Conflicts between Teso and EU

farming methods
By: Eagan and Edo
REAL LIFE SITUATION
Farms in Teso sub-region Teso people of Uganda
EU

Both the EU and the Teso people have different farming methods
EU attempts to integrate modern technology to indigenous farming
Commercialisation drove this project forward
 REAL LIFE SITUATION
Conflicts

1. Different objectives in mind for agriculture

2. Disagreement on traditional farming methods
DERIVING THE KQ

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used

effectively in an indigenous context?
 Conceptual Beliefs
Different perceptions of success and sustainability by Teso and EU
WHY? KEY TAKEAWAY:

IKS: There is an inherent difference

between the two systems, which
● Concept of change makes compromise hard to achieve.
● Empathic links to owned property
● Pragmatic in nature COMMON GOAL IS NEEDED

NS: ● KQ: Under what circumstances can

the Natural sciences be used
● Concept of objectivity effectively in an indigenous
● Reality is independent to consciousness context?
● Restrictive - bound by empirical laws
Methods of Learning
EU attempted to integrate the same method across all countries within the Cotonou Agreement, but they failed.

Different locations = different conditions = different needs

In IKS, knowledge is NON-TRANSFERABLE ; In NS is TRANSFERABLE

IKS NS

Experiential learning Experimental learning

Holistic Reductionist

TAKEAWAY: Both systems need to have a COMMON UNDERSTANDING otherwise no chance of

integration.

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used effectively in an indigenous context?
HOW WAS A COMPROMISE FORMED
● 2 very different knowledge frameworks
● Will inherently lead to conflict
● With COMMON GOALS, an attempt at resolving conflict can be done
● Through COMMON UNDERSTANDING of each system’s methodologies,
the process of making the compromise happen arises.

Under the circumstance that both systems are willing to let go or add to their ideals such that a
common interest and understanding can be used to drive a compromise forward.

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used effectively in an indigenous context?
IT WORKS, BUT….

● There is a common goal

● There is a common understanding
● However… major assumption: ARE KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS EVEN FLUID
ENOUGH?

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used effectively in an indigenous context?
 The Capacity to Change
Teso were initially willing, but hesitated once they realised EU planned on replacing the
indigenous method

IKS NS
The Teso people were initially open to adopting the EU’s method, but were reluctant when EU
Knowledge is validated through experience Knowledge is validated by scientific
suggested implementing their method fully. - unfamiliarity?
method

Contextually applicable Applicable without context

If it works, why change it?

Key Takeaway: For a compromise to be made, both knowledge systems involved must be FLUID

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used effectively in an indigenous context?
Compromise... REVISED
Ideally:

● Common Goals, Common Understanding, Willingness to accept change

● Opens scope for further compromise and investigation. WHY?
● Knowledge is transparent, cohesive and concise
● Accepted by both IKS and NS

KQ: Under what circumstances can the Natural sciences be used effectively in an indigenous context?
 Conclusion
● Barriers preventing a
compromise
● Most significant barrier is
the fluidity of knowledge
Application to
other RLS
● Farmer Field School program in
Peru:
○ Production boosted by
35% a year after
implementation
○ Common Goals
○ Common understanding
WHY IS THIS SIGNIFICANT IN OUR
LIVES