Wall, Caleb and Evers, Hans-Dieter (2006): Knowledge Loss: Managing Local Knowledge in Rural Uzbekistan. Published in: ZEF Working Papers Series No. 14 (2006)
Download (102kB) | Preview
Knowledge loss is not a remote phenomenon, unique to one knowledge system. Rather we argue that the loss of knowledge is an issue for other knowledge systems as well. Knowledge loss is certainly a concern for anthropologists working on indigenous knowledge, fearful of ‘losing’ indigenous knowledge entirely as a result of modernisation (cf. Cox, 2000). Equally, staff movements within the corporate world probably lead to a large amount of knowledge displacement, yet staff (and thus knowledge) retention is more often seen as a human resource than a knowledge management issue. Similarly in academia, which thrives on the wide interchange of knowledge and ideas and openly promotes the exchange of knowledge, much of this knowledge can be ‘leaked’ (i.e. it leaves academia for another knowledge community, say, a corporation) or it can be ‘lost’ altogether. Thus we attempt here to explain in theoretical terms how knowledge loss operates, what are the drivers of knowledge loss and how these can be ameliorated. We suggest that knowledge loss is a failure of knowledge management insofar as it demonstrates a lack of knowledge sharing, dissemination and use. The central argument being that knowledge must be reproduced (or stored in a repository) for it to be used and to continue to exist. Because local knowledge resides in individuals, who are apt to move to different knowledge systems (leakage) their doing so carries with them a considerable amount of knowledge. Key to reducing this is effective knowledge sharing during the time they are within the community or organisation. This provides the inherent benefit of greater knowledge utilisation through greater knowledge sharing, as well as reducing the risks of knowledge loss. Yet, individuals do not always share knowledge, when they do this sharing can be partial. In many cases this is because of the high transaction cost (and risk) associated with sharing their knowledge. We argue that knowledge management and knowledge governance theory needs to inform institutions (informal and formal policies) which can introduce better protections for individuals to share knowledge, in order to reduce the transaction costs of knowledge sharing. These transaction costs can be lowered by guaranteeing continued ownership of intellectual property, by establishing a proper policy framework for academic honesty and by enforcing these rules in a transparent manner. In the case of local knowledge the transaction costs are somewhat reduced by knowledge sharing within the family, shown in generational transfer of mastership. In the same way should projects, corporations and ultimately nation states develop structures which allow for enhanced knowledge sharing, by reducing the transaction cost of sharing this knowledge. Part of these systems must allow for knowledge which is no longer relevant, which is not useful or which is simply wrong, to be replaced by more appropriate knowledge. In this regard simple databases are somewhat counterproductive as they do not encourage the dynamic displacement and replacement of knowledge, which whilst it involves some knowledge ‘loss’ is actually a knowledge creation and sharing process. Thus we theorise knowledge loss as a phenomenon to be evidence of poor knowledge management. In its own right it is a failure of management and governance to allow knowledge resources, expensively produced within the community, to be lost. On a wider level it evidences a lack of knowledge reproduction and retention, which can be seen as a result of excessive transaction costs and risks to knowledge sharing.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Knowledge Loss: Managing Local Knowledge in Rural Uzbekistan|
|Keywords:||knowledge; knowledge management; development; rural economy; Usbekistan|
|Subjects:||D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R0 - General
D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
|Depositing User:||Prof. Dr. Hans-Dieter Evers|
|Date Deposited:||08. Mar 2008 16:20|
|Last Modified:||12. Feb 2013 03:34|
Ali, M., Lumpkin, T. A. and Farooq, U. (2003). Vegetable research and development in Central Asia: A guideline for setting priorities under data scarcity. AVRDC - The world vegetable center, 1-21. Baran, P. A. (1957). The Political Economy of Growth. Monthly Review Press. New York & London. Benz, B., Cevallos, E. J., Santana, M. F., Rosales, J. and Graf, S. M. (2000). Losing Knowledge About Plant Use in the Sierra de Manantlan Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Economic Botany, 54, 2, 183–191. Cox, P. A. (2000). Will Tribal Knowledge Survive the Millennium? Science, 7, 44-45. Evers, H.-D. (2000). "Globalization, Local Knowledge, and the Growth of Ignorance: The Epistemic Construction of Reality." Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science 28(1): 13-22. Evers, H.-D. (2005). “ 'Knowledge' and the Sociology of Science”, in Governing and Managing Knowledge in Asia. T. Menkhoff, H.-D. Evers and Y. W. Chay. Singapore, World Scientific: 61-70. Evers, H.-D. and T. Menkhoff (2005). “Expert Knowledge and the Role of Consultants in an Emerging Knowledge Society”, in Governing and Managing Knowledge in Asia. T. Menkhoff, H.-D. Evers and Y. W. Chay. Singapore, World Scientific: 143-164. Hornidge, A.-K. (2006). The Construction of K-Societies: Germany and Singapore. PhD Thesis TU Berlin, Institute of Sociology. Kandiyoti, D. (2002a). Post-Colonialism Compared: Potentials and Limitations in the Middle East and Central Asia. International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 34, 279-297. Kandiyoti, D. (2002b). Agrarian Reform, Gender and Land Rights in Uzbekistan, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Kandiyoti, D. (2003). 'Pathways of Farm Restructuring in Uzbekistan: Pressures and Outcomes' in Spoor, M. (Ed), Transition, Institutions, and the Rural Sector, Lexington Books. Maryland, pp. 143-162. Kuhn, T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (3rd Edition). University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Morgunov, A. and Zuidema, L. (2001). The Legacy of the Soviet Agricultural Research System for the Republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus, ISNAR Research Report. www.isnar.cgiar.org/publications/pdf/rr-20.pdf Peachey, E. J. (2004). The Aral Sea Basin Crisis and Sustainable Water Resource Managementin Central Asia. Journal of Public and International Affairs, 15, Spring. 16 Rasanayagam, J. (2002). Spheres of communal participation: placing the state within local modes of interaction in rural Uzbekistan. Central Asian Survey, 21, 1, 55-70. Ruzmetov, B., Rahimov, Z. and Rudenko, I. (2004). Analysis of Farmer Enterprises and Agricultural Markets in 2, N. (Ed), ZEF Work Papers for Sustainable Development in Central Asia. Spoor, M. (1999). Agrarian Transition In Former Soviet Central Asia: A Comparative Study Of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzsrtan And Uzbekistan, Working Paper 298, Institute of Social Studies. Stevens, S. (1997). Conservation Through Cultural Survival: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas. Island Press. Washington D.C. Tolstov, S. P. (1948). Following The Tracks Of Khorezmian Civilization. Academy Of Sciences Of The USSR (VASKhNIL). Unknown, A. p. d. (1988). The Agricultural System and the Adoption of New technologies. Fan Publishing House. Tashkent. Van Dusen, E. (2006). Evolving land tenure in rural Uzbekistan, a case study of smallholders and divserity in home gardens. Paper presented at the Workshop: "Assessing the linkages between and reform, land tenure, and land use". Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, May 25, 2006. Wall, C. (2004). Multiple Barriers to Technology Change in Rural Uzbekistan: A Development Perspective. Masters Thesis - Massey University, New Zealand. www.zef.de/download/articles/ wallMultiple_Barriers_technologychange.pdf Wall, C. and Lamers, J. (2004). Farmer Priority Setting: Issues and Research Needs For Khorezm, Uzbekistan. Central Asian Journal, 4, 1, 5-25. www.khorezm.uni-bonn.de/downloads/WPs/ZEF-UZ-WP03Wall.pdf Wall, C. (2006). Knowledge Mangement in Rural Uzbekistan: peasant, Projects and Post-Socialist Perspectives in Khorezm. Center for Development Research (ZEF). Bonn, University of Bonn: 356 pp.