豊かに生きること、主体的に生きること（English）

途上国での発展と豊かに生きることついて、知識を生み出していくプロセスから考えたレポートです。コロナの時代を生きることに共通する部分や教訓あるのではないかと思います。

1．Introduction

Indigenous development always includes a process to generate knowledge. People may find it through their experiences or experimental way. People are sometimes forced to change their existing ways because they face some crisis, or uncontrolled external pressure invades, but people will find the best way to deal with them on their own. This is how people have accumulated their knowledge and developed through hybridizing their culture and new culture. The process is different in each place, tradition and culture, and it is strongly influenced by their value, for example, what is important for them or how people feel happy. Therefore, it is important to produce knowledge on their way, because achieving it will lead people’s well-being. 

In this paper, I would like to discuss that indigenous development is indispensable for enhancing people’s well-being from the point of knowledge creation process. I introduce Solomon cases and think about how people generate indigenous knowledge and how it contributes to improving their well-being.

2. Knowledge creation process

Before I enter the main topic, I introduce a process of creating knowledge. Nonaka, Toyama and Konno (2000) proposed a model of knowledge creation process, which explains how knowledge is created and accumulated. In the model, there are four steps to generate knowledge: Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization. When people generate knowledge, they go through these four steps in circles. This is called SECI process. They divided knowledge into explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. We can tell explicit knowledge through languages and see as documents or manuals, but tacit knowledge is not easy to explain to others. It is always invisible and difficult to understand but shared by experiences. For example, when people who have not eaten some food see the food, she/he cannot know how it tastes even though it is explained or written in detail. People cannot know the taste until she/he eats. People can learn tacit knowledge only through experiences. Using these two kinds of knowledge, they explain how knowledge is produced through SECI process. 

First, when some new knowledge comes from outsides, people share common experience regarding the knowledge. This is the socialization process, where tacit knowledge is shared in a community or among people. The next step is the externalization process. Through discussion or conversation, they explain each experience regarding the knowledge, such as what it is or how they feel when they use it, in their languages, and define it as everyone can understand in the context of the community. In this process, tacit knowledge is turned into explicit knowledge. Third, using the new explicit knowledge, they combine it with their knowledge, which they have accumulated, if they recognize it is useful. People integrate new knowledge in the most effective way for their community. This is the combination process. At last, they practice their combined new knowledge in their field and ensure whether it goes well or not. This is the final step to turn explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge, and then, they go back to the first step again. This process does not finish, and it goes on and continues to generate knowledge as it fits their environment, which is changed continuously.

3. The knowledge creation process of a Solomon case

A Solomon case searched by Gegeo (1998) exactly shows this knowledge creation process and how they generate their indigenous knowledge with their belief and value.

The Solomon people traditionally have discussion meetings within the village, where they always discuss what their culture is and what the crucial philosophy for them is, with their rich vocabularies. Therefore, even though new, not traditional, and totally different kinds of knowledge or practice come from the outside, they have a place and time to discuss it. Each people face or experience something new in their life. After the socialization process, where each of them gets common experiences regarding the new practice and knowledge, they represent their experience or feeling in their languages. Through this externalization process, they share a common sophisticated understanding of new knowledge. After that, they add evaluations or continue critical discussions on whether the thinking is suitable for their culture and how they can apply. They combine new knowledge with their existing knowledge and generate newer and improved indigenous knowledge. They choose and decide on their own. Then, they live and practice according to the newer cultural norms, which is the internalization process. 

What I would like to emphasize is that the Solomon people recognize the development process and feel “physical growth” through the knowledge creation process. Indigenous knowledge is not fixed, but people continue to produce it because it should be renewable based on their culture as the environment changes. They represent the style as living in rootedness, and they think it is the most important value for them.

4. The knowledge creation process and well-being

According to Human Development Report, human development is defined as “both the process of widening people’s choices and the level of their achieved well-being (1990).” Human development is not achieved only by economic growth. The economic aspect is also one of the factors to achieve it, but it requires developing human capabilities, such as health or knowledge, and utilizing the capabilities to achieve their well-being. 

The knowledge creation process leads to achieving human development. The Solomon people think development as bringing positive changes to meet local needs and achieve social goals, and it accompanies knowledge creation. If they just applied knowledge or practices from outside to their society as it is, it is not recognized as development because it is not rooted in the local environment. And it would not be the best way to meet their local needs. People may know new knowledge, but it may not be used. If it is not past through the knowledge creation process, it does not mean anything for local people. That is why some rural development projects don’t work well (Gegeo. 1998). It is essential that the new knowledge or practices are evaluated based on their value, and applied as combined or developed knowledge. Through this “alive” knowledge creation process, people enlarge their capabilities with confidence and their identities. Once the knowledge is understood on their own and rooted in their culture or tradition, they can apply and practice to achieve their well-being, which means they are ready to utilize their enlarged capability. Besides, it would work sustainably. 

Nonaka (2000) also mentioned that knowledge creation is made subjectively, and it is an active process which is rooted in individual value system and based on their personal beliefs. Creating indigenous knowledge itself is one of the essential factors of well-being because it is the result of what people decide by themselves based on their value. Besides, what creating knowledge brings also leads to realizing well-being because it turns to be one of the practical tools to live better. From here, I would like to think of these two levels of well-being, even though both cannot exist if separated.

As the former has been explained above, the process of generating indigenous knowledge is directly related to well-being. As for the Solomon people, they always reflect on their indigenous perspectives about good life. It is a holistic way of thinking, including economic, cultural and spiritual aspects. They emphasize good relations and cooperation with others and nature, and devotion to social goals. To achieve their “good life,” it is themselves that reflect it on their strategy and find the best way. Outsiders often disturb the process of indigenous development. 

There are many other articles to argue the importance of developing based on their value and the possibility of threatening people’s well-being. For example, case studies of Papua New Guinea and Fiji (Richardson et al. 2019), where local people value collective well-being, also show that without considering it, intervention by outsider companies that seek individual benefits cannot bring meaningful development. Local people must generate indigenous knowledge reflecting their value and belief independently to achieve well-being.

5. Indigenous knowledge and well-being

The former is related to the knowledge creation process, but the latter is connected to the results of creating indigenous knowledge. In other words, how generated indigenous knowledge works well in a local place. 

Another Solomon agricultural case (Spann, 2018) describes that the knowledge from outside damages fertile soil, increasing the amount of imported food changes people’s living style, and their health becomes worse because they don’t eat nutritious local food. There is no step to combine new knowledge or practice with their traditional ones and generate their indigenous knowledge. The new knowledge or system are not rooted in their value, and may not fit the place. A farmer said that it is necessary to integrate their knowledge little by little. People living there have introduced new knowledge experimentally when they get it. They need time to confirm if the new knowledge or practice are suitable for their culture and climate, try many times with some changes, and accumulate practices. And finally, they get the most appropriate way for them. Through this process, they have developed new indigenous knowledge. Otherwise, the results threaten people’s well-being directly, like the case had negative impacts on food security and their health, which are essential factors of well-being. 

As shown above, indigenous knowledge has been created based on each environment, so the accumulated knowledge and practice are fit and shared as the best way to live in the place. Though a lot of vulnerable events happen, people have established their indigenous ways to avoid them. The relations between problems to deal with and the solutions are not so simple, and the answer would be not one. All of the environment, society and people interacted organically, so the solution should be holistic and unique to the local (Tsurumi, 1977). This is how local communities have been kept sustainably. If people face sudden shock, for example, famine or natural disasters, and they cannot cultivate agricultural products, they cannot survive. If subsistence farmers become ill, also, they cannot survive. However, people have produced various knowledge to cope with many vulnerable factors on their own in their community. It is people living in the place who know the best ways to solve the problems. Tsurumi (1977) also said that it is not until modern science and technology are changed by local science and technology which various people had developed locally that the modern science and technology can play useful roles for survival. 

Food security includes much indigenous knowledge because ensuring stable food is necessary to survive, and the way of ensuring it much depends on climate and environment, so the knowledge is generated in each community. People, especially in the Pacific, think collective welfare is an essential value, and it is embedded in their thinking and practice (Curry and Koczberski. 2012, Richard et al. 2019). Living individuals is a high risk, but if people help each other, they can overcome sudden change or uncertain conditions. That is why people put priorities on collective work, which is never replaced by money but is exchanged among communities, and leads to achieving high productivities and their well-being (Curry and Koczberski. 2012). They feel happy when they work with others. This is their indigenous strategy to ensure their security, including food security. To survive in such vulnerable situations, it is not enough only to improve their economic conditions. Establishing strong social relations with others and achieving collective well-being is one of the most important strategies to live better. In that sense, keeping good relationships among communities and the environment is enlarging their human capability, and which results in improving well-being. This shows how indigenous knowledge contributes to enhancing well-being, which is evaluated not only in economic but in social and environmental relations.

Many articles that argue alternative development or indigenous development emphasize a holistic approach, collective well-being and importance of relationships with others or nature (Gegeo. 1998, Curry and Koczberski. 2012, Bagni. 2015, and Richard et al. 2019). It seems to be related that indigenous knowledge is produced in communities or relations with others. In the case of Gegeo (1998), they have space and chance to discuss and interact with others. Indigenous knowledge is produced in communities where people share the same value and common social goals. People always think not only for themselves but also for the community because they recognize that they are members of the community, and their indigenous strategy to live better will be achieved among the relationships. Nonaka (2000) also pointed out that “Ba,” where context is shared, is necessary for the process of creating knowledge. “Ba” has both meanings of space and time to interact with others. People recognize the importance of “Ba” and value on connections not only with neighbors and communities but also with nature and the environment. Well-being comes out when relationships improve, and people have better motivations and intensions (Ura. 2008). Indigenous development, which is brought by creating indigenous knowledge, exactly promotes human development and enhances human capability, and then, the enhanced human capability will be utilized to achieve well-being. 

 6. Conclusion

I have seen how indigenous knowledge is produced and how it contributes to improving well-being from two Solomon cases. These cases show that indigenous development is indispensable to enhance people’s well-being in two ways. First, the process of indigenous development enhances people’s well-being. In the process of creating indigenous knowledge, people influence their value. Therefore, people are satisfied with the consequence of development. When they face something influenced by globalization, modernization, western thinking, technology or science, they may not enhance people’s well-being because they are not the origin of their value, even though they are so useful in developed countries. However, if they choose by themselves and combine them with their value, they develop their indigenous knowledge, which can enhance people’s well-being. Second, what people produce through the knowledge creation process enhances people’s well-being. People know very well about their local situation and the environment and have much indigenous knowledge. Based on the knowledge, they accumulate new knowledge, so it would be the best way to enhance people’s well-being in the place. 

It is not true that I want to say that modern and scientific knowledge is not useful and people live better as they are. On the contrary, it is necessary to change flexibly as the environment changes. It is needed to see out of the community and introduce what they can apply. By doing so, people know themselves well because they can realize what is important for them from differences. In this paper, I told how a community or group creates knowledge and how it is connected to well-being, but it also applies to how individual people create their knowledge to achieve their goals based on their personal beliefs. If a community or people always keep the value or belief, they would not be invaded by outsiders, but they will develop and enlarge their capability as subjects by creating indigenous knowledge sustainably. 

Now many people are in difficulty due to COVID-19 and depend on the government. People are waiting for financial supports from the government. Of course, it is important to support those who are suffering because of the pandemic, but if people are united with shared beliefs and stand up independently, they will start to go through the knowledge creation process, come up with their own solutions, act, and feel “alive.” I think this is what a Solomon people wanted to say. Well-being is realized not only when the government supports economically, but when people start to move by themselves in relationships with others.

References:
Bagni. 2015. “The constitutionalisation of Indigenous culture as a new paradigm of caring state.” International Journal of Environmental Policy and Decision Making. 1 (3). 205-226
Curry and Koczberski. 2012. “Relational Economics, Social Embeddedness and Value Labour in Agrarian Change: An example from the Development World.” Geographical Research. 50 (4). 377-392
Gegeo. 1998. “Indigenous Knowledge and Empowerment: Rural Development Examined from Within.” Contemporary Pacific. 10 (2). 289-315
Nonaka, Toyama and Konno. 2000. “SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation.” Long Range Planning. 33. 5-34
Richardson, Hugbes, McLennan and Meo-Sewabu. 2019. “Indigenous Well-Being and Development: Connections to Large-Scale Mining and Tourism in the Pacific.” Contemporary Pacific. 31 (1). 1-34
Spann. 2018. ““Living Other-Wise”: The Bushmen Farming Network as an Example of “Alter-Native” Counter Practices to Agriculture and Development.” Contemporary Pacific. 30 (1). 33-68
Tsurumi. 1977. 『漂泊と定住と (Vagrancy and Settlement)』Chikumashobo. Tokyo.
UNDP. 1990. Human Development Report 1990: Concept and Measurement of Human Development. New York. http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1990.
Ura. 2008. “Understanding the Development Philosophy of Gross National Hapiness.” Interview by Bhutan Broadcasting Service on March 30, 2008