Tradition as Resistance – Indigenous Knowledge and the Law in India’s Climate Governance Framework
This Blog has been authored by Mr. Abhishek Gope (Chanakya National Law University, Patna)
1. INTRODUCTION
Indigenous people have always been of immense importance in Environmental conservation because of their strong relationship with Nature and its surroundings. But recently, it has come to light that climate change has begun to affect the traditional practices of indigenous people negatively, even though they were never the cause of climate change. Indigenous communities have always been vulnerable, but the critical knowledge they carry can serve as a remedy for each climatic problem and help reduce adverse effects.
They face several challenges, such as malnutrition, uneven weather patterns, and an increase in natural disasters, all of this has critically affected their cultural heritage and living conditions.
2. INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE AND CLIMATE JUSTICE – A TOOL FOR CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION
Whenever we talk about Indigenous knowledge (IK), we should first ask to whom do we refer by the term “Indigenous”? The term “Indigenous” refers to a certain group or community of people who have been inhabitants of a particular place for a very long time and have a deeper knowledge of their surroundings.[1] Indigenous knowledge is something that is not taught in schools; rather, it is something that is learnt from elders in the community, and it is passed down through generations of those people.
This knowledge is very dynamic in the sense that there are several indigenous groups following various practices, according to their own customs and traditions. Thus, adapting to those small and crucial steps will lead us to our end goal of protecting ourselves from the destruction caused by climate change. The reluctance to recognise indigenous knowledge is a major factor that needs to be addressed.[2]
Moreover, another important aspect is the Climate Change Justice system. People (like indigenous or local communities), who have contributed the least to climate change are most affected by it, whereas, the major contributors of environmental pollution are the least affected by it, as they have their industries growing at full pace at the cost of environmental degradation. Indigenous communities are facing one of the most severe impacts of climate change in the present era. They not only rely on the environment for their needs, but are also closely intertwined with land, water, and trees. Due to this, even a minimal impact on the environment can disturb the living habitat of these indigenous communities, thus they take such crucial steps in order to protect the environment from depletion through their rich indigenous knowledge.
3. TRADITION MEETS TRANSITION – INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES AND THE QUEST FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE IN INDIA
3.1 BISHNOI COMMUNITY
It is a Hindu tribal sect mostly found in the Marwar region of Rajasthan. Their community rituals have fostered a deeply eco-conscious way of life among Bishnoi adults and even children, who are instilled with these principles from a young age, thus ensuring the multigenerational continuance of conservation efforts in the future.
Bishnois practice agroforestry adapted to the aridity of the Thar desert. For the Bishnois, the Khejri tree is sacred; they have never cut it down for timber. The conservation efforts for the Khejri tree led to greater crop yield, as their roots (which are often greater than 7 metres) reach the water table present deep inside desert soil, thus saving them in case of drought. Fallen leaves & shade help to improve fertility and moisture retention.
The Bishnoi community’s traditional ecological knowledge, like using fog patterns or Khejri fruiting as indicators of incoming rainfall, significantly enhances their climate adaptive capacity to shifting monsoon patterns and repeating drought cycles. This knowledge can help us to manage existing food and fodder storage, conserve water in various tanks/containers, and optimise farming decisions, thereby strengthening our adaptive capacity against the desert ecosystem.
3.2 DONGRIA KONDH COMMUNITY
This community is mostly present at the Niyamgiri hills of Odisha. They have a population of around 8 thousand people living in about 100 villages. They have an inseparable connection with the land, particularly hill slopes, and they call themselves jharnia, which means ‘protectors of streams’. Their entire livelihood depends on the forest where they hunt, gather wild fruits and herbs.
They grow 80 different varieties of crops together. This multi-culture is organic and low-input, harvesting is staggered over months to suit rainfall, and no chemical fertilisers or pesticides are used. By intercropping fast and slow-growing crops together in one area, the tribe spreads labour and risk. If monsoon rains do not arrive or a pest attack happens, some crops still yield food. This extraordinary crop diversity provides year-round sustenance. Short-term crops such as pulses or vegetables can be consumed as food in a matter of weeks, whereas long-term crops such as rice and millets fill granaries. As scientists agree, cultivating multiple crops simultaneously on one patch helps retain moisture in the soil and reduce evaporation, making this system less drought-prone.
4. STRENGTHENING THE ROOTS – LEGAL FRAMEWORK SUPPORTING INDIGENOUS CLIMATE ACTION IN INDIA
4.1 FOREST RIGHTS ACT (FRA), 2006
Studies have estimated that about 50% of Indian forests should ideally fall under the control of tribal population according to the FRA’s definition of community forest, but However, while Indigenous peoples and local communities customarily hold or use a significant proportion of the world’s land, only around 10 percent is formally recognized as their legal property, reflecting a substantial gap between de facto possession and de jure recognition. The FRA gave the authority to the Gram Sabha to use indigenous knowledge and its sustainable practices, reflecting tribal conservation principles. Scholars have consistently observed that structural barriers such as state resistance, entrenched bureaucratic processes, and limited institutional support from non-governmental organizations have significantly impeded the realization of Indigenous rights. For instance, studies highlight that complex administrative procedures and overlapping institutional mandates often delay the formal recognition of land rights, sometimes extending over decades.
4.2 CONSTITUTION PROVISIONS AND JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION
It has been widely noted in legal scholarship that courts have read Articles 48A and 51A(g) together with Article 21 to evolve a substantive environmental rights jurisprudence, thereby expanding the scope of the right to life. In M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (2000)[3], The court balanced 48A & 51A(g) with Article 21; collectively, these provisions mean that both the state and citizens have a constitutional obligation to preserve forests and the ecological balance. Importantly, these have been expanded upon to include indigenous interests. Thus, giving them a strong claim and right to the protection of their land and useful knowledge.
Article 48A/51(g) was included through amendment as a reaction to the 1972 Stockholm declaration, where Article 51A(g) language is similar to the declarations’ texts. Courts regularly linked these duties with rights. In Virender Gaur v. Haryana (1995)[4], The court iterated that it is “not only the duty of the State but also the duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment”, which was also reiterated in the MC Mehta case.
4.3 NATIONAL/STATE ACTION PLAN ON CLIMATE CHANGE (NAPCC/SAPCCs)
The Indian government has made a strategy to fight against climate change both at the federal (NAPCC, 2008) and state levels. The National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) has laid out 8 national missions covering various sectors, forest, and energy, but the main issue with it on the ground level is that it lacks mechanisms to include or attract indigenous people for participation. These policies were largely created by bureaucrats and politicians without much knowledge or input from the stakeholders. The same thing happened with the State Action Plan on Climate Change (SAPCC), where, although public involvement was recommended, states failed to follow it. Many states only conducted a single workshop, even though those were filled with consultants; indigenous people were excluded, thus excluding their crucial knowledge, which could have contributed to this plan, if given proper recognition.
5. DISSECTING THE TOP-DOWN PARADIGM – STRUCTURAL LIMITS OF CENTRALISED CLIMATE GOVERNANCE
The top-down model often focuses on Western scientific ideas while undermining other systems. Various multiplatform panels like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have an assessment process that is mainly designed to evaluate peer-reviewed scientific research, thus undermining knowledge systems that don’t follow it. Often, indigenous communities’ knowledge about rain patterns, forests, etc., is dismissed as unscientific even if it proves its worth. Even if the indigenous knowledge system is included, it is usually reframed to fit the institutional agenda. The top-down model proposals restrict meaningful engagement between the parties. This problem is especially visible in India, where post-colonial bureaucracies create policy without even consulting the people who are going to be affected by it. In most cases, they are only consulted after a decision has been taken, thus eliminating tribal influence over policies.
6. CONCLUSION
Indigenous knowledge is not a relic of the past; rather, it is an evolving system of wisdom that holds the key to a climate-stricken future. While in the 21st century, the whole world is running behind technology and innovations at the same time, these indigenous people have preserved their sustainable practices for centuries. We can use much of this indigenous knowledge in our day-to-day life, such as predictions through animal behaviour, sky colour change, atmospheric conditions like wind, cloud formation, etc. Furthermore, the legislature of every state should draft a policy for the inclusion of indigenous people in climate change mitigation policies, so their crucial knowledge can be used in a better way. Their marginalisation is not merely an oversight but a very serious loss for global climate action.
[1] Brian Morris, ‘Indigenous Knowledge’ (2010) 63 The Society of Malawi Journal 1–9.
[2] Erin L Bohensky and Yiheyis Maru, ‘Indigenous Knowledge, Science, and Resilience: What Have We Learned from a Decade of International Literature on “Integration”’ (2011) 16 Resilience Alliance Inc.
[3] M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (2000) 6 SCC 213.
[4] Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana (1995), 2 SCC 577.
Comments are closed