Quantified Western scientific knowledge is often treated as the most “rational” and “objective” form of knowledge, which contributes to marginalise non-Western, traditional, locally-situated, or Indigenous knowledge systems. One Ocean Hub early-career researchers have shed a light on this imbalance in knowledge systems and on how it has led to the exclusion of certain communities from global governance processes, perpetuating inequitable and exclusive ocean practices.

Our recent article published in Frontiers for Marine Science discusses the influences of historical, social, and political factors on ocean biodiversity governance, and how these have created and reinforced hierarchies of knowledge. In exploring this topic, reflecting on our own positionalities, experiences, and research, we defined knowledge hierarchies as they relate to ocean governance as:

“The categorisation of knowledge based on its perceived value and legitimacy as is created and perpetuated by social structures and power dynamics, influencing its use and recognition.”

These hierarchies often prioritise quantified Western scientific knowledge as the most “rational” and “objective,” while marginalising non-Western, traditional, locally-situated, or Indigenous knowledge systems (see Figure 1). We argue that this imbalance in knowledge systems has led to the exclusion of certain communities and ways of knowing from global governance processes, reinforcing asymmetrical power structures that perpetuate inequitable and exclusive ocean governance.

Through examination of five case studies of research undertaken as part of the One Ocean Hub, and considering transdisciplinary and transformative ocean governance, we find divergent ways in which research can respond to knowledge hierarchies within ocean biodiversity governance. Using case studies, the various research approaches discussed highlight examples of:

•how gender gaps in ocean governance have been narrowed (see Golo et al., 2022)

•the power of ocean literacies in amplifying the voice of “future generations” (see Strand et al. 2023, Strand, Shields and Morgera, 2023, Shields et al. 2023)

•the opportunities that natural capital approaches provide for surfacing diverse knowledge types (see Niner et al., 2024a; Niner et al., 2024b; La Bianca et al., 2023; McQuaid et al., 2023)

•the invaluable role of intergenerational knowledge sharing the innovative way that arts-based approaches can tackle knowledge hierarchies (see Tshiningayamwe 2023; and here; Empatheatre 2021; and here).

The analysis highlights the importance of carefully selecting appropriate and contextual research methods to ensure formerly or currently silenced or neglected ocean knowledges and relationships with biodiversity are ‘made visible’ to governance. It also emphasises that co-production and transdisciplinary research approaches, whilst offering an approach to navigate the tensions between different values and power structures through transparent processes and collective decisions, do not offer a panacea to challenging knowledge hierarchies. 

We caution that without specific attention to the difficult decisions that need to be made regarding different interests, desires, and goals, knowledge hierarchies can be reproduced rather than challenged. To address knowledge hierarchies in ocean biodiversity governance research and to avoid their reproduction, careful selection of contextually relevant research methods, sensitive and reflective problematisation of research questions, and targeted efforts to re-balance how we engage with biodiversity are required.

Furthermore, researchers must acknowledge the historical biases and power imbalances that shape their fields and embrace aspects of discomfort, conflict and failure within our own research. The paper emphasises the need for a more inclusive approach that integrates diverse knowledge systems, recognising that knowledge is influenced by the context in which it is produced, including factors such as geography, race, gender, and socio-economic status.

We suggest that effective governance will require a multi-faceted approach that is sensitive to knowledge hierarchies and actively works to dismantle them. This involves understanding where power lies in knowledge production and being transparent about the positionalities of researchers, which refers to how their background and identity influence their work.

Most importantly, the paper calls for a commitment to equitable and inclusive knowledge production in order to address the complex challenges of ocean governance and specifically marine biodiversity conservation.

The paper was written by Holly Niner (University of Plymouth, UK), David Wilson (University of Strathclyde, UK), Kelly Hoareau (University of Tasmania)/ University of Seychelles, Mia Strand (University of Strathclyde/ Nelson Mandela University, South Africa), Jennifer Whittingham (University of Cape Town, South Africa), Dylan McGarry (Rhodes University, South Africa) Bola Erinosho (University of Cape Coast, Ghana), Sulley Ibrahim (University of Cape Coast, Ghana), Sirkka Tshiningayamwe (University of Namibia), Senia Febrica (University of Strathclyde), Alana Malinde SN Lancaster (University of West Indies), and Milica Prokic (University of Strathclyde).

•To find out more about the One Ocean Hub early-career researchers, check this page.

•And if you wish to know more about transdisciplinarity and Indigenous knowledge systems on the ocean, check our Learning Pathways on One Ocean Learn here >> and here >>

•and listen to our podcast on knowledge co-production here >>