91�鶹��Ʒ

Today, more than . Considering the diversity of Indigenous Peoples and their right to self-identification, the United Nations has not adopted an official definition of “indigenous.” However, the term is the peoples with pre-existing sovereignty who lived as distinct communities prior to the arrival of settler populations.  

 

Despite significant contributions from Indigenous communities, history shows that their innovations have often been extracted and uncredited. European botanists and explorers heavily relied on their knowledge, yet they rarely documented the contributions of Indigenous individuals by name. in school curricula, historical narratives and research practices, in which Indigenous culture, history and scientific expertise are often diminished. The result is not just a loss of recognition, but a distortion of how the scientific community understands science itself.  

Some of the most widely used products, including , were developed by Indigenous communities. Additionally, many Indigenous innovations in health and medicine predated or informed modern medicine. For example, Native Americans, Indigenous Peoples in North America, were early pioneers in the field of pain relief. They chewed or brewed , which contains salicin—a chemical with natural pain relief and anti-inflammatory properties—to soothe aches and pains. The discovery and isolation of salicin eventually led to the development of aspirin in 1897, now one of the most widely used drugs in the world.  

 

also trace their origins to the use of cinchona tree bark in South American Indigenous communities, where the bark was used to combat fevers caused by malarial parasites. learned about the bark’s antimalarial properties from the Indigenous communities in Peru and are credited with introducing cinchona bark for medical use in Europe around 1640. Later, in 1820, French pharmacists Pierre-Joseph Pelletier and Joseph-Bienaim Caventou successfully isolated —the alkaloid responsible for the bark’s therapeutic effects—paving the way for its large-scale extraction and use in modern medicine. Quinine disrupts the ability of Plasmodium falciparum, the malarial parasite, to , causing the parasite to starve or accumulate toxic levels of partially degraded hemoglobin inside its body. 

 

 

(IK) reflects the deep understanding of the relationships between people, animals, plants and the environment that Indigenous communities have developed and passed along for generations. It is grounded in principles of responsibility, reciprocity and respect for the land and all living things. Rather than positioning humans as detached observers, IK views humans as active participants in an interconnected ecosystem. This web of relationships .  

 

IK is also sometimes referred to as Traditional Knowledge or Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). However, the term TEK narrows IK to ecological or environmental expertise and often reflects frameworks created by non-Indigenous academics to make IK usable within ecological management. This can unintentionally reduce IK to simply 1 category, when it also encompasses governance, law, history, ceremony, relationality and nation-specific worldviews.  

 

During a session at 91�鶹��ƷMicrobe 2025, (Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa), asked the audience, “What do you picture when you think of IK or an Indigenous scientist?” Nelson, a molecular anthropologist and bioarcheologist and assistant professor of anthropology at Southern Methodist University, explained that IK is often dismissed as solely spiritual or mythical and is mischaracterized as lacking rigor. However, Indigenous science and knowledge systems go far beyond the spiritual or mythical, she said; they are built on millennia of observation, experimentation and innovation.  

For example, Nelson highlighted the idea of treating microbes as kin, noting that while it might sound strange to some, it is second nature for Indigenous scientists. In her own work, soil sampling begins with expressing respect and gratitude for the land and acknowledging that the microbes will be used in the service of the community. This perspective challenges extractive research models and encourages a more reciprocal relationship with microbes and the environments they shape. 

 

Today, Western science is increasingly recognizing this interconnectedness through frameworks like One Health or breakthroughs in microbiome research, echoing principles Indigenous communities have long expressed through stories and practices with the natural world. 

 

IK is also inherently place-based, meaning knowledge is specific to a location and its unique ecology, culture and history. Because knowledge is passed down across generations, Indigenous communities often hold . A of climatic changes observed by subsistence-oriented peoples from 2,230 localities in 137 countries showed that Indigenous communities can offer about 50 years’ worth of insights into climate change effects. Local knowledge ranges from observations on sea-level rise to shifting rainfall patterns, and linkages among winds, animal behavior and ice conditions. 

Indigenous communities hold deep environmental and cultural knowledge developed through generations of resilience. These insights are incredibly valuable and are increasingly recognized as essential to addressing global challenges. Yet, as interest in building partnerships and , so does the responsibility to engage in ways that are ethical, reciprocal and non-extractive. 

IK has long been taken and applied by external researchers, businesses and institutions without honoring community sovereignty or returning benefits to the nations from whom it came. A found that 87% of climate studies have practiced an extractive model, meaning outside researchers use IK with minimal participation or decision-making by the people who hold that knowledge. Shifting away from this model requires that Indigenous Peoples retain agency over their own knowledge. 
 

refers to the right of Indigenous Peoples to control how data from or about them is collected, accessed, used, stored and shared. IDSov is supported by the (UNDRIP), which affirms the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination over all aspects of research. When Indigenous scientists and community leaders , they ensure that the knowledge is not only protected, but that it also supports community health, well-being and cultural continuity. As Nelson emphasized during her presentation, “As a Native scientist, you’re not just doing research, you also have to be a bit of an activist.”  
 

in enabling , which is the ability of Indigenous communities to decide how to govern themselves, protect their culture, traditions and language, and make their own laws. (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility and Ethics) provide a framework for responsible data practices that uphold Indigenous Peoples’ rights to data and prioritize value-based relationships. Operationalizing these principles can include contracts, research policies and data-sharing agreements that respect Indigenous Peoples’ values, cultures, philosophies and objectives. For example, Native nations in the United States are to establish enforceable research standards and expectations for biomedical research. These codes typically address data ownership, tribal review of results, oversight beyond reservation boundaries and protocols for disposal or reuse of specimens. Researchers must review and incorporate these codes into their agreements, embed their requirements into data-governance plans and design dissemination practices that reflect tribal jurisdiction and priorities. For communities historically excluded or harmed by biomedical research, these tools help ensure tangible benefits for tribes and Indigenous communities.  

 

Organizations like (NBDC), the first U.S. biorepository created by and for Indigenous Peoples, are paving the way for Indigenous communities to control their own genetic insights. With over 96% of genomic studies focused solely on individuals of European ancestry, NBDC advocates for genomics that uplift Indigenous health and sovereignty. “It’s about science for the people, by the people,” (Kānaka Maoli, Native Hawaiian), an assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego, and co-founder of NBDC, shared in a . The consortium ensures that biological samples and genetic data, including microbial DNA data, remain within tribal communities and under local governance, while also investing in STEM capacity building in tribal communities.  

Collecting data and interpreting patterns can help explain how the world works—it is essential in IK systems as well as Western science. However, IK teaches us that data can’t be isolated from the people, lands and cultures that generate them. Stories and narratives passed down through generations are also important in making sense of complexity and connecting individual facts to a larger meaning. 
 

describes the many ways Indigenous storytelling serves as a historical record, teaching and learning method and expression of culture and identity. Incorporating stories into research can also help and be a powerful means for non-Indigenous scientists to engage respectfully with Indigenous communities. For example, using to gather Indigenous experiences and perceptions, or conducting to collect community testimonials, can help advance community-based participatory research methods. These approaches, guided by IK, help create research processes that are both .   
 

Scientists are fundamentally storytellers, too. “As scientists, I think we forget that we’re really honored to be able to tell stories,” Nelson said. “But how are we doing that? [We must ask ourselves], 'Are we reaching people? Are we making [research] meaningful?'” These questions are crucial for conducting science that is not just rigorous, but also rooted in responsibility, reciprocity and relationship.