Epistemic Injustice and Methodological Extraction: A Critical Inquiry into the Marginalization of Indigenous Knowledge

Extract

[...] References Agrawal, A. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and the politics of classification. International Social Science Journal, 54(173), 287-297. Chilisa, B. (2020). Indigenous research methodologies (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Dei, G. J. S. (2000). [...]

[...] Participatory observation of knowledge negotiation contexts (400+ hours): Observation of settings where indigenous and Western knowledge systems interact, including research collaborations, community consultations, and resource management initiatives. 5. Policy document analysis Critical examination of national and regional policies related to indigenous knowledge, cultural heritage, and intellectual property. Data collection tools were developed collaboratively with community researchers and translated into relevant local languages. All interviews and knowledge mapping sessions were conducted in participants' preferred languages with locally trained interpreters when necessary. C. [...]

[...] Recognizing the risk of reproducing the very dynamics under investigation, we developed a reflexive research design grounded in principles of epistemic justice and reciprocity. The research was conducted over a 24-month period (2022-2024) across four regions of Cameroon selected to represent diverse indigenous knowledge systems: Northwest (grassfields communities), South (Baka and Bagyeli communities), Southwest (coastal communities), and Far North (Fulani and Kirdi communities). These regions were selected based on consultation with indigenous knowledge holders and examination of existing literature on knowledge marginalization in Cameroon. B. Data Collection Data collection employed multiple methods designed to center indigenous perspectives on epistemic injustice: 1. [...]

[...] Such approaches often reproduce methodological extraction by positioning indigenous knowledge as supplementary content rather than as embodying alternative epistemological frameworks. Instead, our research points toward what Escobar (2018) terms "epistemic pluriversality," the cultivation of multiple, coexisting knowledge systems without hierarchical ordering. This pluriversal approach requires fundamental reconsideration of what constitutes valid knowledge and who determines validity criteria. Rather than evaluating indigenous knowledge through Western scientific frameworks, pluriversality suggests the need for multiple, context specific evaluative frameworks appropriate to different knowledge systems. [...]

[...] First, they typically emphasize relationality, understanding phenomena not as isolated entities but through their connections within broader ecological, social, and spiritual networks. Second, they are place based, emerging from sustained engagement with specific territories and ecosystems over generations. Third, they integrate empirical observation with narrative, spiritual, and ethical dimensions rather than separating these domains. Fourth, they are typically processual rather than static, emphasizing knowledge as continuous practice rather than fixed content. The distinctive epistemological character of indigenous knowledge systems in Cameroon becomes particularly evident in domains such as ecological management, where indigenous communities conceptualize forests not merely as resources but as complex relational systems involving both human and non-human actors; in healing practices, where health is understood through holistic frameworks integrating physical, social, and spiritual dimensions; and in agricultural systems, where knowledge encompasses not only technical skills but ethical principles governing human-plant relationships. [...]