some Indigenous groups with regard to wildlife and forest management are very important in this regard.

Collaborative networks facilitate social learning, and social learning is key to learningby-doing, also known as adaptive management and, more broadly, as adaptive governance. Many countries have typically practiced top-down management, with no history of user participation and community–government collaboration. In such cases, collaborative networks may take years before they become functional. Joint problem-solving and learning-as-participation are good ways to start collaboration to build trust among the parties.

Indigenous knowledge is essential for monitoring disaster-shocks and understanding environmental change because it provides on-the-ground information. However, Indigenous knowledge has to be used with caution because it has a cultural context—it is a body of knowledge, practice and belief. This is one of the reasons why scientists and governments sometimes dismiss Indigenous knowledge. Another reason is the politics of knowledge: there will always be power differences between Indigenous knowledge and government science. The key to knowledge co-production is to respect the integrity of each way of knowing, and in particular, not using Indigenous knowledge outside its cultural context. Knowledge systems can be used in parallel and can be "bridged" [25,29]. That is, they can be used together respectfully without mixing them or trying to test one against the other.

To summarize, lessons from the international literature indicate that Indigenous knowledge is useful in understanding environmental change. For example, local knowledge shows fine-scale differences in climate change impacts (e.g., valleys vs. highlands in Bolivia), whereas global and regional climate change models are simply too coarse to show this. Indigenous knowledge and local practice often indicate existing adaptations to

climate variability, and potential new adaptations made possible by experimentation and adaptation. In both the Peru and Bolivia examples, local knowledge drives adaptations that keep options open, hence providing resilience. These cases are not unique. Savo et al. [11] discovered and reviewed 1017 studies of local observations of climate change impacts and adaptations throughout the world. The surprisingly large number of cases indicates that local observations and knowledge are now part of the international effort to understand and deal with environmental change.

#### **4. Taiwan: Unique Lessons and Considerations**

Taiwan is a unique environment in which to explore Indigenous resilience to disasters. Consisting of the main island and some 121 others, Taiwan is a democratic regime in East Asia, rich in both biological and cultural diversity [30,31]. Taiwan's topography enables an unusual diversity of ecosystems from mountain tops to the seashore. Only 142 km wide, the main island contains over 200 peaks over 3000 m, the highest reaching nearly 4000 m. Set along the "Ring of Fire" and marking the border between two tectonic plates, Taiwan is often plagued by quakes and landslides.

Due to its location in the Pacific Rim and its mountainous topography, Taiwan is increasingly affected by typhoons and related disasters, such as floods, landslides and debris flows. High and steep mountains are erosion-prone; rivers can turn into torrents running the short distance from the upper slopes to the sea. That makes mountain communities and infrastructure such as roads difficult to maintain. The rapid flow of water from the mountains is hard to control, and necessitates building reservoirs to meet water needs.

Taiwan has a complex colonial history. Since the 17th century, the Spanish, Dutch, Chinese, Japanese and others have come to trade with or colonize Taiwan. The multiple colonial history has meant ever-changing governing policies of the colonists impacting the population and the environment in various ways. To put this into the framework of nature–culture interactions, Taiwan is relatively small but very complex. One spectacular advantage of this is that one can visit very different social-ecological systems on a oneday trip!

Taiwan and its offshore islands are home to 16 officially recognized Indigenous groups ("yuan-chu-min-zu"; 原住民族) as well as other local or unofficially recognized groups (Figure 1). Taiwan is a settler society like the United States, Canada and Australia. The Indigenous peoples are Austronesian in general, and they were living on Taiwan long before the mass immigration of Han Chinese from southern China began in the 17th century. The plains and fertile lands have been occupied by the Han Chinese. In the process of modernization, most of the plains area has become urbanized. Indigenous communities occupy the mountainous interior and the rugged eastern coast. Indigenous peoples in Taiwan accounted for 573,086 people in 2020 (2.4% of the island's total population), of whom 287,789 lived in Indigenous tribal communities [32].

**Figure 1.** Map of Indigenous territories in Taiwan (prepared by Hsu, Y.Y. and Bayrak, M.M., National Taiwan Normal University, based on Dept. of Household Registration [33]).

The 16 official Indigenous groups all have their distinctive languages and cultures. The land and biodiversity of Taiwan are understood and used in the traditional ways of these groups, such as through naming, material practices, social institutions and worldviews. Assuming that each tribe has a unique understanding of Taiwan's biodiversity, Taiwan has at least 16 different sets of biodiversity through the lens of its Indigenous languages. This constitutes a very rich treasure of biocultural diversity, not just biological diversity or cultural diversity per se [26,34]. The most diverse and rich ecosystems of the island are maintained as national reserves, many of them home to Indigenous peoples who have knowledge and understandings of these areas better than others. Indigenous cultures have wisdom accumulated from interacting with their lands and changing environments. However, at the same time, Indigenous peoples have been treated as a threat to national

reserves and biodiversity. These are important issues for resilience studies, and Taiwan has a lot to offer.

Partly due to geography, but also due to colonial legacy and political economy, Taiwan's Indigenous peoples are disproportionately affected by climate change and other disasters. Bayrak et al. (in this Special Issue) found that of all recorded instances of extreme climate-related events between 2006 and 2020 (which are related to, but not necessarily caused, by climate change), 43% occurred or directly impacted Indigenous communities [35]. Typhoon Morakot in 2009 had perhaps the most profound impact on Indigenous and rural communities in Taiwan in recent history. Typhoon Morakot caused 699 deaths, destroyed 1766 houses and displaced 4500 residents [36]. The responses from the government, civil society organizations and Indigenous communities themselves during and after Morakot included disaster relief, resettlement, and recovery, and became a focus of studies after 2009 [37].

Politically, Taiwan's Indigenous peoples have been gaining political legitimacy, recognition, and the ability to revive their customs and languages. However, centuries of colonization, assimilation, and modernization have left deep and profoundly negative impacts. There are many land use and nature conservation-related conflicts between Indigenous peoples and government agencies, private stakeholders, and even among Indigenous communities themselves [38–42].

The recognition of Indigenous knowledge and the consideration of Indigenous resilience in Taiwan are closely intertwined with democratization processes in this young and independent political regime. Particularly important for Indigenous peoples is the name rectification in the constitutional amendment of 1991. Since then, "yuan-chu-min" (原住民, Indigenous people) has become the formal title to replace "mountain people", or even worse, the discriminatory and offensive title, "fan-jen" (蕃人, barbarian).

Changes have not come easy. Waves of social movements, including those on Indigenous peoples' rights, made a great effort to promote Indigenous peoples and discourses related to their oppressed situation, consistent with international norms. Article 26 (2) of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) contemplates the rights of Indigenous peoples to own, use, develop and control their lands, territories and resources.

In 2000, another major leap for Indigenous people's rights was achieved through the "New Partnership Policy" adopted by the then new President of Taiwan. The President promised to respect traditional customary law and facilitate the co-management of natural resources and the recognition of land rights [43]. Subsequently, the "Indigenous Basic Law" was enacted in 2005. Indigenous peoples' issues have become significant in the political agenda and in election campaigns. In 2016, the transitional justice issue that closely embodies Taiwan's democratic process appeared on the agenda. This then led to the formal Presidential apology to Indigenous peoples in the same year.

Overall, the role of Indigenous peoples has been promoted in Taiwan's civil society at significant speed since about 1990. The democratization of Taiwan has brought forth Indigenous voices. The social dimension of resilience studies pays particular attention to democratic participation, mutual learning, networking and local knowledge. It seems interesting that the struggle history of Indigenous peoples and decolonizing processes parallel the growth of democratic processes in Taiwan.

In this context, multiple hazards and environmental threats have created new opportunities for society to reorganize disaster management to include Indigenous concerns. This led to a new collaborative learning environment involving science, government, and local community. The new partnerships were made possible through legislative support, institutional transitioning and multilevel disaster governance [37,44,45], providing the context for making sense of Taiwan's experience with disasters.
