An excellent article by friend-of-the-blog Alex Chepstow-Lusty in The Conversation highlights how the Incas built resilience into their landscapes in ways that modern farmers — and policymakers for that matter — would do well to revisit. By combining dung-producing llamas, irrigated terraces and carefully placed trees, Andean communities developed agricultural systems that thrived for centuries in a very challenging, and changing, environment.
These practices weren’t stop-gaps. They were sophisticated, locally adapted strategies, tested and refined over generations, that now offer clues for how to face climate change, in the high Andes and beyond.
But here’s the challenge: how do we, in today’s world, decide which elements of Indigenous knowledge to adopt, and how to adapt them? That’s where Chad Orzel’s thoughtful essay offers a valuable perspective. He argues that subjecting traditional practices to the same rigorous scientific standards as modern innovations is not an act of dismissal: it’s an act of respect. To test Indigenous methods carefully and fairly is to take them seriously, on an equal footing with other forms of knowledge.
The Inca legacy so well documented by Alex and his collaborators shows us that ancient practices can hold real solutions for modern crises. Orzel reminds us that by evaluating them with rigour, we not only unlock their potential, but also honour the people who developed and sustained them.
Indigenous knowledge deserves both recognition and respect — and the best way to respect knowledge is to test it, and put it to work.