Let’s start with definitions. Science is widely defined as “an organized system of knowledge.” In any system, knowledge is organized by the human priorities and preferences of the culture it is created within. This organized system of knowledge cannot be separated from society, and there is nothing unbiased about the parameters we choose for organization.
One need not look further than the Western science of botany, the study of plants, and Dutch scientist Carl Linnaeus, who is considered “the father of modern taxonomy,” to see how science is imbued with cultural bias. Though Linnaeus published descriptions of over 7,000 types of plants in his lifetime, he believed plants got “married” and claimed to have made scientific observations of plants having “husbands” and “wives.” Linnaeus also projected human sexuality onto plants when he described them as having vaginas and penises. It is interesting to note that Linnaeus gave male organs more priority in his taxonomy scheme, rooted in eighteenth-century European cultural and gender biases. He also believed that botany was too controversial for European women to study.
In the nineteenth century, his science was questioned, and today, many of his beliefs are considered culturally outdated. In other words, the Western science of botany has advanced with our evolving culture. Still, scientists have preserved many of his organizational schemes, which continue to inform the study of botany.
If the example of Linnaeus shows us the inherent bias in all science, the example of the Yucatec Maya shows us the potential value of culturally-informed alternative knowledge systems when it comes to ecosystem health. The Yucatec Maya have lived on the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico for the last 3,000 years, and modern-day Mayan farmers have a deep knowledge about local soils. They are keenly attuned to soil health, which they view as a marker of cultural health. They recognize and refer to 80 criteria for soil, with a focus on leptosols, or shallow soils, which are the most common soils in the northern Yucatán Peninsula.
Although [Yucatec Mayan] practices stem from cultural-spiritual origins, these same practices result in, and are recognized as, soil conservation.
Mayan leptosol classification is not nearly matched in either European or American soil science. Yucatec Maya farmers classify soils on the basis of properties such as soil fertility, relief, vegetation types, and land-use history. In contrast, European and American technical soil classifications focus on formation and on physical and chemical properties, supported by laboratory determinations. Yucatec Maya soil classification is behavioral, relational, and local, while Western classification is measurable, genetically oriented, and universal.
By classifying soils based on fertility, Maya Yucatec classification also elevates soil fertility maintenance, which is directly correlated to Mayan cultural and spiritual priorities — and absent from Western classifications. In Mayan mythology, the soil is a living being who needs to be cared for and fed, and who becomes angry when not taken care of. Mayans believe that if the fertility of the soil is neglected, the land will be punished by the nature gods, and humans will not receive the benefits of agriculture. The Yucatec Maya perform many symbolic practices and rituals to please the soil based on ancestral stories of tranquilizing the divine beings of the ecosystem. Their classification is directly tied to their management of the soil — by identifying the type of soil, Yucatec Maya farmers can identify the right practices for long term conservation of topsoil, from field selection to planting to fallow. Although these practices stem from cultural-spiritual origins, these same practices result in, and are recognized as, soil conservation.
Because the Maya soil classification has been proven to result in successful management of their environments, Mexican government agencies have begun to integrate it as a diagnostic tool for soil management decisions.
Mexico is not alone in recognizing the value of Indigenous knowledge to environmental health. California, for example, has endorsed cultural burning practices as part of a holistic fire mitigation approach. Countries around the world — from India, to Brazil, to Kenya — are turning to Indigenous agroforestry practices in efforts to combat deforestation. Nations like Canada are integrating customary fishing practices into national policy to help address overfishing. And to recognize Indigenous knowledge as a basis of sustainable environmental management, the United Nations has developed a vocabulary to define alternative ways of knowing.
There is power in systems of knowledge developed over millennia by Indigenous practitioners, and this knowledge can complement Western science. This includes deep understanding of ancestral environments, many of which are still not documented by Western science. When we deconstruct the belief that science is “neutral” and non-debatable, we can understand that there are many ways to organize knowledge, and there are many ways of knowing. And we can see that not all bias in science is bad or wrong.
We still have far to go when it comes to integrating Indigenous ways of knowing — European-based sciences are globally more dominant and prevalent than non-European ones. At this time of global ecological crisis, leaning into these vast systems of knowledge seems more essential than ever.