User:Zmuhl/Decolonization of knowledge

Approaches

Decolonization of knowledge is neither about de-westernization nor about refusing western science or western knowledge system. According to Lewis Gordon, decolonization of knowledge mandates a detachment from the "commitments to notions of an epistemic enemy." It rather emphasizes "the appropriation of any and all sources of knowledge" in order to achieve relative epistemic autonomy and epistemic justice for "previously unacknowledged and/or suppressed knowledge traditions."

Raewyn Connel states:

The colonized and postcolonial world [..] has actually been a major participant in the making of the dominant forms of knowledge in the modern era, which we too easily call ‘Western science’. The problem is not the absence of the majority world, but its epistemological subordination within the mainstream economy of knowledge. This economy has been profoundly shaped by what the Peruvian sociologist Aníbal Quijano (2000) has called the ‘coloniality of power’. In consequence, a wealth of knowledge produced in colonized and postcolonial societies has never been incorporated into the mainstream economy, or is included only in marginal ways.

According to Raewyn Connel, decolonizing knowledge is therefore about recognizing those unincorporated or marginalised forms of knowledge. Firstly, this includes indigenous knowledge, which was dismissed by the colonialist ideology. Secondly, it endorses alternative universalisms, i.e., knowledge systems having general and not just local application, which have not derived from the Eurocentric knowledge economy. Connel says the fairly known system among these is Islamic knowledge. This is not, however, the only alternative universalism. She also suggests Indian knowledge tradition as an alternative to the current economy of knowledge. Thirdly, it concerns Southern theory, i.e., knowledge framework developed during colonial encounter which emphasizes that the colonized and the postcolonial world has been affluent in theoretical thinking and that these societies have continually produced concepts, analyses and creative ideas. According to Achille Mbembe:

The western archive is singularly complex. It contains within itself the resources of its own refutation. It is neither monolithic nor the exclusive property of the west. Africa and its diaspora decisively contributed to its making and should legitimately make foundational claims on it. Decolonizing knowledge is therefore not simply about de-westernization.

Walter Mignolo theorises his approach for decolonizing knowledge in terms of delinking which he believes shall ultimately lead to decolonial epistemic shift and will eventually foreground "other epistemologies, other principles of knowledge and understanding."

Decolonizing academia

One of the most crucial aspects of decolonization of knowledge is to rethink the role of the academia, which, according to Louis Yako, has become the "biggest enemy of knowledge and the decolonial option." He says Western universities have always served colonial and imperial powers, and the situation has only become worse in the neoliberal age. According to Yako, the first step toward decolonizing academic knowledge production is to carefully examine "how knowledge is produced, by whom, whose works get canonized and taught in foundational theories and courses, and what types of bibliographies and references are mentioned in every book and published article." Yako says a research work in almost any given field is required to include names of certain "elite" European or American scholars in the bibliography or references. These scholars are commonly considered “foundational” in their respective fields. The citations are evaluated based on the “credibility” of the sources, which must be accepted by the "ruling elite, including the elite that rules the universities." For example, citing sources from a university press or an academic journal is deemed to be more “credible and rigorous” than citing sources from independent authors and experts. There is a hierarchy even when citing publicly available works. Citing the New York Times, the Guardian, or the Washington Post is considered “better” to a newspaper from Africa or Latin America. Even when such citations are allowed, foreign sources are typically seen as insufficient, necessitating their "validation" by Western sources. Yako opposes to the labeling of new scholars as "Marxist," "Foucauldian," "Hegelian," "Kantian," and so on, which he sees as a "colonial method of validating oneself and research" through these scholars. According to Yako, despite the fact that scholars such as Marx, Hegel, Foucault, and many others were all inspired by numerous thinkers before them, they are not identified with the names of such intellectuals. He criticizes the academic peer-review process as a system of "gatekeepers" who regulate the production of knowledge in a given field or about a certain region of the world.

Decolonizing research

Main article: Neo-colonial science

Neo-colonial research or science, frequently described as helicopter research, parachute science or research, or safari study, is when researchers from wealthier countries go to a developing country, collect information, travel back to their country, analyze the data and samples, and publish the results with no or little involvement of local researchers. A 2003 study by the Hungarian academy of sciences found that 70% of articles in a random sample of publications about least-developed countries did not include a local research co-author.

The result of this kind of research is that local colleagues might be used to provide logistics but are not engaged for their expertise or given credit for their participation in the research. Scientific publications resulting from parachute science may only contribute to the career of the scientists from rich countries, but not contribute development of local science capacity (such as funded research centers) or the careers of local scientists. This is a form of "colonial" science that has reverberations of 19th century scientific practices of treating non-Western participants as "others" in order to advance colonialism—and critics call for the end of these practices in order to decolonize knowledge.

This kind of research approach reduces the quality of research because international researchers may not ask the right questions or draw connections to local issues. The result of this approach is that local communities are unable to leverage the research to their own advantage. Ultimately, especially for fields dealing with global issues like conservation biology which rely on local communities to implement solutions, neo-colonial science prevents institutionalization of the findings in local communities in order to address issues being studied by scientists.