Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Knowledge-land-scape
Search
Search
Log in
Personal tools
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Knowledge "inclusion"
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
You have found a "Wrecksite". Here and there, "shipwrecks" will manifest themselves. They gesture to the apparatuses that produce conditions under which some phenomena can exists within polar bear monitoring, my research and this knowledge-land-scape- and others cannot. Different shipwrecks gesture to different possibilities and futurities. This one allows you to think with the im/possibilities of knowledge (co-)production in polar bear monitoring and co-management. To be meaningfully co-produce scientific knowledge, is to co-determines what is included and what is excluded from the properties and meanings of "scientific knowledge" as a phenomena. In scientific wildlife co-management and research the properties of ‘science’ are mostly determined by the agential cuts of post-positivist western natural sciences and its understanding of the world through representative data (Brook, 2005; Smylie, 2014). Without meaningful inclusion of other knowledge systems, the phenomena of ‘science’ materializes not only in a very small resolution of its possibilities. Scientist seeking to make IQ ‘’intelligible’’ within this performance of western natural sciences, either need to break it down into such representative data, or placed IQ completely outside of the phenomena of Science to become intelligible as ‘another phenomena’ like; values, beliefs, ethics or cultural identities. Neither of those cuts can be considered meaningfully co-constituted with Inuit ways of knowing and being. Making IQ intelligible only as a category that can exist outside of science, continues a form of erasure in which the west views itself “as the center of legitimate knowledge, the arbiter of what counts as knowledge and the source of ‘civilized’ knowledge” (Smith, 1999, p. 63). <span class="next_choice"> Besides, the Gjoa Haven HTA, has indicated a couple of times that they feel that research seems to be ever ongoing, without it ever impacting their polar bear harvest quota. Over the last couple of years they have been trying to get BearWatch researchers to turn their focus towards the available polar bear harvest quota. Tomorrow, 20 people will come to talk about how a harvesting moratorium from 2001 has had reverberating impacts on them up until today. You should keep moving, because you still need to buy coffee and snacks for that meeting.<\span> <span class="return to cut 3 link" data-page-title="Wayfaring the BW project" data-section-id="2" data-encounter-type="return">[[Wayfaring the BW project#Fieldtrip BW team Coral Harbour Summer 2021|Return to Cut 3: BW project]]</span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Knowledge-land-scape may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Knowledge-land-scape:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Toggle limited content width