Aspen Omapang
Communities across the pae ‘aina (archipelago) of Hawai?i are advocating for environmental rules and regulations that are grounded in traditional knowledge. This work comes from individuals, organized community hui (groups), and formalized organizations, such as non-profits. The invocation of traditional knowledge comes in many forms, such as overarching ontological commitments (aloha ‘aina, relationality), and pushes for more holistic methodologies and data collection. While agencies and community stakeholders can agree on the importance of natural resource management, these conversations often hit a head with the technical specifics of proposed rules and regulations. In these cases, definitions of sustainability and sources of data reveal divergent epistemological commitments. If co-management of Hawaii’s natural resources is to succeed, Indigenous knowledge must be a valid source for the formation of rules and regulations. In this research, I addressed the legibility of Indigenous data and knowledge practices in two ways. First, I interviewed kilo (traditional Hawaiian observation) practitioners. Kilo in this context can be thought of as data derived from traditional, Indigenous methodologies. Kilo forms the basis of long-term relational theories called Kilokilo, which is reflected in ‘ike kupuna (generational knowledge). I interviewed kilo practitioners concerning their conceptualizations of kilo as data, and their experience advocating with kilo in rulemaking settings. Second, I conducted ethnographic observation of public scoping review meetings, oral testimony, and ruling meetings within the rulemaking process in Hawai?i. In these settings, I documented the stakeholders, varying values and strategic directions posed, and anytime Indigenous knowledge/data are invoked.