Social Science Research Council

Workshop was held at the Ridar Hotel, Seeta, Kampala, November 2001

This Workshop was approved by the Program Committee on Global Security and Cooperation of the Social Science Research Council-SSRC-GSC at its Belfast meeting at the beginning of September 2001. It is part of the process of "Field Building" activities that seek to bring together the different kinds of knowledge obtained by different researchers such as academics, practitioners, and custodians of indigenous knowledge with a view to developing the mechanisms for integrating, synthesizing, and transferring skills and expertise available in each of these different knowledges to a wider audience and to all actors.

The Workshop was held on time as envisaged. In Belfast it was agreed that the Workshop would be held at the beginning of November 2001. In fact dates were fixed from 6th-8th November, to enable the members of the Committee on GSC to examine the possibility of attending the Workshop since they had been indicated in the project as part of the participants. Eventually the date was changed to 5th-7th November by the steering committee to enable participants to arrive at the week-end and begin the Workshop at the beginning of the week, which also happened to be a good timing for airline schedules.

In the event, all members of the committee of GSC did not attend. Special effort had been made by both Charles Hale and Ibrahim Dibrin to attend but they found themselves to do so due to different reasons. This gave us an opportunity to widen the African component as well as the regional spread to enable comparing of experiences in different African regions.

It also made it possible to invite African scholars involved in the field of theory building and research methodologies from the USA, Britain, and France to attend. The regional representation was widened to include the Nigeria and the Sahel borderlands in West and North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and Southern Africa. In All forty participants were invited from these countries. In the end, thirty participants attended and some have indicated they want to be part of the program for next year.

The Kampala Workshop was designed to address the issue of peace and security in pastoral communities in North-Eastern Uganda. These communities have been caught up in cycle of conflict and violence emanating from a number of factors including an ecological crisis, the over-reliance on cattle as the main means of livelihood and the globalisation of instruments of violence in the form of small arms proliferation which have added to the commercialization of the conflict and its intensification.

The Workshop sought to bring these actors together and discuss ways of bringing about this basic objective into reality. The exercise was to use this period as a "collecting phase" to scan the horizons of knowledge and establish the elements of creating a "Field" for the understanding of the phenomenon and also by creating a basis for a new kind of research of the different kinds of activities in the field of "security studies" and help to redefine the field and the sources of the knowledges.

The second phase of the project was a mid-term one, which was to focus on how such knowledge could be integrated, synthesized, and disseminated to a wider range of audiences, including governments, international organizations, NGOs, CBOs, students, researchers, and the affected communities themselves. This phase, which will be the next one, will involve setting up a committee which will make reports about the available knowledge and publish and/or disseminate some of this knowledge in the form of reports, monographs, journals, newsletters and the creation of a website where some of this information will be exhibited and made available to the different kinds of audiences and actors. This will include translations of some of the texts into different kinds of languages, particularly into indigenous ones which would enable the communities to access such knowledge after it has been identified.

The long-term objective was to establish a number of study and training workshops which were to study particular topics and themes in more depth aimed at integration and creating synthetic methodologies for bringing about such integration of knowledge. It would also involve holding workshops, seminars, and conferences to consider the results of these studies and new registries as well as the emerging trends, methodologies, and paradigms in the context of the different disciplines. The training Workshops will involve actors who are in a position to widen the knowledge about this process such as the media, community activists, environmental workers and human rights activists, and the targeting of particular social groups such as women, youths, religious associations, and different kinds of activists, etc. for sensitization about the available new knowledges and approaches.

In practical effect, these different kinds of phases will be mixed as has already happened in the process started in the Kampala Workshop. Some activities (such as training) which would have come in the long term phase will be taken on already in the medium term. This intermixing shows that different kinds of activities can be handled side by side while others need time to be articulated and crystallized. In addition, it will be noted that a research groups have will already have been set up to look into issues of philosophies, methodologies, and epistemologies if future research is to be coherent and integrative.

The longer term research issues would require a process for them to emerge and take a concrete form since the "Filed" we are building is an innovative approach to the whole issue of research and knowledge creation, assemblage and storage. Such a process may in fact be part of paradigm formation which cannot be foretold but has to emerge with the process of building the field. For this reason, some activities envisaged in long-term phase are already emerging in the second mid-term phase.

The Workshop

A. The Plenaries

The Workshop was opened by the Uganda Minister of Economic Monitoring, Hon. Omwony Ojwok, himself a representative of an agro-pastoral community from the geographical area of focus. In his opening address, he addressed the problem of insecurity in the region and gave reasons for its persistence which added to our understanding of the complexity of the problem. He further made some interesting remarks about our project which he had personally taken trouble to study. His wife also participated in the Workshop throughout the three days, herself being a native of the area as well as a practitioner through an NGO on Women issues.

In his observations about the project the minister had this to say:

"I have carefully studied the background documents of the workshop availed to me. The presentation of the project background, the problem focus, the project objectives, the target groups, the project achievement indicators, the results outputs, the strategy, the project comparative advantage, the broad involvement of the peoples in their individual, group and community settings, the division of responsibilities and tasks, all exhibit a high degree of consultation. Moreover, some attention has also been put on future sustainability and organizational partnership. Further, regular monitoring and evaluation have been seriously considered in relation to the major risks. I therefore find the thinking behind this project innovative and challenging . . .

I feel that the beauty of the methodology proposed lies in consciously seeking to go beyond 'coordination' of different sectors and interventions. This is so whether we are talking of the coordination of stakeholders themselves, or coordination towards a multi-disciplinary vision, or even coordination of implementation, monitoring and evaluation. This approach definitely offers the advantage of ensuring that common approaches are built from the start and that this process continues at every stage. In this way, there is joint ownership of the entire process, while ensuring that everyone's expectations are in conformity with what is possible and doable, since the very process of conceptualization, planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation is based on joint efforts where one's input is complimentary to those of others."

He, however added that it was not yet fully clear how these different aspects of insecurity in the region would be captured by the approach we have decided to adopt in this project:

"It may be that the discussions will themselves help us refine it. I am deliberately raising it at this stage so that we do not miss them out. Luckily, the project envisages three stages, the immediate, the medium and the longer term. I urge that from the start, we maintain awareness of how to deal with arms proliferation, security sector reform, and regional security in our strategic vision."

With these encouraging remarks, the Workshop resumed its discussions. The Minister had actually arrived later than had been expected and the Workshop had began its deliberations in the meantime.

In his introduction of the Workshop, Prof. Dani W. Nabudere reminded the participants about the reason they had come to the Workshop. He said that the letters of invitations clearly spelt out these reasons and objectives. He added that in practical effect, the "Field Building" activities we were embarking on will eventually have the implications of creating intersubjective dialogues between researchers and the researched. They will also result in the building of a field of knowledge which will be accessible to all, including the communities who are researched on as mere objects. This will lead to the developing of new methodologies which can enable us to integrate and synthesize different kinds of knowledge

This process will create conditions for inter-civilisational dialogues that will entail different kinds of knowledge from different knowledge systems coming together into a dialogue, rather than into a civilizational clash. He said this entails a new universality of knowledge based on respect for all human-knowledge in which western knowledge systems will become part of the global knowledge system. This in turn will lead to a new paradigm in which all humanly created knowledge will interface and co-exist side by side with one another. He said this was the only way we could establish the "truth" for the truth lies in the different knowledge sources and bases. By focusing on our separate approaches of understanding, we get partial truth but when we combine the different approaches of understanding, we shall get "total truth" to which all of us, as a collectivity as human beings, can relate through dialogues and cross-cultural learning and understanding.

The Workshop was privileged to have had the attendance of Prof. Catherine Odora Hoppers, herself a Ugandan but now acting as an adviser to the South African government in a consultative role on indigenous knowledge systems in which she has now become an expert and a lecturer at the University of Pretoria. She provided the keynote intervention on African indigenous knowledge systems-IKS and showed how these systems can relate to modern knowledge systems-MKS.

She pointed out that there was need for debates on the use and application of scientific knowledge and its relationship with IKS. The making of a pot by an African woman was looked upon as mere handicraft activity of curiosity to tourists whereas in its activity, pot-making was a combination of art, art-forms, and scientific knowledge. This scientific knowledge was based on her choice of clay-soil, the time it took to expose it to intense fire-heat in the kiln, after a period of exposure to the slow solidification in a tree shade and in the sun. All these steps of production entailed a certain experimental knowledge which is scientific but which is built within the IKS.

This then exemplified the fact that MKS have their roots in IKS and therefore both should co-exist through dialogue and cross-cultural learning. She referred to the Budapest Declaration on science, which underlines the very process we were engaged in "Field Building." The Declaration calls on scholars and researchers to adopt an all-inclusive, responsive, and dialogical science in their activities. This was particularly fitting to the "Field Building" activity because it entailed the need for a vigorous, informed and democratic debate and the need to link modern science to the diverse sources of knowledge.

She added that the colonization of a peoples knowledge and heritages was a fundamental violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and had to be stopped: "What we are talking about is the recognition of other peoples' rights," she concluded. She ended her presentation by showing the methodologies which could be used in integrating the different kinds of knowledge with illustrations, which will be presented in the full report of proceedings.

The discussions in the Workshop took the form of answering the two questions which were posed in the letter of invitations. The first day the discussion was about "What do we know"? This question was intended to enable the participants to scan the field of researched knowledge. Different participants addressed the issue from different angles, which illuminated what kinds of activities could emerge in the next phase. The detailed contributions of the different participants on the issue will be reproduced in the full report and proceedings of the Workshop.

In summary, the first day produced an animated debate about the implications of "Field Building." In answer to the question, the participants put forward the following views:

1. That our understanding of the available researched and preserved knowledge was rather limited due to the fact that each group exercised a certain exclusive ownership and monopoly to its libraries;

2. That the researched knowledge using modern methodologies did not give due recognition to IKS and as such, the "scientific" results were rather fragmented and segmented, giving us no coherent understanding of society;

3. That most western educated Africans had very little knowledge of their IKS and that this added to the problem of a positive interfacing of knowledge. Most African elites were married to western languages and cultures, and thus using their positions to impose modern western values on African societies;

4. That there was need to give due recognition to African IKS since this source of knowledge was operative in something close to 90 per cent of African rural communities. Such recognition will require research and training to enable the rural communities to participate in the development of their knowledge systems to the level which can enable such knowledge to interface with other MKS on equal terms.

5. That some interfacing already takes place between modern knowledge systems and traditional ones so that it is not an entirely dichotomized situation. Colonial and post-colonial use of African traditions and customs in the form of neo-traditionalism is one form in which modern colonial systems interfaced (rather negatively) with African IKS through "customary law" and "Native authorities" under "indirect rule."

6. Equally the African people continued to utilize their traditions and cultures in a positive and dynamic way to resist colonial domination in order to negotiate their identities and forms of survival as communities. This is post-traditionalism in which African rural and urban communities have been able to maintain their humanity and to update their cultures and traditions to modernity in an adaptive and innovative fashion.

7. That a study of both neo-traditionalism and post-traditionalism might provide us one of the ways in which we can understand the processes of interfaces and "Field Building" which may already be taking place in a dynamic way.

8. That there was need to address the issue of language and communication when considering the different ways in which "Field Building" might achieve its objective. It is not possible to build up archives of accessible knowledge in foreign languages. Whilst there was room for the use of English, French, Portuguese and Arabic, these languages should not be given the monopoly of scholarship and knowledge acquisition. To continue this policy is to maintain the old colonial and post-colonial policy of colonization and canonization of indigenous knowledge which cannot lead to a genuine intersubjective communication and dialogue.

9. That the issue of methodologies ought to be handled concurrently with "Field Building" activities. This could take the form of reflections and actions such as translations in the process of an on-going field building activity. Deeper research especially in the area of hermeneutic methodologies could produce a new synthesis for understanding of different knowledge system.

B. Group Work

At this point the discussion shifted to the second question: How do we go about building a field? The participants decided that this question would be better answered in smaller groups. It was therefore decide to form three groups to consider this question. After deliberations during the whole morning of the 6th, the Groups re-assembled in plenary and made the following reports:

GROUP No. 1

Theme: This group discussed the following theme: Reconstructing and revitalising the epistemological foundations for the promotion and integration of African IKS with other KS towards a new paradigm of cross-cultural understanding as a basis for "Field Building" activities. Under this theme, the group agreed on the following programmatic ideas:

• Reconceptualise African IKS as a holistic and organic life system grounded in a spiritual, cultural, and material existence;

• Creating spaces for communities to set their own agenda for revitalising IKS and redefining their identities;

• Articulating strategies for facilitating dialogues and the co-existence of different Knowledge Systems-KS through interfacing and field-building;

• Research/study of the objective domains of IKS such as conflict management, food technology, pedagogy, philosophy, medicine, etc. and how they interface with modern knowledge systems-MKS;

• Researching the process by which African indigenous systems have been destroyed or undermined by other civilisations in particular African countries and suggest ways of revitalising them in a new synthesis;

• Study the implications of documenting and disseminating IKS (viz: ownership, intellectual property rights and piracies as well as the ethical ramifications thereof) and interrogate the ethical/moral dimensions of this process into the research process;

• Study the use of African language in the documentation and dissemination of IKS and modern scientific and technological knowledge;

The group agreed on the following activities:

Program

• Prof. D.W. Nabudere:

- Research and study the use of hermeneutical tools, methodologies, and resources in research and the inter-subjective and inter-civilisational dialogues in the 21st Century.

• Prof. Catherine Odora:
- Study of the legal and ethical implications of documenting and disseminating IKS.

- The study of the role of science in the destruction and undermining of African IKS.

• Ibrahim Abou Sall:
- Research on destruction of IKS by other civilisations.

• Vikash Tandon:
- Study of pre-colonial spirituality in Africa and Asia.

• Malekou Tegegn:
- Research on the impact of destruction of indigenous pastoral systems on conflict and poverty.

- Study of the construction of gender in pastoral IKS and its impact on the position of women.

• Simon Simone:
- The study of IK practices in conflict resolution in pastoral communities.

• K.K. Prah:
- The development of the harmonisation and standardisation of African Languages.

• Inyani Simala
- The study of linguistic resources for conflict management in pastoral communities in north-western Kenya.

• Mzee Igaaga Kisambira:
- The study of Busoga IKS, especially on how Busoga clans can create a system based on Kisoga IKS for resocialization of youth in the Kisoga cultural tradition heritages taking into account changed conditions.

GROUP No. 2

Theme: This group considered the following theme: IKS field building for human security and sustainable livelihood:

The group decided to assign the following responsibilities to each individual wanting to participate in the "Field Building" Activities:

² Case Studies:

A) Karamojong Experience of the co-existence of modern KS and the IKS:

• Collect information available (literature, surveys, etc.) so as to come up with a system of governance to promote Human Security;

• Study the issue of administrative decentralisation/self administration, comparing the Karamojong experience with the western concept of the modern sovereign state system;

• Study the crisis between the central state governmental structures and the community's local structures for government;

• Study the idea of security of livelihoods in Karamoja, analysing the political marginalisation and economic neglect in the area;

• Study the idea of collective/community rights in Karamoja and compare it to the idea of human rights;

• Managing diversity/unity in Karamoja (10 different sub-ethnic groups together), cultural and linguistic diversity;

• Study the issues of small arms proliferation and cattle rustling in Karamoja, both internally and across borders (Kenya, Sudan).

B) Other Experiences to be studied:

• Other pastoral communities in the region: - Sudan: Toposa, Didinga.
- Kenya: Pokot, Turkana.

• Indigenous communities in other continents.

C) Other sub-themes to be undertaken in "Field Building":

• Methodologies and techniques to create pools of knowledge accessible to all users;

• Work with traditional institutions on the basis of participatory research bringing in all actors involved;

• Scholar research from different parts of the world;

• Interdisciplinary approach in research;

• No use of questionnaires, but encouragement of dialogical approach;

• Share information with the indigenous communities through public forums and translations of materials of MKS so they are made accessible to them;

• Deal carefully with sensitive information, asking permission to the indigenous community before publishing and disseminating such information;

• Disseminate and make the information available to all user through books, journals, Newsletters and a Website;

• Create resource centres to make IKS available to indigenous communities and other users.

² Examples of where "field building" activities which have taken place: Lutheran World Federation (seed banks, and local loans in marketing of crops by pastoralists); Association for World Education in grassroots research and community participation as well as collaboration with other practitioners in community programmes, etc.; Collaboration of P'KWI and Makerere University in research on the protection of sorghum and millet from insects by using traditional means; etc. This collection of information to be undertaken during the year 2002. Also further research to be undertaken on:

(i) Examples of interface between different kinds of KS;

(ii) agricultural issues and issues of bio-diversity-different conditions in which both modern and traditional forms of knowledge have been applied);

(iii) tax payments (need to bring in the indigenous tradition of differentiating according to economic position);

(iv) parallel justice systems where the indigenous justice institutions are stronger than the official post-colonial systems by the central government (e.g. Wajir region in North Kenya; clan justice in Karamoja and Acholi in Uganda); etc.

(v) Interrogation of IKS: cases in which IKS need to be complemented by other knowledge systems (e.g. indigenous medicinal treatment that can have negative consequences); etc;

(vi) Language and language use in the development of IKS and its interface with MKS.

The individual members of the group assigned the following responsibilities to themselves:

Programme

• Robert Limlim, Rose Lochian Maligan:
- Research on the Karamojong Experience: identification of the area setting tribe sections; collection of IKS information already available; surveys with the community on the basis of participatory research; analysis of thematic issues such as decentralised governmental systems, traditional governance, community rights as compared to human rights, cultural/linguistic issues, conflict management, economic neglect, etc.

• Jacob Muli:
- Research on case study in pastoral communities in Kenya addressing the following issues: security of livelihoods, political marginalisation, economic neglect, governmental structures.

• Peter Adwok Nyaba:
- Research on post-traditional techniques of conflict resolution in Sudan's pastoral communities.

- Study of arms proliferation and cattle rustling in Sudan, Uganda and Kenya.

• Wesley Chebii:
- Case study of Pokot community in Kenya and their IKS.

• Prof. Osiru and Rev. Sam Ebukalin
-Some experiments and study of Modern and traditional Techniques of agricultural production and collaborative research between local communities and Universities.

• Veronica I. Raffo:
- Collection of literature abroad about IKS..

GROUP No. 3
Theme: This group defined its theme to be: Integrating IKS, technology, jurisprudence and development in Field Building Activities.

Preamble:

Recognising the existence of IKS and their significance in the furtherance of cultural, economic, social, political and ecological development of the African people, Appreciating the importance of ICT as a vehicle for developing and enhancing IKS, Recognising the fact that ICT is being used to undermine IKS and their development, We agreed and identified the following areas of focus and action in field-building:

1. The role of ICT in the preservation, development, promotion and protection of IKS, through the following processes:

a) Establishment of IKS data banks through village museums, archives, libraries, exhibitions, photography, websites, historical and monumental sites.
b) Dissemination of IKS through journals, newsletters, bulletins, conferences, etc.
c) Teaching and curricula reforms and development of teaching materials;
d) Research on the interface of IKS and other KS.

2. IKS and capacity building through:

a) Enhancement of the capacity to access and utilise IKS;
b) Training programs;
c) Establishing of community education institutions for exchange and promotion of information;
d) Advocacy and lobby;
e) Use of local resources;

3. Develop policy and legal strategic framework for the development, promotion and protection of IKS. This can be done through the following ways:

a) Identifying:
(i) IKS which need not be protected;
(ii) Existing ones that need protection and promotion;
(iii) Those which have been pirated.

b) Enhancement of IKS through ICT to popularise and publicise existing IKS technologies;

c) Promotion of reciprocal exchange of IKS technologies;

d) Building networks for linking up with other communities and actors;

e) Litigation, lobbying and advocacy;

f) Making people become aware of the importance of IKS technological transfers to the young generation, who should also be encouraged to develop interest in IKS;

4. Further develop principles and guidelines for promoting, production, uses and protection of IKS.

5. Activities to be undertaken:

a) Identify and document:
(i) Existing research in the area of IKS technologies and jurisprudence;
(ii) Jurisprudential concepts to understand their meaning, significance and application;
(iii) IKS resources, how they are kept and utilised by the communities and find out the lacunas.
(iv) Existing structure in the communities for dissemination of IKS (e.g. village/clan gatherings, traditional ceremonies, web-sites, village libraries, brochures, journals, village newspapers, etc.)

b) Interrogate curricula in the Eastern African Region to establish the extent to which IKS have been incorporated and their relevancy in the formal educational systems;

c) Examine the constraints in the production and utilisation of IKS in different communities;

d) Undertake the training of trainers in the communities primary and post-primary educational institutions;

e) Advocate, lobby and litigate for reparations for the abuse, piracy and destruction of IKS and institutions by multinational corporations, etc.;

f) Find out the awareness levels of the communities on existing IKS;

g) Make communities aware of their IKS rights;

h) Identify and document:
(i) Existing regulatory instruments in IKS at national, regional and international levels;
(ii) Gaps in the regulatory framework.

i) Develop principles and guidelines to fill the gaps in the existing framework for purposes of creating an enabling environment for better promotion, production, utilisation and protection of IKS;

j) Conduct research to interrogate IKS (we had difficulties in agreeing on this issue because of its broadness and it was left in suspense).

Participants in these themes are to be identified during the year. In this direction, attempts will be made to link the "Field Building" activity with:

• The Uganda National Council for Science and Technology,
• The Uganda Law Reform Commission and examine some of the issues raised above.

Since the Workshop was held, the following persons have made contact wanting to participate in the program. They have been taken on to work in different groups: These are:

1. Judge Tabaro, High Court of Uganda, Kampala: Research on the use of traditional systems of justice in Uganda along side the formal modern systems.

2. Anne S. Kalanzi: Research on the maintenance of biodiversity in Uganda: Traditional Crops, and preservation of forests and rivers by ancestral spirits.

3. Jane Alowo, Makerere University, Kampala; Dhopadhola Language and its usage in Modern Uganda.

4. Abura Vincent Omara, LWF, Moroto: The LWF and its research and experiments with indigenous crops and seed banks in Karamoja.

On the basis of the above identified activities a Programme of Action with prioritisation was drawn up as below.

PROGRAMME OF ACTION-2002

On the 7th, the Workshop convened in a plenary and considered the above proposals together. It was decided to regroup these ideas under new thematic areas and concentrate the activities in three areas of activity where participants would be encouraged to work in groups rather than as individuals. It was also agree to prioritize some of the issues for 2002 and leave some for future action programs. The following was the agreed Program for 2002:

FIELD BUILDING PROGRAM AND PRIORITY AREAS OF ACTION JANUARY - NOVEMBER 2002.

1. THEORETICAL REFLECTIONS ON IKS AND ITS INTERFACE WITH MKS
• Legal and theoretical implications of documenting and disseminating IKS
• The Role of science in the destruction and undermining of IK.
• Pre-colonial spirituality in Africa and Asia.
• Hermeneutical implications of inter-civilisation dialogue.
• Harmonising and standardising African languages.

Participants to work in this area:

• D.W. Nabudere
• Catherine Odora Hopers
• Vikash Tandon
• Prof. Kwesi K. Prah
• Maurice Amutabi

2. FIELD BUILDING AND IKS CASE STUDIES IN DIFFERENT SITUATIONS
• North-Eastern Uganda, Kenya:
• Interface between IKS and MKS
• Study of parallel systems of traditional and modern systems (Administration, justice, and security)
• Managing bio-diversity in Karamoja.
• Comparing the paradigm and concept of rights in IKS and modern system.
• Small arms proliferation in the region: Uganda, Kenya and Sudan.
• Methodologies and mechanisms for integrating IKS and MKS
• Identify and document IKS resources in Karamoja, how they are kept, used and disseminated in the community.
• The Destruction of pastoral culture and its implications on governance, livelihood and human security in pastoral communities in Africa.
• The gender question in IKS in pastoral and other communities in relation to women.
• Linguistic resources for conflict management in pastoral communities in north-western Kenya.

Participants to work in this areas:

• Helen Pulkol.
• Rose Locham
• Wesley Chebii
• Florence Omwony.
• Rev. Sam Ebukurin
• Simon Simonse
• Jacob Muli
• Janet Wambedhe
• Robert Limlim

Sudan and Ethiopia:
• Interface between IKS and MKS in Sudan
• Indigenous Knowledge systems in conflict management in the New Sudan/Ethiopia.
• The Destruction of pastoral culture and its implications on governance, livelihood and human security in pastoral communities.
• The gender question in IKS in pastoral and other communities in relation to women.
• The problem of small arms in the Sudan

Participants interested in this area:
. Peter Adwok
. Melakou Tegegn

The Sahel

• Study of the destruction of African civilisation (indigenous knowledge systems and institutions) by other forces.
• Participants interested in this area
• Ibrahim Abou Sall

Busoga Clans:

• The IKS in the institutions of the clan and elders and reconstructing their role in the socialisation of youth in Busoga in the Soga culture, tradition and heritage.
• The issue of gender and youths in IKS in Soga culture and tradition.

Participants interested in this area:

. Mzee Igaaga A. Kisambira

Facilitate a "Field Building" Workshop in Maidiguri, Nigeria.

Persons and Organizations interested:

- Abdulmumini Saad,
- Afrika Study Centre, Mbale

New people identified after the Workshop but wanting to participate have now been included in the program of activities:

• Judge Tabaro, High Court of Uganda, Kampala: Research on the use of traditional systems of justice in Uganda along side the formal modern systems.

• Anne S. Kalanzi: Research on the maintenance of biodiversity in Uganda: Traditional Crops, and preservation of forests and rivers by ancestral spirits.

• Jane Alowo, Makerere University, Kampala; Dhopadhola Language and its usage in Modern Uganda.

• Abura Vincent Omara, LWF, Moroto: The LWF and its research and experiments with indigenous crops and seed banks in Karamoja.

3 CO-ORDINATION, DOCUMENTATION AND COMMUNICATION

• Institutionalising the program at Afrika Study Centre as the focal point.
• Appointment of part-time coordinator of the program by the program supervisor to be attached to the Afrika Study Centre.
• Establishing steering committees and institutional linkages between participating and other relevant institutions.
• Commencement of a Newsletter/Bulletin,
• Designing a website for the project and creating links.
• Establishing data banks.
• Establishing community colleges for exchange and dissemination of IKS and their interfaces with MKS ( e.g. Mandela Peoples' College-which is a Mobile Folk High School symbolising the ecological culture and lifestyles of the pastoral communities ).
• Collecting information about other "Field Building" Activities taking place, as well as literature and other material which are connected with the "Field" of security in the region.

Participants and institutions for this activity

• Samuel B. Tindifa/HURIPEC
• DW Nabudere/ASC
• Helen Puklkol/Mandela Peoples' College
• Janet Wambedhe/AWE (U)
• Inyani K. Simala/AWE (K)
• Peter Adwok/FOSCO
• POKATUSA-A pastoralist cross-border organisation bringing together the Pokot (of Kenya and Uganda), the Karamojong of Uganda, Turkana of Kenya and the Samburu)

3. Developing Methodologies

• Each proposal activity must outline the methodologies to be used in their research and work.
• A Workshop for each group to be arranged during the year.

4. FEED BACK MECHANISM

• Periodic meetings on a quarterly basis of the Steering Committee, country and thematic groups.
• Exchange of information and submission of Reports to the focal point.
• A Continental Conference at the end of the year-2002.

5. Circulation of the Conference Report to the participants and other interested persons and groups.

6. Concept papers must be submitted to ASC with an outline the budget, linkages, implementation process, and structure and time line by end of November-2001.

7. Professor D.W. Nabudere of Afrika Study Centre to submit an "Interim Report" to the SSRC-GSC members by 17th November and a final record of proceedings and full report by mid-December with the programme of activities for 2002 as laid out above together with the budget for the activities.