Social Science Research Council

Workshop was held at Ridar Hotel, Seeta, Kampala, JUNE 2002

This was the second in a series of Workshop, which were planned for the year 2002. The first workshop activity consisted of two training workshops for community facilitators in the months of April and May 2002. A separate report for these workshops has already been made (see Report on the Training of Community Facilitators dated 15th May 2002). This present Workshop was intended to bring together researchers and practitioners, as well as community activists and traditional African theoreticians, to exchange experiences and insights in the on-going "Field Building" research activities as agreed in the in the Field Building Programme-2002.

The Workshop was attended by Ms. Karen J. Colvard, Senior Programme Officer of the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, New York, who is one of the supporters of this programme. Her Foundation together with the Social Science Research Council-Programme Committee on Global Cooperation and Security-SSRC-GSC contributed to the research and workshops. We were able to benefit from her own views and experiences, which she offered easily both in the groups and during plenary sessions. The programme benefited greatly from her presence. Karen was also able to offer advice to different researchers on how they could access funding for their different research activities from different sources in the US.

The Workshop was organised in the form of two plenary sessions and group work. The first plenary was for introductions and procedure. The second was for reporting and discussing the way forward. It was agreed at the first plenary that the Workshop would work in groups to enable researchers involved in similar themes to come together and exchange experiences, findings and insights. It was considered that this would help researchers dealing with similar issues to learn from the experiences but also to comment usefully and practically on one another's work. This was considered the best way of gaining new inspirations to continue with the research activity, which will continue until November and perhaps in the third phase.

The researchers therefore spent the first plenary session introducing themselves and their work. They then listed the topics of their research activity and grouped these topics into cohesive groups, which then formed the basis of forming the groups for discussions.

First Plenary Session

The Workshop was opened by Prof. Dani W. Nabudere by first welcoming Ms. Colvard to the Workshop. He said that her presence was proof of her commitment to the research on violence and conflict in pastoral communities, which had contributed to the "field building" programme. He reminded the participants that our duty is to make social research responsive to the needs of the communities from where we ourselves were empowered through formal education. We therefore owe it to the communities to highlight their knowledge through the process of "field building" so that their knowledge can be made part of the global system of knowledge.

He said: "Up to now scientific knowledge is used against the communities through processes of disempowerment and lack of recognition of their knowledge and contributions or through sheer colonisation of such knowledge, which is then owned by others without acknowledgement. Here the intellectual properties of these communities are not respected in a world, which thrives on patents and the ideology or property. He added that it is our duty to retrieve this knowledge and make it part of the general pool through "field building" research activities and to raise the rights of communities as collectives to their intellectual properties."

He said that this Workshop is meant to bring us together in order to share the experiences and insights we have gained since we began the research activities a few months ago. Our task here will be to work with those closely connected to your area of concern and share in the process of discovery. On the basis of this sharing, we shall improve our research by addressing those issues that were not addressed before in order to enrich our contributions.

Professor Nabudere added that he had met Professor Catherine Odora in Pretoria and had briefed her about the work going on in Uganda and she regretted she would not be with us at this Workshop due to many other engagements in the same areas of concern. She had presented us with her own report on her present and on-going engagements in "field Building." These included:

• A Key Address to the 3rd Session of the United Nations Group of Experts on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation. Her submissions included a call to the experts to broaden their understanding of the concept "disarmament" beyond the military aspect so that it is able to encompass the social and local solutions, including strategies that communities use to recover from trauma in conflicts. She appealed for the reconstruction of the shattered capacities of communities in Africa, which enabled them to deal with local conflicts, including conflict management, conflict resolution and even more so, by rejuvenating the well-known solidaritarian principles that underlay African social organisation. In her presentation, she had also drawn attention to the fact that the context in which human security is threatened as a rising from faulty approaches to development that have weakened local capacities to forge sustainable livelihoods, in which poverty, hunger, and overall disenfranchisement of local communities have come to posit greater threats to security than nuclear threats.
• Part of her "Field Building" work has also involved her being invited to serve on the Pluto Press Editorial Committee for a new book series on Peace by Peaceful Means being launched by Pluto Press and TRANSCEND of London. This series will publish works by TRABSCEND members as well as leading scholars and practitioners working in the fields of peace building, conflict information and development, to which the results of our work could be submitted for publication. The work for peace is work against violence, and by analysing its multifaceted forms and causes and by predicting it in order to prevent it is possible to act preventively and curatively to eliminate it breaking out. The series will be transdisciplinary, integrating peace research, conflict studies, development studies, gender studies, political economy, international relations, environment and ecology, as well as philosophy. This is a serious attempt at "field building."
• Prof. Catherine Odora also gave another Key Note Address at the Adult Education for Sustainable Development Conference convened by USAID and the National Department of Education, Johannesburg which focused on amnesia and arrogance that had driven literacy training efforts in South Africa, which put indigenous knowledge systems were put in the background. This led to failure and hence the need to place indigenous knowledge systems at the centre of literacy training, poverty alleviation and development strategies.
• During the year, Catherine had also participated as a resource person at A World Intellectual Property Organisation-WIPO regional meeting, in Lusaka, Zambia, which focused intellectual property and the protection of expressions of folklore and traditional knowledge; as well as the WIPO experts group meeting which was convened in Addis Ababa by the OAU (Organisation of African Unity), the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and WIPO to finalise the continental position on issues of traditional knowledge.
• As a result of Catherine's campaign and efforts in promoting African indigenous knowledge systems, the World Economic Forum-WEF of Davos requested her to convene a special panel on intellectual property rights relating to traditional systems during the African WEF Summit in Durban in June 2002.

Prof. Nabudere pointed out that this work of Professor Catherine Odora (who is a Ugandan woman) shows how much can be achieved by building bridges between modern scientific knowledge and indigenous knowledge systems as part of our process of "Field Building." In this context research is crucial, so long as it leads to the results of such knowledge being fed back to the concerned communities.

In response to these opening remarks some of the participants added their own experiences to reinforce what had been said. Rev. Sam Ebakulin said that his "field building" research activity had revealed that indigenous knowledge was key to the fighting of pests against millet and Sorghum, on which the livelihood of the peasants in his area depended. But such knowledge was threatened by extinction because of the intervention of modern knowledge systems. It is getting lost before it has been researched on and stored for future generations. Our task is to link science to the retrieval of this knowledge and ensure it preservation. On the cases under investigation, there was a fruitful collaboration between the communities, the student researchers from Makerere University and a University in the United States as well as a community-based pilot farm, which he owned with his wife.

Simon Kaparo, Programme Officer, Mandela African Peoples College and a founder member of OSILIGI in Masaailand, Kenya, gave example of how the Masaai Community had worked closely with their educated youths to mobilise local the population to fight for their rights against British Government for negligently leaving explosives and war materiel in areas inhabited by the people. The British government had agreed to settle the case after a concerted national and global networking, which assisted the community to raise their voices. He added that 80% of the Masaai were illiterate and the official school curriculum did not address their problems and needs. There was need therefore for alternatives.

Professor Joseph Kakooza, the Chairman of the Uganda Government Law Reform Commission, pointed out that law reform should utilise indigenous concepts in making laws that were relevant to the needs of the communities. He gave the example of the draft law on plant variety, aspects of which were being opposed by lawyers from the North because of their unacceptance of the concept of collective property. The draft law tries to bring in traditional medical knowledge and protect intellectual property rights in herbal medicine vested in the collectivity of the communities. He concluded that there were certain dynamic elements, which could be found in customary laws, which had to be explored in modern law making.

Jacob Muli of the Cohort of Researchers on the Environment and urban Settlements, Nairobi, Kenya also emphasized the need to retrieve customary law on issues of land tenure in view of the fact that Agenda 21 had put the environment at the forefront of sustainable development. Research on the indigenous knowledge systems in the context of Agenda 21 is very vital to sustainable development of societies both developed and undeveloped, hence the importance of "Field Building."

Tegegn Malekou of PANOS, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia emphasized the issue of pastoral development and the role of the media in the process, with which PANOS was concerned. The objective is to mainstream pastoral community problems and needs in the media. Issues of conflict and peacekeeping, as well as gender in pastoral communities and the destruction of traditional systems on conflict management should be researched and highlighted. The research should also show how the processes of this destruction of pastoral culture have contributed to poverty in these communities. Such issues demand media attention and research to attract public notice and debate.

Amulaferi Kisambira, an Elder and Head of the Clans of Busoga, raised the issue of cultural heritage as being fundamental to African survival. He noted that restoring confidence in the African elite required that they pay attention to their heritages instead of being confused by the so-called modern scientific knowledge, which underrates the knowledge generated within the indigenous communities. This has to be overcome if we are to move forward.

Judge Patrick Tabora, Judge of the High Court of Uganda, referred to the use of certain traditional concepts in the settlement of cases in the courts. He referred to the concept of Ubuntu as one such example, which imparts new understanding to ethical human behaviour. He referred to the 1970 acceptance of Alternative Dispute Resolution techniques in many countries as a sign that courts were also moving in the direction of accepting indigenous and non-formal systems such as reconciliation, arbitration, and mediation in settling disputes. This was a form of "field building," which should be encouraged. In the course of time, these should become part of the modern legal systems, which integrate and synthesise all legal systems and principles.

Peter Adwok Nyaba, chairperson of the Federation of Sudan Civil Society Organisations and the Association of World Education, Sudan Chapter, observed that war had become a resource for some of rebel groups in the Sudan. He noted that only peace processes supported by the grassroots communities could put a stop to such conflict proliferation.

After these introductory remarks, Professor Nabudere then drew the attention of the participants to his research paper under the programme of activities entitled: Epistemological and Methodological Foundations for an All-inclusive Research Paradigm for "Field Building and Intersubjective Accommodation. He said that this paper was a draft, which all participants were free to comment on so that it could be enriched and improved for discussion in the November conference. It was not for discussion at this Workshop. He pointed out that the paper was based on an epistemology called hermeneutics, which was connected to the ancient African-Egyptian historical figure of Herms. This worldview was crucial to accommodating different source of knowledge. Hermeneutics provided an open-ended methodology for an all-inclusive knowledge.

The participants then organised themselves to break up in groups for deeper discussions on their research. The participants listed issues and areas of concern to their research. The idea was that the participants were to split according to these concerns and interests. In the end these were reduced to three areas, which then formed the basis of group work. This participatory approach produced a good result since it enabled the researchers to form the groups in which they would benefit from others doing similar work. The three groups formed were:

1. Post-traditional systems of governance and justice and Conflict Resolution;
2. Natural Resource Management;
3. Education, Information, and Communication

Second Plenary Session

Reports from Group Work

Group One: Post-traditional systems of governance and justice and Conflict Resolution.

Discussions in this group dealt with epistemological issues connected with traditional systems of governance, justice, and conflict resolution and how these are interfaced with modern systems of justice and administration. This arose out of the fact that modern systems of justice and its administration had proved inadequate and in some cases unsuitable to the African situation. In many cases, the modern system was either found to be inaccessible or wanting in terms of distance, legal services, police presence, language, and procedurally. The prevalence of conflicts and wars, which resulted in the dislocation of official court systems as well as enforcement agencies of judgements also contributed to the breakdown of official modern systems of justice.

The other problem concerned the very purpose, which the system served, was supposed to serve. It was observed that whereas modern systems provided for an adversarial system, most rural African communities preferred non-adversarial systems, which encouraged reconciliation and compensation for wrongs done in order to restore social balance and harmony in the communities. This approach therefore required a resort to traditional African systems of justice in conditions where its epistemological basis was not clarified, leading to confusion of concepts, objectives, and results. There was therefore a problem of conceptionalisation. Was a resort to some aspects of African systems of justice in the present conditions a restoration of African traditional systems of justice or not. Professor Nabudere advanced the concept of "post-traditional" to describe the persistence of formerly traditional ways of doing things in their cultural setting in existing conditions where modernity has influenced the traditions and vice-versa. The concept presupposes a combination of elements from both systems at the level of community action and understanding.

Malekou insisted that each of the systems have their own conception of what is just and what is not. It is not just a question of perception, but of self-definition and identity of communities and individuals within them. In the case of Ethiopia, the Lowland have their traditional systems relatively intact, whereas in the Highlands, where you had a feudal state system of administration, the more formal systems of justice based on Roman law were in place. Both have undergone change, but change has not been stable due to conflicts and famines. The question is what methodology do we use to reconcile the traditional and the modern systems, where the latter has failed, given the debates about dichotomisation, hybridisation, and croelisation. Should we look at African tradition from an Africanist epistemological standpoint or be open-ended? Whatever the case, the methodology adopted must avoid evolutionism or dichotomisation. The hermeneutical approach eliminated dichotomisation.

He added that the idea of interdependence could be applied to different situations. How can we generate universal knowledge based on interrogation of different knowledge systems in order to get the best out of all of them? This is the fundamental question. To do this, we must develop tolerance of different cultures and outlooks and adopt dialogue as a basis for sharing experiences. All knowledge is valid contextually and should be treated in a non-hierarchical way.

Judge Tabaro tried to relate the discussion to African systems of conflict resolution. He said his research would centre on how the concepts from this source can be applied in the modern systems of justice. He said he is relying on some anthropological works from different parts of Africa to get a sense of the similarities, but it was pointed out by other participants that some of the anthropological literature is outdated and that we need to "read backwards" from current ethnography in order to reflect on some of the findings of the old works, always taking into account their scientific limitations and epistemological groundings. There are also new concepts such as restorative justice and transitional justice, which ought to be explored. In what way, are these new concepts taking in traditional elements of reconciliation to the new conflictual situations?

At this level, Professor Kakooza pointed out the importance of law reform, which can exploit these traditional systems to make them more relevant to the wider society. Issues such as good governance, which are emerging have to be tackled within this wider conceptualisation to accommodate sustainability of development on the basis of the social, economic, and political well being of the people. As regards plants, the Law Reform Commission has developed a law to protect herbalists, who refuse to part with their secrets without protection. But this law is challenged by the European institutions on the ground that it is not based on individual rights, but collective ones. There are also situations where criminal law falls short of the needs of communities.

He said that there were also need to decriminalise some petty offences and let them be dealt with in the local communities. Failure of justice in the courts had led to an appearance of self-help in the form of mob-justice where communities felt the official system has failed to deliver justice in serious crimes such as murder and defilement. All this goes to suggest that some form of compensation for crimes might be the answer and here traditional systems would be helpful. Similar issues arise in the area of family relations, which had held up the Family Relations Bill in the Uganda Parliament.

During the discussions, issues of environmental degradation arose and how these could be handled with the environmental friendly indigenous systems of ecology. The problems of pastoral communities were highlighted. Mukasa outlined the work he is doing on plant names in kiganda culture and how these are handled cognitively and behaviourally in the communities. This involves totemics, herbestics, spirituality and taxonomy, which imply epistemology. The idea is to investigate how people classify and name plants and why. Attempt will also be made to compare this system with the scientific classifications of the botanical world. Traditional naming of plants has a lot to do with the usage and purpose for which plants are nurtured. There is a close relationship between classification, naming, and purpose. More field-work was required to incorporate the spatial elements in this research in order to draw the necessary epistemological conclusions.

Group 2: Natural Resources Management.

This group exchanged views surrounding the issue of resource control, use and management. This included all materials available to maintain a balanced ecosystem including factors such as land, water, air, fauna flora, and the knowledge system with which they are controlled, used, and managed both indigenous and modern. It was emphasized that this interlinkage underlined the fact that there were skills and ways of communication through generations, spirits, cultural forces and education. All these were linked to people's social-economic activities.

For instance, it was pointed out that spirits were a very important aspect of maintaining bio-diversity in many African societies. The case studies from Buganda revealed those certain forests; river falls; lakes; hills and caves are regarded as being protected by named spirits. Even today in areas of rampant robberies and thefts, certain markets, which are regarded as protected by spirits, are never touched. The owners of merchandise in these market places leave them intact on the spot without removing them from open markets. Yet a few yards a way people do steal things from shops and private houses. This proved the potency of spirits in human existence in African societies, which should be explored further.

Issues of food security arose in which certain seeds and plants were considered essential for peoples' survival. Crops such as sorghum, millet, etc. were suited for these kinds of purposes, especially in drier areas. The interface between indigenous knowledge system and modern systems was essential to exploit the strengths of each of the knowledge in these areas. Conflict related to natural resource management and the role state in natural resource management also impact on the way communities are able to utilise their IKS for survival.

Several examples from Karamoja pastoral region were cited and the various means, which were being used, both from traditional and modern systems in the production of sorghum and its preservation, were given. It was pointed out that there were 261 land races (seed variety) of superior quality, which were resistant to drought, disease, and pests, and also more nutritious, palatapable and lasting in that the warriors used them to survive on it for one week while they were a way from their kraals. On the other hand, those varieties developed in the scientific centres such as Kawanda were not drought resistant, not palatable, and not bird resistant.

Other examples from other areas were cited in which experimentation with improved varieties was also made on individual basis. There are also spiritual and cultural ideas, which were being used to preserve seed for planting to prevent them from being consumed in periods of scarcity. These practices included mixing seeds with wine, storing them in skulls, and the creation of taboos, which compelled people to desist from consuming them.

Examples of links between NGO practitioners and local communities such as the Lutheran World Federation in pastoral communities was given as a good way of "field building" in that the NGO tried to assist the communities in seed multiplication and storage. There were modified seed banks to accord with traditional practices. Funds were provided to purchase indigenous seeds for distribution by creating community seed banking. Planting using indigenous systems of "broadcasting" mixed stands and intercropping had proved most useful. Also in order to spread risks, a system of cultivating in scattered locations was used in traditional systems. These kinds of ideas could be taken aboard by scientific investigators and practitioners working in communities rather than imposing "scientific solutions" without cultural context.

In the Teso are, there were traditional systems of weather early warning systems in which the observation of the movement of the moon and stars was used by local communities to decide when to plant crops. The shape of the moon and the place of the certain stars determined when to start planting. This astronomical knowledge has been built over centuries of scientific observation and experimentation by communities, which they still use. Researchers can investigate these systems to find out the secrets, which the rural communities communicate within themselves.

In Teso also, there had been a combination of scientific investigation and local knowledge on the control of striga disease, which afflicts millet and sorghum. Without its control, striga can cause up to 100% loss of food cereals. Appearance of striga indicates soil exhaustion. In Teso, pest control was affected by a striga chaser called amuyeit that was planted at the same time as sorghum or millet. Its growth stimulated striga to germinate before the cereal had been planted so that it was made to die off before being a threat to the crops.

This method has now been validated by scientific research involving Universities of Makerere and one from the US, who worked closely with local communities. There was also the use of urine, herbs, ash, and red pepper for preservation of seeds. Research by the National Agricultural Research Organisation - NARO had also proved that the use of the traditional method called ecucuka was effective as a repellent against insects, which could be used in granaries to keep insects a way from consuming millet or sorghum. Government policies such as campaign to use yielding varieties and the use of chemicals tend to undermine these practices, when in fact these policies are ineffective.

It was also noted that these systems of knowledge depended on the existence of other value systems and institutions, which were still observed and respected within the communities. These systems and institutions emphasized communal existence, communal and interdependence practices, and the concept of what is life all about. These traditional institutions include extended family kinship, traditional fundraising through bride-wealth, reliance on social capital by for social solidarity, especially relying on others in difficult times, and unique arrangements such as pawning ones property against an unborn child. There were also systems of what is regarded as fairness and equitable in such philosophies as Obuntu bulamu (good humanness) and practices such as first come, first serve in cases of water or ajono (millet drink) drinking pots being passed around, when there is group activity. The communities do not accept modern systems, which emphasize individualistic concepts such as boundaries, fencing, title deeds, etc.

It was noted that the role of the state in the cycle of conflict and violence-creation was significant. This arose out of its enforcement of laws and policies, which were considered unjust by the communities such as maintaining of artificial boundaries and protected areas in the name of "security" and efficient administration. These were colonial policies based on so-called "tribes," which is divisive of communities. These kinds of policies by the state have resulted in insensitive and discriminatory restrictions on the movement of pastoralists and their cattle in search of pasture and water in the neighbouring districts.

This is a kind of internal colonialism within Africa, which the pastoralists regard as unfair and anti-Pan African. It was noted that Karamoja pastoral area was 100% of their land gazetted by the state in one form or the other, with 40% of it restricted from hunting, and 60-80% of the land being put out of bounds since it is reserved for national parks and government prison farms in the most fertile areas. This has left communities no room for survival except through engaging in destructive acts such as cattle raids and conflicts with their neighbours over pasture and water for their cattle. The state follows foreign values in the form of state constitutions, which are insensitive to indigenous knowledge and communities. This has led to the increased marginalisation of pastoralists by agriculturalists and other social groups engaged in large-scale private farming and mining, as well as the state agencies.

Group Three: Education, Information and Technology

This group discussed the importance of retrieval, enlargement, and communication of indigenous knowledge in the communities from research carried out in the "Field Building" programme. The focus was on education and the group noted that IKS formed part of the education system in the country in that apart from the formal school system which is based on foreign education theories and philosophies, there was the informal and non-formal systems of education through which IKS could be further developed and communicated as means to mainstreaming it into the formal schooling systems. Such a curriculum would link education to their values and norms as well as to good governance.

The group first brainstormed and dwelt with the definition of education in this broader context. First, it was argued by the various participants that education is a means through which knowledge was acquired and shared within a particular community. This also applied to the extension of such knowledge to other communities through dialogue. Secondly, it was argued that education was leads to the creation of awareness and self-discovery within communities, particularly if it is backed by research. Thirdly, education was the way people understood the process of development as well as change in their lives. Through such awareness geared towards making people better participants in the process of social and economic transformation, the people came to understand better their environment, including other people they interacted with. This also worked towards influencing government policy and democratisation in society in an integrated manner.

The group then dealt with the issue of forms of education, noting that there were two such forms in Africa today: Traditional-indigenous education and modern (western) education. The first was rooted in the cultures and languages of the local communities based on their norms and value systems. Equally modern western-style education was based on the ideas of European Enlightenment and rooted in the norms and value systems of those societies. The group noted that the manner in which modern (western) education was introduced in Africa had resulted in the alienation of the individuals who were subjected to it since such education did not understand the indigenous knowledge systems of the natives. This meant that the western-educated individual became hostile to local knowledge systems, which they regarded as "primitive" and "backward." It is this, which had contributed to the malaise in African development. There was therefore the need for the two systems to learn from each other in new ways and "Field Building" was the way forward.

The group concluded that therefore education was a form of dialogue because through dialogue knowledge was created and communicated as information. Without dialogue there cannot be the understanding of one another and the different kinds of knowledge, which exist in communities. There is therefore need for communication of information and knowledge between communities based on common activities, which seek answers to problems or what Habermas called "communicative action." For information so communicated to be effective and positively received, it has to be relevant to those to whom it is targeted. If this is not done, the knowledge contained in the information cannot be communicated, and particularly so when it is not in the indigenous languages of the communities concerned. Only then is access to that possible. As was stated by one participant: "Communication in peoples' own languages builds peoples self-confidence and in the process empowers then through social transformation. It builds initiatives and the messages delivered are not obliterated or given in rough translations because a lot is lost in the process. The result is that the recipients of the knowledge cannot use it and if they do they are bound to get unsatisfactory results."

This understanding led the group to conclude that education in one's mother tongue must be acknowledged as being at the base of the broadening of global knowledge because such an approach takes on indigenous knowledge systems and it is only through education and research that process of knowledge creation, retrieval and communication can be sustained and mainstreamed. The development of African languages is therefore the missing links and the key to the development of African knowledge and spiritual systems as well as bringing about social and economic transformation. Language is also a basis through which African values and norms can be preserved. Although it is now possible to use the Internet and to place forms of knowledge on websites, efforts should be made to ensure that such placement is done through people's languages. This is the only way, the African communities can learn from other cultures while also promoting their own cultures into a global system of mutually respecting cultures.

The group observed through the brainstorming session that there were serious problems in managing and transmitting information. These were:

• Poor organisation;
• Lack of dissemination of the knowledge researched on in communities;
• Limited financial resources;
• Disparity between education content and the knowledge base referred to above;
• Lack of networking and collaboration amongst organisations dealing with same issues;
• Lack of information exchange;
• Limited lobbying and advocacy skills

The group focused on the issue of the dissemination of researched knowledge, as the most serious one. The group felt that much of the research carried out in the communities was never disseminated to the communities who cooperated in carrying out the research. One reason for this was that the researchers did not carry out research because they wanted such findings to be communicated back to the communities. Most of the research done by scholars was for academic purposes, while the research done by practitioners was for the particular organisation, which they used and restricted to their intervention programmes. Thus, apart from the problem of language, such knowledge was rendered inaccessible to the majority of the population who had helped to produce it. This was colonisation of knowledge by scholars and researchers, which resulted in the disempowerment and impoverishment of the communities.

The group noted further that even if such knowledge was translated into local languages, the overwhelming majority of the people could not read it because they are illiterate. This therefore called for a three-pronged approach: First, the involvement of the people in the research in a participatory way; second, discussing the results with them before publication and, third translating the most important findings in the local languages. Finally, carrying out an outreach programme so that the findings can be assimilated and debated through familiar traditional techniques of communication and learning. Techniques such as the use of audio or audio-visual forms of communication in the peoples' languages are suitable. In this form, they can discuss the results, which is another form of research through dialogue and further action.

There is also need to pass on this information in the manner in which the people can appreciate it culturally. The findings of research and the knowledge created can be communicated to the communities in form of drama, dance, poetry, songs, and even cartoons. Africans are very good in relating to situations through cultural forms such as songs and dance. The main ideas in a research can be put in the form of songs and ballads, and these can also be put in drama form and performed for audiences who can then be called upon to discuss the play or the drama. Museums should also be built to preserve some of the material cultures of the people. The experience of drama in the sensitisation of the population about HIV/AIDS in Uganda is instructive in this respect. This can be applied to "Field Building" activities in the communities in transmitting researched knowledge to them.

The group finally took on the issue of Information Communication Technology-ICT. They noted that very sophisticated new technologies in the form of ICT were now part of the scene in knowledge production and dissemination. The question was how such new technologies could be brought in to the benefit of the communities in rural areas. It was observed that one of the factors contributing to the inaccessibility of researched knowledge was that the researchers had access to these technologies through which they disseminated their results. This contributed to the gap being created between researchers and the researched.

As already mentioned above, one of the means of improving knowledge of IKS is to interface it with the modern knowledge systems. ICT can be used not only for education of young people, but also the elders. Telecentres can be set up with laptops powered by solar energy and satellite broadband Internet and telephony. Such experiments are already being tried out in a number of countries promoted by the Global University System-GUS-of Finland. The G8 in Okinawa also agreed to bridge the "digital gap." This bridging of the gap should not be left to the urban centres only, but should also target rural areas.

Discussion in the Second Plenary

The discussion on the group work reports focussed on how the research can be improved. Some of the researchers handed in their tentative findings, but it was decided that they should continue with their research and produce the final product for the November conference.

Prof. Nabudere pointed out that the purpose of the Workshop was to enable the participants to exchange research experiences in order to deepen their understanding of their field of study and to inspire each other into going deeper in the matter. Therefore the most fruitful work was that which was done in groups since at this level, every participant had an opportunity to say what he/she is doing and for the others to say something about that work. In the plenary discussion we should concentrate on those issues, which have a cross-cutting value and that can inform our work in the next six months before the conference. Therefore, the following were the comments made about the work in the groups:

1. That the group dealing with traditional forms of justice should also take a board some of the recommendations of the Education and Communication group about the dissemination of laws in their languages that can assist the communities to know about their rights and to participate in law-making and law-reform so that laws are understood by the people;

2. We should explore further what we mean by community-communication. There are a lot of cultural elements involved here and one should include how some forms of traditional communication can be used to increase knowledge in the communities, particularly those based on participatory forms of research in which communities control the process;

3. As regards the problem posed by the donors about individual and collective rights, Judge Tabaro pointed out that the local communities in the form of district councils could own property and protect intellectual properties in their areas. The problem here was that the communities did not see these institutions as being "organic" to their existence and therefore could not be trusted with the collective rights. There was therefore the problem of community rights in international law as regards intellectual property;

4. Seed preservation was another area, which required further investigation. Apart from seed being preserved for planting, there was the wider problem of multiplication and distribution of indigenous seeds bearing in mind the dangers posed to humanity by the genetically modified food industry and the terminator problem posed by these monopolistic practices on the part of transnational corporations, while denying communities their collective rights;

5. In regard to the striga problem, questions were asked about the research done by the Universities. Where was the research? Who was entitled to keep the results? What were the communities' rights over the results? Who had the copyrights and property rights in the findings? This is a matter that required the attention of the legal and justice group. As a first step, the group could produce a small manual for community use containing a protocol for communities and researchers in relation to how to avoid bio-piracy, bio-prospecting and knowledge colonisation;

6. Prof. Nabudere also asked whether there were institutions present that could give some ideas of institutional "field building." He gave the example of how Yiga Ng'okola Folk Institute had initiated the research on traditional techniques of conflict resolution and then handed it over to the Association for World Education-AWE Uganda and Kenya National Chapters, which continued it. It is this collaboration that later resulted in Africa Study Centre joining the effort as an academic research institution to look into the violence and conflicts, which have characterised the pastoral communities in Eastern Uganda.

7. The Programme Officer of the AWE and the Coordinator of Yiga confirmed these relationships. They pointed out that this institutional linkage was still prevailing in working together in other fields such as outreach into the communities over the issues of adult education, awareness creation, conflict management and peace building. It was agreed that this and other experiences of institutional "field building" should be written and placed on the website to form the basis of collaboration and networking efforts.

The Way Forward

After this discussion, attention moved on the need to reflect on the way forward. Many of the participants pointed out that this kind of work we were doing depended very much on networking and collaboration in all directions. There was therefore the need to strengthen advocacy and lobby work to advance some of the research objectives and to use these tools to find acceptability for applying some of the findings.

It was agreed that the participants continue with their "field building" research activities and that the final results be presented at a conference in November-December 2002. It is at this conference that we shall decide on the next phase of the activity, may be incorporating some of the suggestions already made in the third phase. This will, however be subject to the availability of funds, since we do not have any commitment by any donor to continue this work.

The problem of dissemination of the researched knowledge to the communities should also be seen as extension of research since it involves dialogues and interactions with the communities, which produce more problems for reflection and further research action. It was therefore agreed that in the outreach work in the communities in the process of dissemination of results in a culturally relevant manner, efforts should be made to generate enthusiasm on the part of communities to question results and produce alternative approaches to research, especially of their knowledge systems in which they are the experts. This would a situation in which the people participate not as mere objects of research but as subjects of their own situation.

Report prepared by: Prof. Dani W. Nabudere Executive Director, Afrika Study Centre, P. O. Box 961, MBALE, Uganda