This is the submitted version of the journal article: Galappaththi, Eranga K.; Schlingmann, Anna. «The sustainability assess- ment of Indigenous and local knowledge-based climate adaptation responses in agricultural and aquatic food systems». Current Opinion in Environmental Sus- tainability, Vol. 62 (June 2023), art. 101276. DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101276 This version is available at https://ddd.uab.cat/record/275859 under the terms of the license 1 The sustainability assessment of Indigenous and local knowledge-based climate adaptation 2 responses in agricultural and aquatic food systems 3 4 Eranga K. Galappaththi1 and Anna Schlingmann2 5 1 6 Department of Geography, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, USA 2 7 Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, 8 Barcelona, Spain 9 10 Highlights 11 • ILK-based adaptation has high potential for social and environmental sustainability 12 • Local institutions foster social sustainability through co-management and social networks 13 • ILK-based conservation and low-input agriculture increase environmental sustainability 14 • Both risks and benefits are reported for the economic sustainability dimension 15 • The weakening of ILK systems has the potential to fail sustainable climate adaptation 16 17 Abstract 18 We examine common Indigenous and local knowledge-based adaptive responses to climate 19 change from the sustainability perspective among Indigenous and local communities globally. 20 We draw upon an assessment of 98 peer-reviewed articles to access how local-level responses 21 interact with the broader sustainability dimensions of social, economic, and environmental. We 22 focus on five adaptive responses: 1) community-based adaptation, 2) diversification, 3) local 23 governance and conflict resolution schemes, 4) land, soil, and water management, and 5) 24 traditional weather forecast. Using sustainability framing, we illustrate how these adaptive 25 responses can be both resilient and vulnerable. We argue that long-term successful adaptation to 26 climate change should aim to avoid any increase in, and instead should decrease, vulnerability 27 related to the social (e.g., loss of social bonds and mutual support), economic (e.g., insecure 28 income), and environmental (e.g., soil contamination) dimensions. There is an urgent need to 29 discuss successful adaptation to climate change from a holistic approach that includes long-term 30 social, economic, and environmental sustainability aspects. 31 32 Keywords: Indigenous and local knowledge, feasibility, agriculture, fisheries, resilience, 33 sustainability, vulnerability 34 35 36 37 1_Introduction 1 38 Climate change is creating an unprecedented challenge for humanity, undermining progress 39 toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and exacerbating ongoing 40 difficulties facing the world’s most disadvantaged communities [1,2]. In particular, climate 41 change poses a high risk for Indigenous and local peoples (ILPs) [3,4**]. This reflects the 42 interaction of a combination of factors, including colonization, discrimination, and social 43 exclusion, and directly results in conditions such as a high burden of food insecurity, ill health, 44 and poverty [5–7]. Many of the risks that climate change poses stem from interactions with food 45 systems [8]. Indigenous and local communities typically have “mixed” food systems, deriving 46 significant nutrition from subsistence-based agriculture, hunting, fishing, and foraging, alongside 47 small-scale farming, while also engaging in market activities to sell and obtain food [9,10**]. 48 While these food systems have historically been resilient, the compounding nature of climate 49 risks and, in many cases, government policies has created significant vulnerabilities. At the same 50 time, Indigenous communities are not “agent-less” and helpless; they display a certain resilience 51 to climate change, derived from their profound local and contextualized knowledge and their 52 capacity to adapt to the climate variabilities they have faced over generations [4**]. 53 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) is an explicit characteristic of ILPs’ adaptive responses 54 associated with their food systems. We understand ILK as an integrated body of knowledge 55 transmitted orally and derived from the accumulation of long-term observations, experiences, 56 and history in the collective memory with communal understanding [11]. Some threads of these 57 knowledge systems are woven into various aspects of the lives of ILPs, whose diverse cultures 58 and traditions helped develop the knowledge required to adapt to a remote environment [12]. 59 ILK is considered a process rather than content, as it co-evolves through an adaptive process and 60 is handed down by cultural transmission from one generation to the next [13]. This knowledge 61 system also faces the serious threat of weakening, as it either has been lost, is not learned by the 62 current generation, or remains undocumented [13]. In this context, this body of knowledge has 63 been fundamental to the environmental, cultural, and livelihood sustainability of ILPs [11]. 64 Previous studies have emphasized the intertwined nature of social-ecological systems and the 65 dependency of economic and social well-being on an entire biosphere [14] as well as the 66 importance of better understanding the nexus between effective adaptation, resilience, and 67 sustainable development [2,15**]. Eriksen et al. [16] identify the integration of local knowledge 68 as one of four key principles for sustainable adaptation, which, per definition, heightens social 69 justice and environmental integrity across spatial and temporal scales while increasing resilience 70 to climate change. 71 From this perspective, through the sustainability perspective, we identify and examine common 72 ILK-based adaptive responses to climate change among ILPs globally. We draw upon an 73 assessment of 98 peer-reviewed articles published over the last three years (2019-2021) to assess 74 how local-level responses interact with the broader sustainability dimensions (e.g., social, 75 economic, environmental). In structuring our analysis by using sustainability framing, we also 2 76 illustrate how ILK-based adaptations can be both resilient and vulnerable. We define resilience 77 as the capacity of individuals, communities, and systems to survive, adapt, and self-organize in 78 the face of stress and shocks and even transform when conditions require it [17]. Vulnerability is 79 susceptibility to harm [18]. In writing this paper, we acknowledge that we are non-Indigenous 80 academics who work within the epistemic community of global-change research. This 81 positionality affects our analysis and interpretation of the literature. 82 2_Methods 83 2.1_Semi-systematic literature review 84 This article presents results from a semi-systematic literature review [19], conducted in June 85 2021, to detect common patterns of ILK-based adaptation to climate change in small-scale 86 agricultural and fishery communities. The underlying work contributed to chapter 5, “Food 87 systems,” in the Sixth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report (IPCC, AR6, 88 WG II, chapter 5, 2022) [20] and focused on scientific literature published between 2019 and 89 June 2021 to capture the most recent research evidence in line with the journal’s publication 90 guidelines. 91 We applied a two-phase search approach by using the web-based databases Web of Science and 92 Scopus to identify English peer-reviewed publications (Figure 1). In the first phase, we used key 93 search strings based on three sub-topics: 1) Indigenous and local knowledge, 2) climate change, 94 and 3) adaptation (see Table SM1 for specific search terms). This resulted in a list of 402 articles 95 in Web of Science and 316 articles in Scopus. Duplicated articles (n=243) that appeared in both 96 databases were removed. The remaining 475 articles were screened for titles and abstracts. The 97 purpose of this initial screening was to identify major ILK-based adaptation topics for the second 98 phase. The themes were selected based on the number of articles published under each theme, 99 and the depth and breadth of each study. The major adaptation themes were identified for small- 100 scale fisheries (i.e., community-based adaptation, livelihood diversification, and local 101 governance and conflict resolution) and smallholder farmers (i.e., crop diversification, traditional 102 weather forecast, and soil and water management). 103 In the second phase, we repeated the search with specific key terms corresponding to each of the 104 identified major ILK-based adaptation strategies to find the most study-relevant articles (see 105 Table SM1 for specific search terms). From the total list of articles derived from phases 1 and 2, 106 we selected approximately 15 articles per theme (or adaptation strategy) that best met the 107 following criteria based on the authors’ assessment of: 1) topic relevance, 2) quality criteria, 3) 108 level of details of results, and 4) diversity in the geographic distribution of case studies. 109 We also added nine articles that subject experts recommended but that did not appear in our 110 search list. For the included articles and each adaptation theme, we conducted a qualitative 111 analysis by assessing common patterns of benefits, costs, and trade-offs regarding the three 112 sustainability dimensions (social, economic, and environmental), in line with social, economic, 3 113 and environmental feasibility indicators developed by Singh et al. [29]. The supplementary 114 materials contain a list of documents reviewed and a data sheet. 115 116 Figure 1: The two-phase search approach. 117 2.2_Adaptive responses and sustainability 118 We focus specifically on five adaptive responses in the context of Indigenous and local 119 knowledge: 1) community-based adaptation, 2) diversification, 3) local governance and conflict 120 resolution schemes, 4) land, soil, and water management, and 5) traditional weather forecast. 121 Community-based adaptation refers to adaptive responses emerging from the local level 122 (individual, household, community) to address climate-related risk [21]. Diversification can take 123 various forms including diversification of livelihood activities and assets such as crop species 124 and varieties and fisheries to minimize climate vulnerability by increasing the range of options 125 available [22]. Local governance and conflict resolution schemes refer to community-level 126 resource governance partnerships occurring at multiple levels (community to government) in 127 managing food systems to deal with climate risk. This can include community-based 128 management and co-management approaches for natural resources [23]. Soil management 129 includes (no-)tillage, plowing, mulching, ridge and furrow, and terrace cultivation with the 130 general goal of increasing soil quality and water retention capacity [24*]. Water management 131 refers to different types of irrigation and water conservation practices. Traditional weather 132 forecasts use the ILK of biophysical indicators such as animals, plants, weather phenomena, and 4 133 celestial bodies to predict upcoming weather and thereby plan daily and seasonal livelihood 134 activities (e.g., [25]). 135 Adaptive responses are key to the sustainability of Indigenous and local food systems. We 136 understand sustainability in a climate change adaptation context as the combined result of the 137 long-term dynamics of the resilience and vulnerability of human-environmental systems [16,26]. 138 Social, economic, and environmental dimensions are various archetypical pathways of 139 sustainability shaped by various adaptive responses. Specifically, the social dimension of 140 sustainability refers to social equality and justice, including food, health, education, and gender 141 aspects; the economic dimension to economic equality, including decent work, economic growth, 142 and responsible production; and the environmental dimension to the integrity of terrestrial and 143 aquatic systems, including the climate [14]. Adaptive responses can generate mixed positive and 144 negative impacts along the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. 145 When adaptive responses show evidence of generating more resilience than vulnerability (along 146 the three dimensions of sustainability), they are identified as having a positive impact. On the 147 other hand, high economic, social, or environmental costs constitute maladaptation [27,28]. 148 Table 1: Three dimensions and indicators of sustainability to assess adaptation in Indigenous and local contexts 149 (adopted from [29]) Sustainability Indicators Questions asked with adaptation indicators References dimensions Social Social Does the option offer health and education benefits? [30] benefits Does the option minimize negative trade-offs with other development policy goals and identify positive synergies with other policy goals? Sociocultural Is there public resistance to the option? Does the option [31–33] acceptability typically find acceptance within existing sociocultural norms and utilize diverse knowledge systems including Indigenous and local knowledge? Social and regional Does the option include different social groups and [34–36] inclusiveness remote regions? Does the adaptation option adversely affect vulnerable groups or other areas? Economic Microeconomic and What are the economic costs and trade-offs of the [37,38] macroeconomic option? (high costs correspond to low feasibility) viability, including Would the option lead to higher economic employment and productivity? productivity Does the option employ many people or does the enhancement potential system’s productivity increase under the option? 5 Environmental Adaptive capacity/ Does the option enhance the ability of ecosystems or [39] resilience-building relevant decision-makers to adjust to potential damage potential to the environment, take advantage of opportunities, or respond to consequences, or does the option contribute to building resilience (the environment’s ability to cope with stressors and reorganize to maintain structures and functions and retain the capacity to transform)? Ecological capacity Does the option enhance supporting, regulating, or [39] provisioning ecosystem services in any way? 150 151 3. Results 152 3.1_Social sustainability 153 We found records of diverse ILK-based adaptive responses leading to social sustainability. 154 Community-based adaptation has a widely documented ability to positively impact social 155 sustainability. For example, based on two case studies from the Solomon Islands, Basel et al. 156 [40] found that the community-based adaptation approach could address key climate change 157 vulnerabilities (e.g., climate variability, extreme events), additional drivers of social vulnerability 158 (e.g., limited equity and inclusion, education), and adaptive capacity (e.g., leadership, youth 159 capacity building). However, from the same islands, Van der Ploeg et al. [41*] found that several 160 other interconnected social and political problems such as youth unemployment, poor healthcare 161 and education, gender-based violence, land tenure disputes, corruption, alcoholism, urbanization, 162 and expectations of modernity could lead to food insecurity and health problems. 163 Local governance and co-management arrangements are recorded among the Indigenous 164 fisheries systems of northern Canada and Sri Lanka as a way of building the resilience of social- 165 ecological systems and fostering adaptation to climate change. For example, both the DFO 166 (Department of Fisheries and Oceans) and the HTA (Hunters and Trappers Association), along 167 with the NWMB (Nunavut Wildlife Management Board) and other designated Inuit 168 organizations, are co-managers of the fisheries in Nunavut, Canada as outlined in the Nunavut 169 Agreement Article 5 [42]. Some community fisheries such as Cambridge Bay and Pangnirtung 170 have been using co-management for the last three decades [43]. These co-managers use the best 171 available ILK and science for decision-making related to annual fish quotas and fishing places. 172 For instance, transformative changes such as food system changes (e.g., from land-based to 173 ocean-based) recorded in Pangnirtung were fostered by the local perception of environmental 174 change, sustained monitoring programs, shared narratives, and the interaction between 175 knowledge systems, facilitated by a bridging organization within a broader process of 176 governance transformation [43]. Similar co-management characteristics have been documented 177 in Sri Lankan Coastal-Vedda culture-based fisheries [44]. Co-management is not an easy 6 178 adaptive response but is the best available collaborative management solution for Indigenous and 179 local resource systems [45]. 180 Across the globe, Indigenous and local crops and varieties are an integral part of local cultures 181 and therefore play an important role in customary traditions and local diets; they are often 182 associated with a better taste and, consequently, are culturally highly accepted [46*–51]. A 183 mixed cropping system and the complementation of cultivated crops with medicinal plants has 184 additional social benefits for health such as the potential to diversify the food and nutritional 185 intake of ILPs and the supply of low-cost medical treatments [46*,47**,52–55]. Social structures 186 such as traditional seed networks and communal labor are important factors in preserving local 187 seeds, crop diversity, and crop quality [50,51], pooling labor in times of intensive farming 188 activities, and supporting each other in times of climate emergency, as practiced by the Lun 189 Bawang, Sa’ban, and Penan peoples on the island of Borneo [56]. 190 The strong link between ILK-based adaptive strategies and customary institutions is also evident 191 in the context of traditional weather forecasts. Information and knowledge sharing through 192 customary institutions are crucial for the collection and interpretation of weather indicators and 193 the evaluation, correction, and dissemination of the final forecasts [57–59]. Similar to Indigenous 194 crops, traditional weather forecasts have been transmitted through generations and therefore 195 display high cultural acceptance and trust (e.g., [59–61]). 196 Indigenous institutions are also crucial for controlling, regulating, and guaranteeing the balanced, 197 equal, and sustainable use of water, an often limited good [62]. Additionally, social capital in the 198 form of collective actions is visible in work-intensive soil and water management practices such 199 as community-based pasture management in the Andes [63] and chena cultivation and large- 200 scale water tank systems in Sri Lanka [64]. 201 However, evidence indicates that local culture and customary institutions are weakening, which 202 threatens social cohesion and resilience to climate change. For example, studies report declines 203 in the cultivation of Indigenous and local crop varieties [46*,48], the application of Indigenous 204 cropping systems, seed exchange between farmers [48], and the application of customary water 205 control systems and governance [64]. 206 3.2_Economic sustainability 207 The economic dimension of sustainability addresses uncertainties associated with Indigenous and 208 local food systems. This includes various diversification responses as well as the application of 209 traditional weather forecasts. Crop diversification is documented for microeconomic viability. A 210 shift from subsistence to market integration is highly correlated with a shift toward cash crops 211 (e.g., fruits, vegetables, wheat, and coffee) and improved and hybrid varieties [46*,47**,50,65]. 212 This trend is strongly driven by certain economic benefits such as higher yields, shorter growing 213 cycles, lower labor demand, and higher market values, which potentially increase income and 7 214 food security [46*–48,51,52,66]; the exception is [67]. The economic trade-offs of improved and 215 hybrid varieties are often neglected. For example, direct costs arise because hybrid varieties 216 cannot be self-saved but must be purchased for each season [47**,48,50,55]. Indirect costs arise 217 because improved varieties and cash crops often require more chemical fertilizer and pesticides 218 as well as a cost-intensive irrigation infrastructure [47**,48,50]. These economic downsides 219 imply two consequences: 1) Indigenous crops have a higher energy use efficiency ratio as shown 220 in a case study involving Nepalese and Bangladeshi farmers [46*] and 2) Indigenous crops imply 221 lower economic risks in a high-climate-risk year, due mainly to their lower investment costs 222 [47**,68]. Furthermore, Indigenous cropping practices like intercropping or relay cropping have 223 the potential to increase yield per area compared to mono-cropping systems [54,66,68]. 224 Economic value also arises through the incorporation of Indigenous medicinal plants and the 225 generally better straw quality of Indigenous crops [47**,50,52,55]. 226 227 Livelihood diversification is recorded in different forms as an adaptive response allowing rural 228 populations to be involved in a range of activities that reduce their economic vulnerability. For 229 example, Inuit of the Canadian Arctic are involved in co-existing fisheries (commercial and 230 subsistence; Arctic Char—Salvelinus alpinus and Turbot—Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) that 231 create more economic opportunities [42]. In the Global South, Sri Lankan Coastal-Vedda are 232 involved in multiple casual livelihood activities allowing them to shift between different 233 livelihood options (e.g., culture-based fisheries, rice farming, home gardening) [44]. However, in 234 the context of economic diversification (as a main adaptive strategy), a peri-urban lake system in 235 Zimbabwe records that males dominate the leadership of fishing cooperatives and that women 236 (who are often low-paid or unpaid, with an unofficial status) are not recognized for their roles 237 (e.g., net making, fish gutting, cleaning, and gleaning) [69]. 238 Adequate weather forecasts are crucial for stabilizing yields, avoiding yield losses, and 239 maximizing crop revenues. Compared to state-led weather forecasts, traditional weather forecasts 240 display certain economic and technological advantages, i.e., they are low-cost and low-tech, 241 though additional costs and required technological infrastructure and understanding of state 242 institutional weather forecasts are significant access impediments, especially for remote 243 communities [25,53,55,59,61,70,71]. For example, based on evidence from studies in Zimbabwe, 244 Mexico, Uganda, and Botswana, the scarcity of weather stations in remote regions, which results 245 in a low spatial resolution of institutional weather forecasts, often presented at the regional level 246 or even state level, is criticized as being too broad in its application and use at the local level and 247 misaligned with farmers’ needs [58,60,61,70]. Additionally, temporal delays in state forecast 248 dissemination place a burden on its local applicability [59,70]. 249 3.3_Environmental sustainability and climate resilience 250 Many Indigenous crops such as millet, buckwheat, quinoa and qañawa, yam and cocoyam, and 251 cassava, and their wild relatives, have adapted to harsh environmental conditions, including 8 252 extreme cold droughts and floods [46*,48,49,55,68,72], and are less susceptible to pests and 253 diseases [47**,48,55,68]. Therefore, the general demand for external inputs, such as pesticides, 254 fertilizer, and irrigation, and, consequently, the environmental impacts, especially on soil and 255 water, is generally lower for Indigenous crops [47**,53]. Instead, traditional crop cultivation 256 depends on natural fertilizers and pesticides [48,55,65] or dung from (free-range) livestock 257 [47**]. An example from Sri Lanka shows that chena cultivation systems use less artificial 258 fertilizer and pesticides, depending instead on natural soil fertility [64]. We therefore argue that 259 many Indigenous and local crops and varieties combine general climate resilience and 260 environmental sustainability. However, the short maturation cycles of crops such as maize, 261 groundnut, and cowpea and the improved short-cycle varieties increase their drought resistance 262 by advancing their flowering and harvest dates compared to those of Indigenous crop varieties 263 such as guinea corn and late millet; this results in a decline in the cultivation of Indigenous crops 264 [53,66]. On the other hand, traditional mixed cropping systems decrease the risk of complete 265 crop failure and contribute to agrobiodiversity and increased soil quality [24*,49,51,53,65]. 266 Similarly, soil conservation based on Indigenous and local knowledge is generally 267 environmentally sustainable because of its low demand for energy and chemical products with 268 the aim of increasing soil fertility and water retention capacity in an environmentally sustainable 269 manner. 270 Local governance involves community-based efforts to face common challenges using collective 271 action and local institutions, sometimes with the support of the government. Records from Sri 272 Lanka show how small-scale shrimp farmers collectively use their local knowledge of shrimp 273 disease spreading patterns across the interconnected lagoon waterbody to implement a zonal crop 274 calendar system by managing water withdrawal and discharge [42]. Also in the Pacific Islands, 275 [73**] recorded how local governance of iTaukei (Indigenous Fijian) communities sustainably 276 managed mangrove ecosystems over time and how this knowledge and these experiences can 277 produce more sustainable and effective ecosystem-based adaptation options in the future. iTaukei 278 indicates that mangrove plantations can prevent soil from washing away and can act as natural 279 barriers to protect the coastline from sea-level rise, storm surges, and coral damage. However, 280 there is not enough scientific data to facilitate sustainable environment management practices, 281 for example, in the context of Arctic fisheries experiencing rapid environmental and climate 282 change [74]. 283 Traditional weather forecast methods are used to determine seasonal activities such as the timing 284 of crop planting and harvesting and the seasonal selection of crop species and varieties (e.g., 285 [58,68,71,75]) and livestock activities [59] to prepare for expected climate emergencies such as 286 drought and flooding [25,60,70,71,75] as well as for adapting to long-term changes in local 287 climates [60,71]. However, nowadays, traditional weather forecast practices are threatened not 288 only by cultural loss but also by the unprecedented speed of anthropogenic climate change itself, 289 as shown in case studies from Malaysian Borneo [56] and Ethiopia [25]. Several communities 290 lament a decrease in the reliability and accuracy of traditional weather forecasts, as weather is 9 291 more variable and rainfall more erratic nowadays and the relationships between biophysical 292 indicators and weather phenomena are weakening [56,61]. Nonetheless, the question of whether 293 relying on institutional or traditional weather forecast methods is more accurate and implies 294 fewer risks of error is not a trivial one, as [76] exemplified in a case study in Nigeria. 295 Table 2: Examples of Indigenous and local knowledge-based adaptation responses and their impacts on 296 sustainability Adaptive Examples (+/–) Impacts on Sustainability References responses sustainability dimensions Community- Participatory (+) Support community Social, [40,41*] based adaptation planning cohesion, local resource Environmental adaptation (Langalanga people management (forest, from the Solomon water, and fisheries), and Islands) disaster risk reduction (-) Increased settlement along the coast leads to conflicts over access to fishing grounds Inclusion of women (+) Inclusion of women’s Social [77**] in fisheries knowledge in fisheries (Alaskan native decision-making (Alaskan people, United native people, United States) States) (-) Limited research considering the knowledge and perspectives of fisherwomen in Alaska (Alaskan native people, United States) Diversificatio Livelihood (+) Diverse skills give Economic, [3,44] n diversification them opportunities to Social (Indigenous peoples maximize the flexible use in the Asia Pacific of all available capital to region) sustain their livelihood and reduce climate risks and vulnerability (-) Limited specialization in one livelihood activity (expert knowledge and learning) 10 Crop diversification (+) Contribution to Environmental, [51,54,55,67] (Bangladesh; Milpa agrobiodiversity, Economic, farmers in Mexico; improved soil quality, Social various ethnic reduced pest infestation, groups in northern health and nutritional Vietnam; intake diversity Yi people in China) (-) Although mixed cropping increases yield, indigenous crops generally display lower yields and lower market prices, resulting in generally lower income generation potential compared to improved varieties Local Co-management (+) Empowered Social, [78,79] governance (small-scale fishers communities are more Economic, and conflict in Timor-Leste and likely to meet both socio- Environmental resolutions Bangladesh) economic and biological schemes goals being involved in decision-making (-) Inequities reinforced by the customary power hierarchies reduce incomes and access rights of poor fishers Community-based (+) Foster capacity Social, [80,81] management (Laos building Environmental PDR, Resex (-) Degradation of coastal- Pirajubaé fishers of marine ecosystems and a Brazil) severe impact on traditional fishery did not prevent due to urban growth over the reserve Land, soil, and Soil management (+) Improves soil quality, Environmental, [82,83] water (Thai farmers in including soil fertility and Economic, management Vietnam; water retention potential Social smallholder farmers (-) Labor work-intensive, in Northern Ghana; which is addressed Khasi and Jaintia through collective actions people in Northern and a culture of India) reciprocity 11 Water management (+) a good water Social, [62–64] (Sri Lanka; management systems Economic, Peruvian Andean guarantees sustainable and Environmental Indigenous fair water use among pastoralists; community members Northern Pakistan) (-) Excessive water usage in the dry season might exhaust natural water sources Traditional Traditional weather (+) High cultural Social, [57,61] weather forecast (Alfa acceptance, Information Economic observation pastoralists in sharing to inform all and forecast Ethiopia; Mayan community members milpa farmers in (-) The higher Mexico) unpredictability especially of rainfall, makes traditional weather forecast less reliable and decision-making more difficult 297 4_Discussion 298 We have investigated the most recently recorded evidence covering diverse regions and peoples 299 to understand how these ILK-based adaptive responses can generate mixed positive and negative 300 impacts along the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Across the 301 examples we review, Indigenous and local knowledge provide the context for adaptive responses 302 to foster the resilience and sustainability of agricultural and aquatic food systems. However, we 303 have also seen that performance in the different domains of sustainability varies. While the 304 reviewed strategies show specifically high potential to increase social and environmental 305 sustainability, there are reported trade-offs in the economic sustainability domain. Therefore, 306 strengthening ILK-based adaptation can enrich climate change resilience while contributing to 307 the social and environmental SDG, for which low achievements have been reported thus far 308 [84,85]. 309 We find numerous records of adaptation in Indigenous food systems across diverse regions that 310 are resilient to climate change and sustainable in many aspects. For example, the zaï cultivation 311 system improves soil qualities, increases yields, and reduces climate impacts [86]. However, we 312 also find examples of sustainable trade-offs, especially regarding the economic domain, and 313 argue that populations can be both resilient and vulnerable. For example, the high landrace 314 diversity of buckwheat of the Yi people in China makes them resilient to climate variability but 315 vulnerable to market conditions [51]. Furthermore, some of the adaptive responses that we 316 document are being undermined or challenged to varying degrees, differing by (and within) 12 317 populations; an example is the lack of capacity among Indigenous peoples on the Cook Islands to 318 practically integrate and apply ILK in climate change adaptation planning [87]. 319 We argue that long-term successful adaptation to climate change should aim to avoid any 320 increase in, and instead should reduce, social (e.g., loss of social bonds and mutual support), 321 economic (e.g., food insecurity due to poverty), and environmental (e.g., soil contamination) 322 vulnerability [27,28,88]. However, due to the complexity of climate change and adaptation in a 323 sociopolitical context, trade-offs and maladaptive outcomes are omnipresent, even when the best 324 intentions exist [89,90]. There is consequently an urgent need to discuss successful adaptation to 325 climate change through a holistic approach that includes, inter alia, long-term social, economic, 326 and environmental sustainability aspects and to consider ILK [88]. This is especially important 327 because 1) Indigenous and local food systems are undergoing rapid change due to environmental 328 and climate change [4**] and 2) these changes are not experienced in isolation but in a context 329 of various socio-economic, cultural, and political stressors [9]. In other words, these various 330 place-based conditions shape the way people respond to climate change impacts and determine 331 the long-term and system-wide efficiency and sustainability of adaptation and, thus, the 332 resilience and vulnerability of human-environmental systems [4**]. 333 Many ILK systems are rooted in a deep understanding and represent a process of social- 334 ecological memory accumulated over several generations [91]. Also, these ILK systems are 335 connected to specific environments (e.g., food systems) and social processes (e.g., livelihood) 336 shaped by shocks and stressors over the long term [4**]. Additionally, as shown in our and other 337 studies, ILPs are characterized by the high importance of social capital through the practice of 338 collective action and collaboration (e.g., food sharing), local institutions (e.g., farmers 339 associations), human agency (e.g., assets), and learning (e.g., learning-by-doing) [4**,10**,42]. 340 These characteristics can shape adaptive responses in the ILK setting and provide evidence for 341 building the resilience and sustainability of food systems. Furthermore, culture, beliefs, and a 342 high connection with and respect for nature foster sustainable resource use and impede any other 343 harm to the natural environment, implemented and controlled through customary institutions and 344 codes of ethics [92]. 345 In our study, we find that some ILK systems are experiencing a weakening of knowledge 346 systems and that this has the potential to result in the failure of sustainable adaptive capacity or 347 increase exposure and sensitivity to climate impacts and other impacts [10**,31]. The weakening 348 of ILK could stem from distractions in a process of social-ecological memory accumulation, for 349 example, the loss of language and cultural and livelihood practices (e.g., toward off-farm 350 activities), relocation, and increasing external influences, such as extension services and 351 schooling (Sri Lankan Coastal-Vedda believe that aspects of their ILK system are weakening, 352 due partly to three decades of ethnic conflict and social modernization) [10**,44]. In the 353 Canadian Arctic, some aspects of Inuit knowledge systems are weakening, as many elders 354 possess knowledge but do not practice it themselves. For example, some young Inuit have not 13 355 had to use survival skills on the ice, nor have they handled dog teams, read the sky, or sewn seal 356 skin [10**,42]. Thus, while ILK systems could result in resilience, their weakening could lead to 357 vulnerability. Such weakening could lead to, for example, more environmental degradation (e.g., 358 through the increased application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides as promoted by many 359 extension services, a loss of local resources, and unconstrained overexploitation of water 360 resources for the irrigation of cash crops) [47**] and a decrease in social bounds and the ethics 361 of reciprocity. Therefore, several studies support the application of hybrid knowledge that 362 combines ILK and scientific knowledge [93]. This can be a promising tool based on the premise 363 of a decolonized and respectful exchange with a common understanding that both knowledge 364 systems are equally valid, without any temptation to outperform each other, and guaranteeing the 365 preservation of local culture and beliefs. Some examples of the successful application of such 366 “hybrid knowledge” are reported for natural resource management including water, fisheries, and 367 mountainous ecosystems (e.g., [51,53,93]). 368 Given the multiple policy challenges demanding joint solutions that seek to bring together 369 sustainable development, climate change action, and disaster risk reduction, this assessment is 370 conceptualized as an initial step toward building a broad understanding of sustainable climate 371 adaptation responses in the context of ILK and their food systems. The five ILK-based adaptive 372 responses are: community-based adaptation; diversification; local governance and conflict 373 resolution schemes; land, soil, and water management; and traditional weather forecast. These 374 adaptive responses have significant potential for social and environmental sustainability but ILK 375 remains challenged and disadvantaged under economic aspects. ILK-based adaptive strategies 376 can show trade-offs in fostering resilience regarding one dimension of sustainability while 377 increasing vulnerability regarding another. The weakening of ILK systems can potentially fail 378 and be maladaptive in terms of sustainable climate adaptation. The policy focusing on successful 379 adaptation should aim at sustainability's social, economic, and environmental dimensions. Our 380 assessment serves as a learning platform to anticipate urgent adaptation policies and envisions 381 sustainable solutions to a wide range of fast-warming, small-scale agricultural and aquatic food 382 systems worldwide. 383 384 Acknowledgments: 385 The research leading to this paper has received funding from multiple sources. EKG received 386 funds from the International Development Research Centre-IDRC (108279-008) and the Social 387 Science and Humanities Research Council-SSHRC (752-2016-0148). AS received funds from 388 the European Research Council under an ERC Consolidator Grant (FP7-771056-LICCI) --this 389 work contributes to the “María de Maeztu” Programme for Units of Excellence of the Spanish 390 Ministry of Science and Innovation (CEX2019-000940-M). 391 392 393 394 14 395 References 396 1. Yap ML-M, Watene K: The sustainable development goals (SDGs) and indigenous 397 peoples: another missed opportunity? Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 398 2019, 20:451–467. 399 2. Fuso Nerini F, Sovacool B, Hughes N, Cozzi L, Cosgrave E, Howells M, Tavoni M, Tomei J, 400 Zerriffi H, Milligan B: Connecting climate action with other Sustainable Development 401 Goals. Nature Sustainability 2019, 2:674–680. 402 3. Shaffril HAM, Ahmad N, Samsuddin SF, Samah AA, Hamdan ME: Systematic literature 403 review on adaptation towards climate change impacts among indigenous people in 404 the Asia Pacific regions. Journal of cleaner production 2020, 258:120595. 405 4. Ford JD, King N, Galappaththi EK, Pearce T, McDowell G, Harper S: Resilience of 406 Indigenous peoples to environmental change. One Earth 2020, 2:532–543. 407 **Based on a systematic review of 227 articles, this study examines the common factors 408 affecting this resilience by illustrating how the interconnected roles of place, agency, institutions, 409 collective action, Indigenous knowledge, and learning help Indigenous peoples to cope and 410 adapt to environmental change. The study recognizes the importance of a place that provides a 411 foundation for belief systems, identity, knowledge, and livelihood practices that underlie 412 mechanisms through which environmental change is experienced. It further discusses 413 vulnerabilities associated with colonization, globalization and development patterns. 414 415 5. Huang S-M: Understanding disaster (in) justice: Spatializing the production of 416 vulnerabilities of indigenous people in Taiwan. Environment and Planning E: Nature and 417 Space 2018, 1:382–403. 418 6. Leite MS, Ferreira AA, Bresan D, Araujo JR, Tavares I do N, Santos RV: Indigenous 419 protagonism in the context of food insecurity in times of Covid-19. Revista de Nutrição 420 2020, 33:e200171. 421 7. Comberti C, Thornton TF, Korodimou M, Shea M, Riamit KO: Adaptation and resilience at 422 the margins: Addressing indigenous peoples’ marginalization at international climate 423 negotiations. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 2019, 61:14– 424 30. 425 8. Lemke S, Delormier T: Indigenous Peoples’ food systems, nutrition, and gender: 426 Conceptual and methodological considerations. Maternal & Child Nutrition 2017, 427 13:e12499. 428 9. FAO: The White/Wiphala Paper on Indigenous Peoples’ food systems. Rome. 429 https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4932en. 2021, 430 10. Galappaththi EK, Ford DJ, Bennett EM, Berkes F: Adapting to climate change in 431 small-scale fisheries: Insights from Indigenous communities in the global north and 432 south. Environmental Science and Policy 2021, 116:160–170. 15 433 **Based on a comparative analysis of two case studies from the Canadian Arctic (Inuit) and Sri 434 Lanka (Coastal-Vedda), this study investigates how different Indigenous fisheries systems 435 experience and respond to climate change impacts. Two key adaptive strategies emerged in 436 common across the two communities – diversification and adaptive co-management. Eight 437 sources of resilience that underpin adaptive capacity: i) use of diverse kinds of knowledge; ii) 438 practice of different ways of learning; iii) use of community-based institutions; iv) efforts to 439 improve human agency; v) unique worldviews; vi) specific cultural attributes that keep up with 440 adaptation; vii) effective social networks; and viii) a high level of flexibility. Definitive 441 characteristics that need to promote successful community adaptation: continuous learning 442 through knowledge co-production; capacity-building to improve human agency; a place-specific 443 nature (rootedness); collective action and partnerships through community-based institutions; 444 and flexibility. 445 446 11. Berkes F: Sacred ecology. Routledge; 2018. 447 12. Maldonado J: Engagement with indigenous peoples and honoring traditional 448 knowledge systems. Climatic Change 2016, 135:111–126. 449 13. Kitolelei S, Thaman R, Veitayaki J, Breckwoldt A, Piovano S: Na Vuku Makawa ni Qoli: 450 Indigenous Fishing Knowledge (IFK) in Fiji and the Pacific. Frontiers in Marine Science 451 2021, 8. 452 14. Folke C, Biggs R, Norström A, Reyers B, Rockström J: Social-ecological resilience and 453 biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecology and Society 2016, 21. 454 15. Singh C, Iyer S, New MG, Few R, Kuchimanchi B, Segnon AC, Morchain D: 455 Interrogating ‘effectiveness’ in climate change adaptation: 11 guiding principles for 456 adaptation research and practice. Climate and Development 2022, 14:650–664. 457 **Based on a literature review of 243 publications, this study response to the conceptual and 458 methodological challenges in framing effective adaptation. It synthesizes 11 principals of 459 effective adaptation, among others avoided maladaptation, reduced vulnerability and costs, and 460 increased resilience, sustainability, ecosystem conservation, wellbeing, economic benefits, 461 social justice and equity. It further applies those principles to empirical data from cases in Africa 462 and Asia. 463 464 16. Eriksen S, Aldunce P, Bahinipati CS, Martins RD, Molefe JI, Nhemachena C, O’brien K, 465 Olorunfemi F, Park J, Sygna L: When not every response to climate change is a good 466 one: Identifying principles for sustainable adaptation. Climate and development 2011, 467 3:7–20. 468 17. Brown K: Resilience, development and global change. Routledge; 2016. 469 18. Arora-Jonsson S: Virtue and vulnerability: Discourses on women, gender and climate 470 change. Global Environmental Change 2011, 21:744–751. 471 19. Snyder H: Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. 472 Journal of Business Research 2019, 104:333–339. 16 473 20. Bezner Kerr R, Hasegawa T, Lasco R, Bhatt I, Deryng D, Farrell A, Gurney-Smith H, Ju H, 474 Lluch-Cota S, Meza F, et al.: Food, Fibre, and Other Ecosystem Products. In Climate 475 Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the 476 Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, 477 D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. 478 Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. . Cambridge University Press, 479 Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA; 2022:713–906. 480 21. Ensor JE, Park SE, Attwood SJ, Kaminski AM, Johnson JE: Can community-based 481 adaptation increase resilience? Climate and Development 2018, 10:134–151. 482 22. Asfaw S, Pallante G, Palma A: Diversification strategies and adaptation deficit: 483 Evidence from rural communities in Niger. World Development 2018, 101:219–234. 484 23. Plummer R, Baird J: Adaptive co-management for climate change adaptation: 485 Considerations for the Barents Region. Sustainability 2013, 5:629–642. 486 24. Rivera-ferre M, Di Masso M, Vara I, Cuellar M, López-i-Gelats F, Bhatta G, Gallar D: 487 Traditional agricultural knowledge in land management: the potential contributions of 488 ethnographic research to climate change adaptation in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and 489 Pakistan. Climate and Development 2021, 13:644–661. 490 *This literature review with a regional focus on India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan highlights 491 the importance of traditional agricultural knowledge (TAK) for minimizing climate change 492 impacts. It argues that TAK-based land and soil management such as organic manuring and 493 composting, diversified cropping patterns such as intercropping, rotational and relay cropping, 494 land preparation, mulching and fallowing, and terracing, contributes to soil and water 495 conservation and thereby displays high potentials for climate change adaptation, yet however 496 often untapped in ethnographic research. 497 498 25. Iticha B, Husen A: Adaptation to climate change using indigenous weather forecasting 499 systems in Borana pastoralists of southern Ethiopia. Climate and Development 2019, 500 11:564–573. 501 26. Bhatasara S, Nyamwanza A: Sustainability: a missing dimension in climate change 502 adaptation discourse in Africa? Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences 2018, 503 15:83–97. 504 27. Barnett J, O’Neill S: Maladaptation. Global Environmental Change 2010, 20:211–213. 505 28. Juhola S, Glaas E, Linnér B-O, Neset T-S: Redefining maladaptation. Environmental 506 Science & Policy 2016, 55:135–140. 507 29. Singh C, Ford J, Ley D, Bazaz A, Revi A: Assessing the feasibility of adaptation 508 options: methodological advancements and directions for climate adaptation 509 research and practice. Climatic Change 2020, 162:255–277. 510 30. Jordan AJ, Huitema D, Hildén M, Van Asselt H, Rayner TJ, Schoenefeld JJ, Tosun J, 511 Forster J, Boasson EL: Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future 512 prospects. Nature Climate Change 2015, 5:977–982. 17 513 31. Pearce T, Ford J, Willox AC, Smit B: Inuit traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), 514 subsistence hunting and adaptation to climate change in the Canadian Arctic. Arctic 515 2015, 68:233. 516 32. Singh C, Osbahr H, Dorward P: The implications of rural perceptions of water scarcity 517 on differential adaptation behaviour in Rajasthan, India. Regional Environmental 518 Change 2018, 18:2417–2432. 519 33. Tschakert P, Barnett J, Ellis N, Lawrence C, Tuana N, New M, Elrick‐Barr C, Pandit R, 520 Pannell D: Climate change and loss, as if people mattered: values, places, and 521 experiences. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2017, 8:e476. 522 34. Sovacool BK, Linnér B-O, Goodsite ME: The political economy of climate adaptation. 523 Nature Climate Change 2015, 5:616–618. 524 35. Ford JD, Labbé J, Flynn M, Araos M, Team IR: Readiness for climate change adaptation 525 in the Arctic: a case study from Nunavut, Canada. Climatic change 2017, 145:85–100. 526 36. Shi L, Chu E, Anguelovski I, Aylett A, Debats J, Goh K, Schenk T, Seto KC, Dodman D, 527 Roberts D: Roadmap towards justice in urban climate adaptation research. Nature 528 Climate Change 2016, 6:131–137. 529 37. Chakrabarty S, Boksh F, Chakraborty A: Economic viability of biogas and green self- 530 employment opportunities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013, 28:757–766. 531 38. Dalton G, Allan G, Beaumont N, Georgakaki A, Hacking N, et al.: Economic and socio- 532 economic assessment methods for ocean renewable energy: Public and private 533 perspectives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015, 45:850–878. 534 39. Berbés-Blázquez M, Mitchell C, Burch S, Wandel J: Understanding climate change and 535 resilience: assessing strengths and opportunities for adaptation in the Global South. 536 Climatic Change 2017, 141:227–241. 537 40. Basel B, Goby G, Johnson J: Community-based adaptation to climate change in 538 villages of Western Province, Solomon Islands. Mar Pollut Bull 2020, 156:111–266. 539 41. van der Ploeg J, Sukulu M, Govan H, Minter T, Eriksson H: Sinking Islands, Drowned 540 Logic; Climate Change and Community-Based Adaptation Discourses in Solomon 541 Islands. Sustainability 2020, 12:7225. 542 *Using a qualitative content analysis, this paper tries to contextualize the claims made in 73 543 newspaper articles and reconstruct local socio-ecological events through an iterative process of 544 inference and induction. This study investigates the sinking islands narrative, and argues that a 545 narrow focus on the projected impacts of climate change distracts attention and resources from 546 more pressing environmental and development problems that are threatening rural livelihoods. 547 548 42. Galappaththi EK, Ford DJ, Bennett EM, Berkes F: Climate change and community 549 fisheries in the Arctic: A case study from Pangnirtung, Canada. Journal of 550 Environmental Management 2019, 250:11. 18 551 43. Galappaththi EK, Falardeau M, Harris LN, Rocha JC, Moore J-S, Berkes F: Resilience- 552 based steps for adaptive co-management of Arctic small-scale fisheries. 553 Environmental Research Letters 2022, 17:083004. 554 44. Galappaththi EK, Ford JD, Bennett EM: Climate change and adaptation to social- 555 ecological change: the case of indigenous people and culture-based fisheries in Sri 556 Lanka. Climatic Change 2020, 162:279–300. 557 45. Berkes F: Toward A New Social Contract: Community-based Resource Management and 558 Small-scale Fisheries. TBTI Global; 2021. 559 46. Adhikari L, Tuladhar S, Hussain A, Aryal K: Are Traditional Food Crops Really ‘Future 560 Smart Foods?’ A Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability 2019, 11:5236. 561 *This study draws on a case study in Nepal to assess and discuss the social, environmental and 562 economic sustainability of traditional food crops (TFCs). It concludes that TFCs have huge 563 potentials for being ‘future smart foods’ due to their high nutritional values, their key contribution 564 to agrobiodiversity and resilience of farming systems and their efficient energy use, among other 565 factors. However much stronger efforts towards the promotion of TFCs are required to revitalize 566 them in local farming systems. 567 568 47. Dhakal B, Kattel R: Effects of global changes on ecosystems services of multiple 569 natural resources in mountain agricultural landscapes. Sci Total Environ 2019, 570 676:665–682. 571 **This study provides detailed information on the positive and negative effects of external 572 factors on ecosystem services in a case study in Nepalese mountain farming communities. 573 Reported positive effects refer to amenity amelioration, hazard moderation, habitat 574 conservation, water supply and recreational ecosystem services. Seriously degraded or extinct 575 indigenous species and genetic diversity, and a decline in soil quality, water conservation, local 576 knowledge systems and spiritual ecosystem services are among the negative impacts. 577 578 48. Ndalilo L, Wekesa C, Mbuvi M: Indigenous and Local Knowledge Practices and 579 Innovations for Enhancing Food Security Under Climate Change: Examples from 580 Mijikenda Communities in Coastal Kenya. In Sustainability Challenges in Sub-Saharan 581 Africa II: Insights from Eastern and Southern Africa. Edited by Gasparatos A, Naidoo M, 582 Ahmed A, Karanja A, Fukushi K, Saito O. Springer; 2020:63–82. 583 49. Dutta S, Maiti S, Garai S, Abrar F, Jha S, Bhakat M, et al.: Analyzing adaptation 584 strategies to climate change followed by the farming community of the Indian 585 Sunderbans using Analytical Hierarchy Process. J Coast Conserv 2020, 24:61. 586 50. Ravera F, Reyes-García V, Pascual U, Drucker A, Tarrasón D, Bellon M: Gendered 587 agrobiodiversity management and adaptation to climate change: differentiated 588 strategies in two marginal rural areas of India. Agric Hum Values 2019, 36:455–474. 589 51. Song Y, Dong Y, Wang Y, Feng J, Long C: Tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum 590 Gaertn.) landraces cultivated by Yi people in Liangshan, China. Resour Crop Evol 591 2020, 67:745–761. 19 592 52. Singh R, Kumar A, Singh A, Singhal P: Evidence that cultural food practices of Adi 593 women in Arunachal Pradesh, India, improve social-ecological resilience: insights for 594 Sustainable Development Goals. Ecol Process 2020, 9:29. 595 53. Chaudhary B, Acciaioli G, Erskine W, Chaudhary P: Responses of the Tharu to climate 596 change-related hazards in the water sector: Indigenous perceptions, vulnerability and 597 adaptations in the western Tarai of Nepal. Clim Dev 2021, 13:816–829. 598 54. Novotny I, Tittonell P, Fuentes-Ponce M, López-Ridaura S, Rossing W: The importance of 599 the traditional milpa in food security and nutritional self-sufficiency in the highlands 600 of Oaxaca, Mexico. PLOS ONE 2021, 16:e0246281. 601 55. Son H, Kingsbury A, Hoa H: Indigenous knowledge and the enhancement of 602 community resilience to climate change in the Northern Mountainous Region of 603 Vietnam. Sustain Food Syst 2021, 45:499–522. 604 56. Hosen N, Nakamura H, Hamzah A: Adaptation to Climate Change: Does Traditional 605 Ecological Knowledge Hold the Key? Sustainability 2020, 12:676. 606 57. Balehegn M, Balehey S, Fu C, Liang W: Indigenous weather and climate forecasting 607 knowledge among Afar pastoralists of north eastern Ethiopia: Role in adaptation to 608 weather and climate variability. Pastoralism 2019, 9:8. 609 58. Mogomotsi P, Sekelemani A, Mogomotsi G: Climate change adaptation strategies of 610 small-scale farmers in Ngamiland East, Botswana. Climatic Change 2020, 159:441–460. 611 59. Radeny M, Desalegn A, Mubiru D, Kyazze F, Mahoo H, Recha J, et al.: Indigenous 612 knowledge for seasonal weather and climate forecasting across East Africa. Climatic 613 Change 2019, 156:509–526. 614 60. Nkuba M, Chanda R, Mmopelwa G, Kato E, Mangheni M, Lesolle D: Influence of 615 Indigenous Knowledge and Scientific Climate Forecasts on Arable Farmers’ Climate 616 Adaptation Methods in the Rwenzori region, Western Uganda. Environ Manage 2020, 617 65:500–516. 618 61. Camacho-Villa T, Martinez-Cruz T, Ramírez-López A, Hoil-Tzuc M, Terán-Contreras S: 619 Mayan Traditional Knowledge on Weather Forecasting: Who Contributes to Whom in 620 Coping With Climate Change? Front Sustain Food Syst 2021, 5:618453. 621 62. Ahmad Z, Rahman F, Dittmann A, Hussain K, Ihsanullah I: Water crisis in the Eastern 622 Hindu Kush: a micro-level study of community-based irrigation water management in 623 the mountain village Kushum, Pakistan. Erdkunde 2020, 74:59–79. 624 63. Postigo J: The role of social institutions in indigenous Andean Pastoralists’ 625 adaptation to climate-related water hazards. Climate Development 2021, 13:780–791. 626 64. Abeywardana N, Schütt B, Wagalawatta T, Bebermeier W: Indigenous Agricultural 627 Systems in the Dry Zone of Sri Lanka: Management Transformation Assessment and 628 Sustainability. Sustainability 2019, 11:910. 20 629 65. Maikhuri R, Rawat L, Maletha A, Phondani P, Semwal R, Bahuguna Y, et al.: Community 630 Response and Adaptation to Climate Change in Central Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India. 631 In Tropical Ecosystems: Structure, Functions and Challenges in the Face of Global Change. 632 Edited by Garkoti S, Van Bloem S, Fulé P, Semwal R. Springer; 2019:213–231. 633 66. Aniah P, Kaunza-Nu-Dem M, Ayembilla J: Smallholder farmers’ livelihood adaptation to 634 climate variability and ecological changes in the savanna agro ecological zone of 635 Ghana. Heliyon 2019, 5:e014922019. 636 67. Assefa Y, Yadav S, Mondal M, Bhattacharya J, Parvin R, Sarker S, et al.: Crop 637 diversification in rice-based systems in the polders of Bangladesh: Yield stability, 638 profitability, and associated risk. Agric Syst 2021, 187:102986. 639 68. Van Huynh C, Phuong Le Q, Hong Nguyen M, Tran P, Nguyen T, Pham T, et al.: 640 Indigenous knowledge in relation to climate change: adaptation practices used by the 641 Xo Dang people of central Vietnam. Heliyon 2020, 6:e05656. 642 69. Utete B, Phiri C, Mlambo SS, Muboko N, Fregene BT: Vulnerability of fisherfolks and 643 their perceptions towards climate change and its impacts on their livelihoods in a 644 peri-urban lake system in Zimbabwe. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2019, 645 21:917–934. 646 70. Grey M: Accessing seasonal weather forecasts and drought prediction information for 647 rural households in Chirumhanzu district, Zimbabwe. Jamba J Disaster Risk Stud 2019, 648 11:1–9. 649 71. Ubisi N, Kolanisi U, Jiri O: The Role of Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Rural 650 Smallholder Farmers’ Response to Climate Change: Case Study of Nkomazi Local 651 Municipality, Mpumalanga, South Africa. Journal of Asian and African Studies 2020, 652 55:273–282. 653 72. Theodory T: Understanding the relevance of indigenous knowledge on climate change 654 adaptation among mixed farmers in the Ngono River Basin, Tanzania. Afr J Sci 655 Technol Innov Dev 2021, 13:51–59. 656 73. Pearson J, McNamara K, Nunn P: iTaukei Ways of Knowing and Managing Mangroves 657 for Ecosystem-Based Adaptation. In Managing Climate Change Adaptation in the 658 Pacific Region. Edited by Leal Filho W. Springer International Publishing; 2020:105– 659 127. 660 **Based on interview and participant observation data collected across six rural villages in 661 western Vanua Levu, this study explores how iTaukei (Indigenous Fijian) communities have 662 sustainably managed mangrove ecosystems over time and how this knowledge and 663 experiences can enable future ecosystem-based adaptation options that are more sustainable 664 and effective. The findings demonstrate the importance of understanding, respecting and 665 utilizing Indigenous knowledge for local management and protecting ecosystems as part of 666 communities’ response to climate change adaptation. 667 668 74. Divine LM, Pearce T, Ford J, Solovyev B, Galappaththi EK, Bluhm B, Kaiser BA: Protecting 669 the future Arctic. One Earth 2021, 4:1649–1651. 21 670 75. Pauli N, Williams M, Henningsen S, Davies K, Chhom C, van Ogtrop F, et al.: “Listening to 671 the Sounds of the Water”: Bringing Together Local Knowledge and Biophysical Data 672 to Understand Climate-Related Hazard Dynamics. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 2021, 12:326– 673 340. 674 76. Ebhuoma E: A framework for integrating scientific forecasts with indigenous systems 675 of weather forecasting in southern Nigeria. Dev Pract 2020, 30:472–484. 676 77. Lavoie A, Lee J, Sparks K, Hoseth G, Wise S: Engaging with Women’s Knowledge in 677 Bristol Bay Fisheries through Oral History and Participatory Ethnography. Fisheries 678 2019, 44:331–337. 679 **Based on the interviews with women engaged in salmon fisheries in Bristol Bay, Alaska, the 680 study illustrates how oral history and participatory ethnography methods contribute to voices 681 being heard that have been excluded from fisheries research and management. The study 682 revealed that women’s knowledge might be critical in fisheries management decisions, 683 community resilience, and socio-ecological sustainability in a region facing increased threats 684 from climate change. Women shoulder major roles by contributing to the preservation of salmon 685 fishing knowledge and cultural values through cross-generational knowledge transfer. Their 686 participation in fisheries, deep knowledge of local resources, and education of the youth on the 687 cultural value of fishing and the environment are critical to community socio-cultural and 688 economic wellbeing. 689 690 78. Tilley A, Hunnam K, Mills D, Steenbergen D, Govan H, Alonso-Poblacion E, et al.: 691 Evaluating the Fit of Co-management for Small-Scale Fisheries Governance in Timor- 692 Leste. Front Mar Sci 2019, 6:00392. 693 79. Islam M, Nahiduzzaman M, Wahab MA: Fisheries co-management in hilsa shad 694 sanctuaries of Bangladesh: Early experiences and implementation challenges. Marine 695 Policy 2020, 117:103955. 696 80. Casagrande A, Salvatore R, Rover O, Chiodo E, Fantini A: Artisanal mollusc fisheries co- 697 management in Brazil and Italy: Institutional innovations to address environmental 698 crisis. J Environ Manage 2021, 291:112671. 699 81. Suasi T, Koya I: Strengthening the capacity of local communities for fostering 700 community-based resources management/co-management: a case study in 701 Khammouane Province, Lao PDR. Fish People 2019, 17:8–11. 702 82. Nguyen A, Hens L: Diversified responses to contemporary pressures on sloping 703 agricultural land: Thai farmer’s perception of mountainous landscapes in northern 704 Vietnam. Environ Dev Sustain 2021, 23:5411–29. 705 83. Upadhaya K, Barik S, Kharbhih V, Nongbri G, Debnath G, Gupta A, et al.: Traditional bun 706 shifting cultivation practice in Meghalaya, Northeast India. Energy Ecol Environ 2020, 707 5:34–46. 708 84. Halkos G, Gkampoura E: Where do we stand on the 17 Sustainable Development 709 Goals? An overview on progress. Econ Anal Policy 2020, 70:94–122. 22 710 85. Moyer J, Hedden S: Are we on the right path to achieve the sustainable development 711 goals? World Development 2020, 127:104749. 712 86. Nyantakyi-Frimpong H: What lies beneath: Climate change, land expropriation, and zaï 713 agroecological innovations by smallholder farmers in Northern Ghana. Land Use 714 Policy 2020, 92:104469. 715 87. de Scally D, Doberstein B: Local knowledge in climate change adaptation in the Cook 716 Islands. Local knowledge in climate change adaptation in the Cook Islands 2022, 14:360– 717 373. 718 88. Magnan A, Schipper E, Burkett M, Bharwani S, Burton I, Eriksen S, Gemenne F, Schaar J, 719 Ziervogel G: Addressing the risk of maladaptation to climate change. Wiley 720 Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2016, 7:646–665. 721 89. Schipper E: Maladaptation: When Adaptation to Climate Change Goes Very Wrong. 722 One Earth 2020, 3:409–414. 723 90. Akinyi D, Ng’ang’a S, Girvetz E: Trade-offs and synergies of climate change adaptation 724 strategies among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review. 725 Regional Sustainability 2021, 2:130–143. 726 91. Nykvist B, von Heland J: Social-ecological memory as a source of general and 727 specified resilience. Ecology and Society 2014, 19:26269552. 728 92. Tengö M, von Heland J: Adaptive capacity of local indigenous institutions: the case of 729 the taboo forests of southern Madagascar. In Adapting Institutions: Governance, 730 Complexity and Social-Ecological Resilience. Edited by Boyd E, Folke C. Cambridge 731 University Press; 2011:37–74. 732 93. Armitage D, Berkes F, Dale A, Kocho-Schellenberg E: Co-management and the co- 733 production of knowledge: Learning to adapt in Canada’s Arctic. Glob Environ Change 734 2011, 21:995–1004. 23