Indigenous Knowledge Clause Samples
Indigenous Knowledge. Article 3.1 Land based Indigenous Knowledge is inextricably intertwined with the language and culture of Indigenous Peoples. International discourse recognizes five (5) elements to Nationhood: land, governance, language, culture and peoples. Indigenous knowledge is “written” in pictographs, petroglyphs, winter counts, the lands, the stone markings, the burial grounds, birch bark and sand scrolls, wampum belts, ancient wisdom of our people, sacred ocean gardens, rivers, and numerous other sacred sites encompassing the history of Indigenous Peoples.
Article 3.2 Indigenous Knowledge(s) are sacred, profound, and a gift connected to the spirit world. Indigenous education is transferred and transmitted through our songs, stories, languages, ceremonies and lands of Indigenous Peoples; these are interconnected and cannot be separated. Indigenous Knowledge is transferred and transmitted through oral tradition passed from generation to generation and is intrinsic to the lands, skies, and waters in which our history is tied and our culture is created.
Article 3.3 Indigenous Knowledge has always, and will always exist: self-determination is the practice and expression of intellectual, physical, emotional, and spiritual gifts given to the people and thus translated into the education of children. Indigenous Knowledge comprises all knowledge pertaining to a particular Nation and their territory, the nature or use of which has been transmitted from generation to generation. This knowledge includes our way of life. The use and transmission of Indigenous Knowledge is an inherent right from the beginning of time. Indigenous Knowledge continues through the languages, lands, and cultures of Indigenous Peoples which persevere today.
Indigenous Knowledge. Sustainability Studies
Indigenous Knowledge. Issues for Developing Countries (Santa ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇: University of California Press, 2005); ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Poesy and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Indigenous Knowledge and Ethics: A ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Poesy Reader (New York: Routledge, 2004). 19 For the critique of Western understanding of senses see, Constant ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Worlds of Sense: Exploring the Senses in History and Across Cultures (London: Routledge, 1993); ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇., ed., The Varieties of Sensory Experience: A Sourcebook in the Anthropology of the Senses (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991); ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. T'irner, eds., The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory (London: Sage Publications, 1991). discursive elements is not relevant in understanding artisanal practices. In Asari representations of asarippani (carpentry) we will see mentions of “mind acting” and “hand thinking” which makes the above separation meaningless. For example, a moothasari (the chief ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇) may recite a verse during asarippani, which are part of the practice. The purpose of this reciting was not the transmission of meaning through words. The recital was part of producing certain forces which can create effects on objects and on other Asaris who are hearing the recital. Hence, it is less useful in separating the discursive and non-discursive elements than understanding the productive effects of various forces active in asarippani. Scholars who study experiential knowledge from a phenomenological perspective have questioned the notion that the anthropologists’ sensitivity could translate the non-discursive practices based on sensual experience into objectified knowledge by experiencing herself/himself through the body and then writing about that experience. They relocate knowledge to the realm of unconscious, impulsive and implicit thinking. For example, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ explains experiential knowledge as “things recalled from experiences, things tacitly or implicitly learned or acquired.” According to him, “the various kind of experiential knowledge and knowing have in common the use of what is termed unconscious, non-conscious or implicit thinking, which does not involve explicit, expressible, analyzable theoretical system of knowledge.” 20 20 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, “Experiential Knowledge, Knowing and Thinking,” Experiential Knowledge Special Interest Group 2009, accessed February 18, 2012, ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇▇/niedderer/EKSIG/proceedings_speakers_files/Storkerson.pdf . For a debate on experiential knowledge see ...
Indigenous Knowledge. The Parties will respect and not assert ownership rights in Indigenous cultural intellectual property rights (ICIP) and traditional knowledge including knowledge, know-how, skills and practices that are developed, sustained and passed on from generation to generation within a community, often forming part of its cultural or spiritual identity (Traditional Knowledge) A Party collecting ICIP or Traditional Knowledge must consult with and seek consent from the relevant traditional custodians for use of such ICIP and Traditional Knowledge, and the Parties must comply with the conditions of any consent obtained by the collecting Party. BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS During the Project, if a Party (Material Provider) transfers Biological Materials to another Party (Material Recipient), the Material Recipient must: only use the Biological Material for the purpose of the Project; not provide the Biological Material to any third party unless with the prior written consent of the Material Provider; not use the Biological Material in humans, human body fluids, extracts of human tissues, human tissue in explant culture or human cells in cell culture, without the prior written consent of the Material Provider and the Administering Institution; not seek any form of registration of Intellectual Property or other statutory protection of the Biological Material; not seek to reverse engineer the Biological Material or otherwise determine the origin of the Biological Material (unless otherwise expressly agreed by the Material Provider); comply with all applicable laws, regulations, codes and guidelines in relation to use of the Biological Material; obtain all ethical clearances that are necessary or desirable to use the Biological Material for the purpose of the Project; ensure that its employees, students, contractors and officers use the Biological Materials in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and the relevant human subject consent; co-operate with the Material Provider and act reasonably in connection with this Agreement and receipt of the Biological Material; and must, at the expiration or termination of this Agreement, at its own cost, return, transfer or dispose of all remaining Biological Materials as instructed by the Material Provider. The Material Recipient acknowledges and agrees that, as between the Parties, the Material Provider retains title to the Biological Material provided to the Material Recipient under this Agreement. The Material Recipient acknowledges ...
Indigenous Knowledge. An accumulation of knowledge of the natural and cultural environment by Tribes through a generational and reciprocal relationship with traditional territories. See the ACHP Policy Statement on Indigenous Knowledge and Historic Preservation (2024) | Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. The Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) is the Tribal official appointed by an Indian tribe’s chief governing authority or designated by a Tribal ordinance who has assumed the responsibilities of the SHPO for purposes of NHPA Section 106 compliance on Tribal lands in accordance with NHPA Section 101(d)(2). When Federal actions occur on reservation lands, the agency official consults the THPO rather than the SHPO.
Indigenous Knowledge. All Indigenous Knowledge shared by Cowichan Tribes with other Parties, even if communicated verbally, shall remain the sole property of Cowichan Tribes;