JOURNAL O F SOIL AND WATER

ERVATI0:\

t.

The role of indigenous soil knowledge in agricultural development By Roman Pawluk, Jonathan Sandor, andJoseph Tabor

298 L 0 F 50 I L

D ECADES of attempting to promote agricultural developme nt in coun­tries in which the majo rity of farm­

e rs are rural sma ll-holders have produced few results at a considerable In many cases, the simple transfer of technology and information to fanners with unique socio­cultural and e nvironmental circumstances has contributed to the degradation of agri­cul tural resources and often to a decline in the economic and social well-being of the intended beneficiaries.

Critical reflection on these efforts by peo­ple in many disciplines has revealed the in­appropriateness of relying on an agricultu ral model conceived of solely in the context of the industrialized world. Some insightful conclusions concerning areas of needed im­provement include strategies that are gen­uine ly sens itive to the problems faced by poor farmers (4), that invite farmer participa­tion and therefore enhance the ca pacity of local people to solve their own problems (18), that require resources within the scope of those available, and that are based on a thorough understanding of the loca l envi­ronment and ecology In general, all of these strategies reflect the need for a greater awareness on the part of development plan­ners of the situations they hope to ·improve.

O ne might hegin by understanding that subsistence production is intimately related to culture . A culture develops in part as a re­sponse to the natural environment, and peo­ple therefore use the environment in cu ltur­ally prescribed ways (3, 23). Al though it may seem more clear now that greater cul­tural and ecological sensitivity are necessary for development programs to be successful, realistica lly incorporating this perspective re­mains a difficult problem. Understanding the knowledge systems behind trad itional peo­ples' management of natural resources is a worthwhile approach with promising impli­cations for the shortcomings outlined above. More specifically, tapping into indigenous soil knowledge is a useful methodology on both a practical and theore tical level for fos­tering sustainable agricultural development.

Indigenous knowledge

Indigenous knowledge systems, relative to

agricu lture , are bodies of knowledge that develop as a certain cultural or ethnic group strives to meet suhsistence goals in a partic­ular ecological setting. Informat ion is col­lected from astute observation of the loca l environment to solve agricultural production problems. This information is passed on through generations and thereby becomes refined into a system of understanding of natura l resources and rel evant ecological processes. As a result of this process, knowl­

edge systems become intertwined with the belief and value systems that underlie cul­ture. These systems are the result of people living with the land. Information may lie em­bodied in stories and religious teachings or in the form of detailed taxonomies that riva l western scientific classification.

To better understand the concept of in­digenous knowledge, o ne must understand why this information has been ignored for so long. The notion of indigenous people as "primitive," which was backed by nineteenth century social philosophy , effective ly blinded Westerners to the sophisticated as­pects of other societies. In 1887, Sir Alfred Ellis published a book on the people of the Gold Coast that became a guidebook in West Africa for government officia ls and teachers for the next several decades. In that book, he implied that the local people had poor communication sk ills and noted the language contained only 350 to 400 words and that the people could count only to 10. He stated , "There is , as is commonly the case with language of the lower races , great paucity of abstract terms." And o n an­other occasion, "One word frequently has to serve for a variety of meanings. " What Ellis failed to realize because of his cu ltural bias was that tribes of the area used a tonal lan­guage that fundamentally differs from Euro­pean languages in that tonal differentiations clearly convey different meanings. Ironically, more than six years earlier a m issionary working in the same area published dictio­nary containing 4,000 words and a grammar of the Akan language (John Schafer, person­al communication 1991, 29).

Cultural bias still exists in thiS century. Traditional agricultural systems often are fundamentally different from those in indus­trialized countries, and thus their complexity is difficult to see without understanding the corresponding cultura l and/ or eco logical context. In the 1950s, a n anthropologis t from Yale University had to study Western botanical classification before and during his fie ldwork in the Philippines to fully docu­ment the plant knowledge of the Hanuno'o people (Harold Conklin, personal communi­cation 1986). He subsequently dete rmined that the Hanuno'o distinguished more than 1,600 plant types, including 430 crop plants along with 10 basic and 30 derivative soil and mineral categories . At that time, accord­ing to Conklin, "...Hanuno'o plant categories outnumber, by more than 400 types, the tax­onomic species into which the same local flora is grouped by systematic botanists"

Consider Conklin 's description of a Ha­nuno'o swidden: "During the late rice-grow­ing seasons, a cross section view of a new [plot] illustrates the complexity of this type of swidden cropping (which contrasts re­

markably with the type of field cropping more familiar to temperate zone farmers). At the sides and against the swidden fences there is found an association dominated by low, climbing, or sprawling legumes (as­paragus beans, sieva beans, hyacinth beans, string beans, and cowpeas). As one goes out into the center of the swidden, one passes through an association dominated by ripen­ing grain crops but also including numerous maturing root crops, shrub legumes, and tree crops. Pole-climbing yam vines, heart­shaped taro leaves , ground-hugging sweet potato vines, and s hru b lik e manioc stems are the only visi­ble signs of the large store of starch staples which is building up underground , w hil e the grain crops fruit a meter or so above the swidden floor before giving way to the more widely spaced and less rapidly matur­ing tree crops" (9).

Western agricultural ists might have walked rig ht through a plot such as this and not no­ticed it. The underlying princi­ple for many tropical swiddens is to mimic the forest ecosystem and thus capitalize on nature's own superior design for light and nutrient capture, pest control, and soil and water conservation.

It is useful to describe some generaliza­tions of indigeno us knowledge systems. First, such systems focus on local production realities, which is a different emphas is from that of Western universa l science. Knowl­edge is passed on orally and usually is un­recorded; grandmothers and grandfathe rs are the resource consulted. There may not be long-term fie ld studies , but testing and refinement through time gives information an empirical value. Terms may vary from one group to another, but, unlike western society, there is less emphasis on experts so there is a potential for tapping into a body of "common knowledge. " Lastly, these sys­tems are dynamic and do not preclude per­sonal innovation and creativity John­son noted, "Experimentation is probably as natural as conformity in traditional commu­nities" (13). With regard to soils, researchers have documented an example in West Africa where farmers conducting farm trials look for soil interzones, such as between swamp­land and upland. Adjustments can be made in soil microenvironment by moving up or down slope if the trial fails (18).

Ethnopedology

Interesting information on indigenous soil knowledge, o r ethnopedology, has emerged recently. In a study of soil knowledge and

Scientists and local farmers share knowledge during a soil description near Niamey, Niger. On the facing page are the ancient agricultral terraces at nearly 12,000 feet in the highlands ofthe Andes in South America.

JULY-AUGU ST 19 92 299

igenoushich

il

X7'estern

Cayani, a Quechua-speaking farmer in the Peruvian

sorts soil term cards to elicit an

taxonomy.

300 JOU RNA L

management in the highland region of Peru (1 0), a computer model was used to gener­ate a folk expert system for an indigenous soil taxonomy (8) . Complex soil manipula­tions have been described for swidden plots in the Amazon Basin. These include specifi c so il amendments for d iffe re nt concentric zo nes to e nhance fe rtility and matching crops to particular soi l microenvironments (12). Sometimes, the examples are perplex­ing, such as Hopi crops that yield success­full y in sand dunes. In this case, it was dis­covered that slowly permeable strata below

the coarse sands perch water w ithin the crop root zone (11).

In ma ny cases, so il a nd water conservation is the prin­c iple underl ying indigeno us farming methods. A commo n technique usecl by traditional peoples from Mesoamerica to the Sahe l includes the use o f weirs, dams, or terrace walls to slow runoff and foster the de­positio n o f upland sediments. In this way eroded slopes are re ha bilitated as to pso il builds up be hind structures . Such a syste m prom p te d Bocc o to

conclude, "The main principle guiding most of the techniques is the management of sed­imentation rather than erosion " (2). In the Zay syste m in Burkina Faso, barre n and crusted soils are reclaimed by constructing holes within fields into manu re and grasses are thrown. These holes help cap­ture overland flow The Dogon people of Mali also use a basin system, and in cen­tral Mexico ca refully placed ditches are used to capture subsurface flow . That system also includes erosion prevention methods, such as grassways between fields and selection of specific plant species to stabilize gully walls (2) . In Kenya, living fences are constructed along contour lines. Vetiver grass, now pro­mo ted by the Wo rld Bank on three conti­ne nts fo r e rosion contro l, is a techniq ue originating in India that is centuries old.

Though the physical structures of these technologies often are not dramatic, under­lying knowledge of soil processes can make the m e ffec tive . Na ti ve America ns in the southwestern United States have far med suc­cessfully in a precarious arid and semiarid environment for over a millenniu m (6, 11, 23). Some of the methods used by the Zuni include the careful placement of fields on al­luvial fans, .complex manipulation of runoff, and management of gully formation. It ap­pears that harvesting water and sediment from drainages has allowed the Zuni to fa ­vorably influence soil moisture , nutrient sta­tus, and texture of soils within their fields.

Though the situation appears to be chang-

SOI L A N D C O N SEHVA TI ON

ing , ind igeno us so il knowledge re ma ins underrepresented in studies of indigenous science. This is unfortunate given the central role of soil resources in subsistence produc­tion and the importance of soil conservation fo r long-te rm agroecosystem sustainability (12, 14).

Development and soil knowledge

Marten and Vityakon concluded, "Because a key fea tu re of trad itiona l agricul ture is care ful attune ment of the cro pping sys­tem... to the agricultural capabilities of the site, a refined system of land su itabili ty clas­sification is essentia l" (14, 32). Tabo r also found that many gro ups have developed land and soil classification systems. He has conducted soil evaluations and surveys in such countries as Burkina Faso , Cameroon, Cape Ve rde , Gambia, Haiti , Ken ya, Mali , Mauritania , Niger, and Senegal and currently is publishing works on the benefits of these systems (26) .

In most developing countries, resea rch in­stitutio ns have not been in place for very long, and a substantial amount of soil infor­matio n is needed to improve food produc­tion. Both money and time needed to collect and interpret soil info rmation are sca rce. By meeting with local people , Ta bor has dis­covered that scientists can expedite the survey process. Loc al in fo rmati o n and farmer interviews allow scientists to identify the soils that are impo rtant to fa rmers, deter­mine each soil's relative productivity, and 10­cate typical examples of each soi l. Benefits for development include production of soil ma ps on a scale that is more appropriate to smallholde r productio n, a bette r understand­ing o f the ra tio nale behind management prac tices and the type of soil informatio n tha t would help farmers, better communica­tion between farmers and soil scien­tists or extension agents who can tap into local soil te rminology, and better correlation of information between regions to increase the capacity for local-level problem solving.

More important, however, is the concept behind thi s approach: "Classifica tio ns are contrivances made by men to suit their pur­poses" ( 22). Class ification systems every­where refl ect distinctions and prio rities that are re levant to the creators of the system. For example, a limiting factor, such as flood­ing, may be reflected by classifica tio n sys­te ms that e mphas ize su bt le d is ti nctio ns abo ut drainage characteristics of soils or abo ut the management of wet soil. This is also the case for key cultural priorities con­cerning agricultural production, such as risk management and conservation. Weste rn sys­tems also reflect priorities that mayor may not be important to poor fa rmers, such as

9,

ra l

n

lOd

eterin"

estl)' ,

e

some distinctions related to soil genesis. By knowing local prio rities, less effo rt needs to be spent providing informatio n that is less re levant, and more effort can be spent pro­viding useful info rmation and assistance. In another sense, indigenous knowledge sys­tems can provide the link between universal science and the manageme nt co ncerns of small farmers in much the same way soil se­ri es function in so il taxonomy (26). This methodology leads to less cultural disruption and more effective problem solving for the development do llar.

Indigenous systems as resources

Knowledge abo ut indigenous re source management can complement the approach to agricultural development in ano the r way. Faced with serious problems regarding soil degradation in modern agriculture , scientists are shifting resea rch priorities to include greater emphasis on conservatio n and agro­ecology. Agricultural scientists have made it clear that the development of sustainable agricultural systems must include a bette r understanding of resource decline . Because soil essentially is a nonrenewable resource o n the human time scale, monito ring soil changes induced by cultivatio n, cropping , and other agricultural practices is an integral part of conservation research . Othe rs look­ing at sustainable agriculture have no ted the importance of looking at the economic and social aspects of agriculture and even the values that underlie modern sociery's use of natural resources in general. Could indige­nous systems offer insights in this endeavo r?

In many cases, people have had to subsist on a finite resource base. In the case of the traditional groups remaining today, many have sustained agricultural production for centuries and often in harsh environments. With no source of external suppo rt in the case of misuse, indigenous socie ties have had to evo lve w ith a serious emphasis on managing the risk associated w ith the de­struction of resources. In short, in many in­digenous systems production and conserva­ti o n al ways h ave bee n s im ulta neou s prio rities. Based on this analysis, it appears tha t indigeno us agri cultura I syste ms may provide examples fo r extending the study of long-term effects of farming o n agricultural resources. The longest expe rimental plots provide information on the order of a centu­IY ( 20) . These systems also offe r a glimpse of the cultural values that unde rlie those sys­tems.

One example is the Colca Va lley in the southern Peruvian Andes. lndigenous farm­e rs have constru c te d terraces tha t have transformed a terrain unsuitable fo r farming because of steep slopes and sha llow soils

into an area of stable agricultural fields. Ar­chaeological evidence and radiocarbon dat­ing show that agricultural terraces date back '1,500 or more yea rs. Field and laboratory re­search showed that with respect both fer­tility and tilth these anthropogenic soils had p roperties favorable fo r agriculture . A statis­tica l comparison of such so il p roperties as bulk density, organ ic matter content, nitro­gen and phosphorous levels to baseline data from uncultivated Mollisols revealed that the qua lity of the agricul tural plo ts was higher than the surrounding areas This ev­idence suggests that after more than 15 cen­turies of cultivatio n the traditiona l fa rmers actua lly improved the ir agricultura l land. The Colca Valley may provide example fo r agricultural scientis ts of a well-adapted agri cultural syste m that is susta ina ble in te rms of land stewardship. In this case, the agricul tural land itself is a potentia l resource fo r expanding crop production in Peru.

Indigenous people do not simply respond to their environment but rather to their envi­ronment as they conceive it ( 7) . In light of thiS, an interesting ritual was documented by a geographer working in the same Peruvian vall ey. People who a re there to he lp the local farmer plow the land gather around a small shrine quickly constructed in the field just prior to planting. Treacy described the event as "a procedural necessity much like planting, weeding, o r any other annual agri­cultural chore ." He interprets the event as glimpse into the cultural content of maize farming: "To ce lebrate seeding maize, in a sense, acknowledges the victories of genera­tions of farmers who transformed a region unfit fo r maize into a landscape of wa rm irri­ga ble fields " (27) . Ce lebra ting human achievement is no t the only purpose of this ritual. The local farmer explains that the ritu­al blessing is to "console the earth that will soon be rent by the plow. " The people raise the ir g lasses, pour some liquor on the so il, and exclaim the ancient blessing, "Hayliy! Hayliy! How sweetly we celebrate with you , sa inted earth our mother earth" (27).

A resource for the future

Because indigeno us knowledge syste ms often conta in a wea lth of local ecological knowledge and are simultaneously a key to understanding the soc iocultural context of

producers, they represent a way to ad­dress problems that have plagued agricultur­

. a l development programs for some time. If Western-tra ined scientists can remain open to these systems, such systems need no t be viewed as oppos ing but rathe r as compli­mentalY systems, useful in guiding efforts to improve agricultural production. Beginning agricultural development work with indige-

CIKARD With the work of Con­

klin and others, the study of e thn oscience bega n . Since then, the topic has been refined into ethnob­otany, ethnoecology, and most recently ethnopeclol­ogy . Today , the numbe r of complex traditional sys­tems being documented is increasing steadily as re ­sea rchers from natural and socia l sciences collaborate for a more thorough un­derstanding of indigenous resource management.

Co ll e cting and docu­menting these systems is the mission of the Center for Indigenous Knowledge fo r Agriculture and Rural Deve lo pment (C1 KARD), e sta blished in 1987 a t Iowa State University. The center coordinates infor­mation fo r deve lo pment planne rs , scientists, and others by publishing mon­ographs maintaining ind exed bibliographica l data base .

Interest in the center is growing. ClKARD's news­letter goes to more than 3,000 individuals in­stitutions in more than 130 countries. Working papers and presentations have been prepared fo r such age ncies as the Wo rld Bank and U.S. Agency for Inte rnational Deve lo p ­ment. CIKARD has a for­mal link with the Institute of Social and Economic Research in Ibadan, Nige­ria, and the Ethnosystems and De ve lo pme nt Pro ­gram at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands. The director and founder, D. M. Warren, is currently on sabbatical to help es­ta bli shme nt o f reg iona l collection centers in Nige­ria and the Philippines.

Documents arrive daily on such topics as rangeland management, ary medicine , forest man­agement, and irriga tion. vast store­house of rural indigenous knowledge is rapidly van­ishing as modernizing un­rave l fabric of no n­Western societies.

J U LY-AUGU S T 1 992 301

--

l

ent.

gement

'

-

erorld

en,

est

itial

­

ltunll

,

chaeol. -114.

nous soil classification systems can make re­search and development effort s more effec­tive and economically effic ient. Looking

16.

ing North America. Agw-ecosystem 5: 245­255. Reij, c., P. Mulder, and L. Bogemann. 1988.

harvesting production. Tech. closely at traditjonal soil management tech­niques as well as the soils themselves and evaluating them in light of Western scientific understanding may yield valuable insights

17. Paper No. 91. Bank, Washington D.C. Rhoades, E., and A. Bebbington. 1991. Farm­ers who experiment: An untapped resource agricultural researcb and development. In D. M. Warren, D. M. David Brokenshoe , and

for scientists addressing conservation and sustainability.

Because traditiona l societies represent dif­ 18.

L. Jan Slikkerveer [eds.] Indigenous Knowledge Systems: The Cultural Dimension of Develop­

Kegan Paul Int . Ltd. , London, Eng. Richards, Paul. 1985. Indigenous agricultural

ferent equations of society in relation to its soil resource, they offer an opportunity for reflection on the Western value system re­

19.

revolution: Ecology and food production in Afi·ica. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo. Sandor, Jonathan A. 1987. investigation of soils in agricultural terraces the Colca Valley,

garding use of natural resources. At a time when the world faces unprecedented prob­lems conce rning global agr icultura l re­sources , e nvironme ntal decline , a nd the

In W. M. Denevan, M. Denevan, K. Mathewson, and G. Knapp [eds.] Pre-Hispanic Agricultural Terraces in the Andean Region. British Arch. Rpts. , Int. Series 359(1) . Oxford , Eng.

need for improved food production, we must explore evelY avenue for possible so­lutions. Indigenous knowledge systems are a

20. Sandor, Jonathan A., and Neal S. Eash. 1991. Significance of ancient agricultural soils long-term studies and susta inable agriculture research. J. 83(1): 29-37.

resource for the future 21. Schafer, John. 1989. Utilizing indigenous agri­

REFERENCES CITED 1. Altieri, Miguel A., and Susanna B. Hecht. 1990.

Agroecology small development. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla.

2. Bocco, Gerardo. 1991. Traditional knowledge for soil conservation in Central Mexico . .J. Soil and

Cons. 46 (5): 346-348.

cultural knowledge in the planning of agricul­tural resea rch projects designed to aid small­scale farmers. In D. M. Warre n , L. Jan Slikkelveer, and S. O. Titilola [eds.1 Indigenous Knowledge Systems: Implications for Agriculture and International Development . Monog. 11, Tech. and Social Change Program, Iowa State Univ. , Ames.

3. Brosius, Peter ]., George Lovelace, and Ger­a ld G. Marten. 1986. Etbnopedology: An ap­proach to understanding traditional agricultural knowledge. In Gera ld G. Mater [eel.] Traditional Agriculture in Southeast Asia: A Human Ecology Perspective. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo.

4. Chambers, Robert. 1985 . development:

22.

23.

Soil SLllvey Staff. 1975. Soil taxonomy: A basic system ofsoil classification for making and inter­preting soil surveys. AgI'. Handbk . No. 436. u.s. Dept. AgI'., Washington D.C. Steward, Julian H. 1955. Th eory of culture change; The methodology of multilinear evolu­tion. Univ. Illino is Press, Urbana.

Putting the last Longman, London, Eng. 5. Conklin , Harold. 1954. An ethnoecological ap­

proach to Shifting agriculture. Trans., N.Y. Acad.

24. Stewart, Guy 1940. Conservation in Pueblo agriculture. Sci. Monthly 51: I 201 -220, II 329­340.

Sci. , Series Il 17: 133-142. 6. Cordell , L. S. 1984. Prehistory of the Southwest.

Acad. Press Inc., New York, N.Y.

25. Tabor, J. A. , D. Kilambya , and]. M. Kibe. 1990. Reconnaissance survey of ethno-pedology in Embu, Machakos and Kitui Districts of

7. Denton, K. 1970. An appeal to members of the society from an anthropologist. Malayan Nature 23: 121-122.

8. Furbee, Louanna. 1989. A folk expert system: Soils classification in the Colca Valley, An­thropol. Qual1erly 62(2): 83-102.

26.

Kenya's Eastern Province. Univ. Mo. , Columbia, and U.S . Agency for Int. Develop., Nairobi, Kenya. Tabor, Joseph A. 1990. Ethnopedology: Using in­digenous knowledge to classify soils. Univ. zo na, Arid Lands Newsletter. Tu cso n.

9. Geertz, Clifford. 1963. Agricultural involution: The process of ecological change in Indonesia. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.

10. Guille t, D. W., L. Furbee,]. A. Sandor, and A. Benfer. 1989. Cognitive and behavioral studies of

management in the Co lca Valley, Peru.

27. 30(fall/winter): 28-29. Treacy, John Michael. 1989. The fields of Copo­raque: Agricultural terracing water man­agement the Colca Va lley, AreqUipa, Ph.D. Thesis, Geog. Dept., Univ. Wisconsin, Madison.

Tech. to the Sci. Found., Catholic Univ. Am., Washington , D.C. Hack, John 1. 1942. The changing physical envi­ronment of the Hopi Indians ofAn·zona. Rpts. of the Awatovi Exped ition, No. 1 Papers of the

28. Warren, D. M. 1989. Linking Scientific and in­digenous systems. In.l . Lin Compton [ed.! The Transformation of International Agri­cultural Research and Development. Lynne Rien­neI' Publ. , Boulder, Colo.

Roman R. Pawluk is an associate the Centerfor Indigenous Knowledge for Agri­culture and Rural Development andJonathan A. Sandor is an associate professor in the Department ofAgronomy, Iowa State University, Ames 50011. Joseph A . Tabor is a consultant with the q/{ice a/Arid Lands Studies, University ofArizona, Tucson, 85719.

Peabody Museum of Am. Arch. and Ethnol. vol. 35. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge.

12. Hecht, Susanna , and Darrell Posey. 1989. P'-e­liminary results soil management techniques of the Kayapo ' Indians. In D. A. Posey and Balee [eds.] Resow-ce Amazo­nia: Indigenous and Folk Strategies. Vol. 7 Ad. in Economic Botany, New York Bot. Garden, New York.

13. Johnson, 1972. IndiViduality and experi­mentation in traditional agriculture. Human Ecology 1:149-159.

14. Marten, Gerald, and Patma Vityakon. 1986. Soil management traditional agriculture. In Ger­ald G. Marten [ed .] Traditional Agriculture Soutbeast Asia: A Human Ecology Perspective. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo.

15. Nabhan, G. P. 1979. Ecology oJjloodwater

29.

30.

31.

32.

D. M. 1989. The impact of nineteenth century social science in establishing negative values and attitudes towards indigenous knowl­edge systems. In D. M. Warren, L. J. Slikkerveer, and S. O. Titilola [eds.] Indigenous Knowledge Syste1ns: Implications f01- Agriculture and Inter­national Development. Monog. n. Tech. and So­cial Change Program, Iowa State Univ., Ames. Warren, D. M. 1990. Indigenous knowledge and development. Agr. Dept. , World Bank, Washing­ton, D.C. Warren, D. M. 1991. Indigenous knowledge sys­tems for sustainable agriculture in Proc., Int. Conf. on Sustainable Agr. in Africa. Center for African Studies, Ohio State Univ. , Columbus. Wilshusen , Richard H., and Glen D. Stone. 1990. An e thnoarchaeologica l pe rspect ive on soils. World 22(1): 0

302 J 0 URN A L 0 F SOIL A ND AT E Reo 5 E V A TI 0 N

I