Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect

Multiple knowledge systems and participatory actions

in slow-onset effects of climate change: insights and
perspectives in Latin America and the Caribbean
Allan Y Iwama1, Francisco Araos2, Jeremy Anbleyth-Evans2,
Victor Marchezini3, Arturo Ruiz-Luna4, Francisco Ther-Rı́os5,
Gonzalo Bacigalupe6 and Patricia E Perkins7

This paper advances the literature on multiple knowledge systems, Introduction

showing how Traditional and Local Knowledge (TLK) systems can
collaborate with scientific knowledge to advance understanding of
the slow-onset effects of climate change adaptation in Latin
America and the Caribbean. Such an approach implies
acknowledging the cultural heterogeneity of traditional (e.g.
indigenous) knowledge and local knowledge, and how this can link
to practical actions to adapt to climate and global change.
Integration of TLK with scientific knowledge in impact and risk
assessment may be necessary to develop both short and long-
term planning. The authors review how and why TLK needs to be
integrated into climate change adaptation in the Latin America and
the Caribbean (LAC), and offer a critical perspective and a vision
toward incorporation of TLK on climate risks and adaptation in LAC.
Addresses
1
Universidad de Los Lagos – Departamento de Arquitectura; CEDER,
Centro de Estudios del Desarrollo Regional y de Polı́ticas Públicas;
Laboratorio de Ciencia Ciudadana, Osorno, Chile
2
Universidad de Los Lagos – CEDER, Centro de Estudios del Desarrollo
Regional y de Polı́ticas Públicas; Laboratorio de Ciencia Ciudadana,
Osorno, Chile
3
CEMADEN – Centro Nacional de Monitoramento e Alertas de
Desastres Naturais, São José dos Campos, Brazil
4
CIAD – Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C.,
Mazatlán, Mexico
5
Universidad de Los Lagos – Departamento de Arquitectura, Osorno, Chile
6
University of Massachusetts Boston, College of Education and Human
Development & Universidad de Concepción, CREASUR –
Convergencias Regionalistas de Estudios Aplicados, Chile
7
York University, FES – Faculty of Environmental and Urban Change,
Toronto, Canada
Corresponding author: Iwama, Allan Y (allan.iwama@ulagos.cl)
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
This review comes from a themed issue on Slow onset events related
to climate change
Edited by Susana Adamo, Riyanti Djalante, Prabodh GD Chakrabarti,
Fabrice G Renaud, Amsalu Woldie Yalew, Doreen Stabinsky,
Zinta Zommers and Koko Warner
For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial
Available online 3rd March 2021
Received: 02 June 2020; Accepted: 31 January 2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.01.010
1877-3435/ã 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Slow-onset effects of climate change in Latin America
and the Caribbean
Many authors have shown that climate change, with its
myriad short to long-term effects, is a major threat to
people around the world [1–3]. In the Latin America and
Caribbean region (LAC), the short-term effects of climate
change related to the El Niño Southern Oscillation
(ENSO) are seen as the most threatening, and these
extreme weather events are predicted to become more
frequent [4–6]. While progress in international awareness
of phenomena like global warming and sea level rise
allows a window for preparedness, it does not seem to
have produced the levels of political commitment
required for short/medium-term adaptation actions.
The long-term effects of slow-onset changes are pro-
jected to be a significant driver of further degradation
of most terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems, their
biodiversity, and the living conditions of people residing
within these ecosystems [3,7,8,9,10].
These slow-onset changes have gradual impacts
[11,12,13] — including sea level rise, rising tempera-
tures, land and forest degradation, salinization, loss of
biodiversity, ocean acidification, desertification, and gla-
cial retreat, which can be distinguished from rapid-onset,
acute events including droughts or floods, characterized
as extreme weather events. Slow-onset events are inter-
annual-to-centennial changes that are also linked to cli-
matic variability and climate change.
Progress has been made regarding the knowledge of slow-
onset events, at both global and regional scales, for example
through the support provided by improvements in online
platform tools that visualize these future scenarios of cli-
mate change impacts. Despite these advances in climate
change modelling, current strategies still show an
‘adaptation deficit’ [9,14,15,16]. More attention is needed
to climate change’s causes and effects, both short and long-
term. Furthermore, studies [17,18,19,20,21] have
pointed out the need for climate research to include local
observations and historical knowledge as important inputs
to scientific data to support changes organized at the
community scale.

www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42

32 Slow onset events related to climate change
Recent studies have focused on local observations of
climate and environmental changes, sustainability, and
disaster risks at several scales, from the North American
Arctic to Polar and Tropical regions, Africa and Asia
[17,18,22]. In contrast, studies on participatory
approaches in climate research focusing on the LAC
region are scarce.
This article, through a systematic literature review, aims
to address this gap and explore ways to advance partici-
patory approaches in climate change observation and
adaptation. We sought out LAC-based studies that
include traditional and local knowledge (TLK), using
participatory research methodologies to understand the
processes and effects of slow-onset climate change. We
explored these studies in order to answer the following
questions: (i) Is there evidence that these approaches can
describe and scale-up participatory actions in the LAC
region, whilst contributing to global mitigation efforts at
local to global scales? (ii) Are there projects that consider
how inclusion of TLK maintains social representation
and community cohesion, with sufficient data quality for
comparisons at different scales? (iii) What are the varie-
ties, typologies, and levels of participation in these
studies? Based on our findings, this paper goes on to
review how and why TLK can contribute to climate
change adaptation in LAC, whilst offering a critical
perspective and a vision towards realizing greater levels
of community participation and more extensive use of
TLK observations on climate risks and adaptation in the
LAC region.
In this context, this paper uses the concept of Tradi-
tional and Local Knowledge (TLK) to refer to knowl-
edge or observations that have been accumulated across
generations as part of collective and cultural practices in
the environments of stateless nations and local ecolog-
ically dependent communities such as small-scale fishers
[23]. We recognize that the term Indigenous means
communities with strong relationships between ancestral
and socio-cultural and historical aspects with native
occupants of ancestral lands [20]. Their knowledge
includes their own conceptualization of sustainability,
based on their own culture, which differs from non-
Indigenous discourses of sustainable growth [24,25].
The TLK concept includes Indigenous knowledge,
traditional knowledge, traditional ecological knowledge,
local ecological knowledge, farmers’ knowledge, folk
knowledge and Indigenous science [19,20,26,27].
Our research underscores that Indigenous and other
ecologically dependent local communities need to not
only be engaged with the climate change research proj-
ect, but active participants in all phases of research [28]
(e.g. in collecting, recording, assessing, constructing,
learning, and transforming ways of doing research and
adaptation). Community participation through observa-
tions of ecological and slow-onset change aims to avoid
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
extractive research,1 and support knowledge feedbacks
between communities and scientists. To adequately
capture the complexity of interconnected systems
requires an integrated, cross-sectoral approach including
the traditional and local knowledge of ‘non-scientists’ —
local participants as well as outside researchers
[18,24,30,31].
Studies of multiple knowledge systems and local
observations on a global scale
Studies have shown that scientists are increasingly recog-
nizing the relevance of Traditional and Local Knowledge
(TLK) in providing observations for adaptation to the
effects of climate change [17,18,20,28,32,33,34,35],
conservation of biodiversity [36,37], and global environ-
mental change [26,27,38]. Moreover, these studies have
identified the importance of participatory approaches for
including local observations and understanding their appro-
priate contexts, scales, and ways to assess people’s engage-
ment in risk governance.
In turn, participation implies that individuals and/or social
groups have a right to take part in the democratic process.
Several authors have shown that it is necessary to recog-
nize that participatory processes are associated with a
structure of power relations [20,39,40,41]. Frequently,
this power structure may conflict with non-dominant
worldviews and/or forms of knowledge, such as traditional
and local knowledge systems. Therefore, when we use
the term ‘participatory approaches’ in this paper, we refer
to approaches that ensure the rights of traditional and
local communities to exercise their citizenship, but also
perspectives that describe who can participate in deci-
sion-making processes through the inclusion of their
observations, and how they would do so.
Nakashima et al. [42], based on Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports, show that
there is an expanding global awareness of Indigenous
peoples’ issues in general. Their review states that the
role of Indigenous knowledge in climate change observa-
tions, adaptation and mitigation can be expanded. Where
TLK can interact with scientific knowledge through
citizen science monitoring programs or other participatory
methods, local perceptions of climate change can help to
supplement poor data baselines with data to which scien-
tists otherwise lack access. TLK can also work to legiti-
mize local community changes that might not otherwise
be noted. The interaction of TLK with scientific knowl-
edge can support local perceptions, expand the
1
We adopt the idea of ‘extractive research’ used by Gaudry [29]: “In
extractive research, something meaningful is removed: the context, values, and
on-the-ground struggles of the people who provide data to the researcher. [ . . . ]
When the ‘objects of research’ are Indigenous peoples, and research is conducted
on them rather than with them, familiar colonial narratives that justify
occupation and oppression often result [ . . . ] Extraction research tends to
rehash stories of dependency, defeat, and alienation.”
www.sciencedirect.com
 Slow-onset events in Latin America and Caribbean Iwama et al. 33
geographical and historical scope of the perceived legiti-
macy of TLK, and broaden the influence of TLK climate
change observations [43].
An increasing number of studies demonstrate the impor-
tance of integrating TLK and scientific knowledge in
climate change and adaptation research. Despite this,
there are significant challenges which require discussion,
related to integrating TLK and scientific knowledge in
climate change and adaptation research: (i) the recogni-
tion of TLK in scientific research, while colonial power
structures continue; (ii) the discontinuity of long-term
participatory research; (iii) the extractive research model;
(iv) the search language of investigation methodologies.
We return to these challenges in Sections ‘Local observa-
tions on climate research in Latin America and the
Caribbean’ and ‘Do participatory approaches in climate
research in Latin America and the Caribbean include
traditional and local knowledge?’ below.
We also share insights and perspectives on climate change
from multiple knowledge systems in Latin America and
the Caribbean, as contributions to the global discussion
towards a more integrative research approach to climate
research and public policy,
Literature review methodology
Table SM1 includes seven global-scale comparative
review articles that include 238 LAC-related studies, with
findings identifying local observations on different
themes: climate change [17,18,20], sustainability
and environmental changes [26,44], and disaster risks
[22,45,46]. This table helps us to discuss elements that
must be investigated in more detail to understand why
there are fewer studies on local/TLK observations in LAC
when compared to other regions of the globe.
Our literature review was organized in three steps to
explore TLK in participatory approaches to LAC climate
research: (1) use of two conceptual search terms —
‘Climate change and adaptation’ and ‘Participatory
approach’; (2) classification by types of slow-onset events,
extreme events, or both and exclusion criteria; and (3)
classification by level of participation in the research
[20,45–47]. A priori, we found documents from
2001 to 2019, but we did not impose date restrictions
in our preliminary search.
In Step 1, we conducted a systematic review using Sco-
pus, Science Direct, Scielo, Web of Science, and Google
Scholar, including grey literature such as regional reports,
policy and conference documents. We searched for key-
words on two overarching topics, focusing on LAC: (a)
Climate change and adaptation; AND (b) Participatory
approach (see Figure 1). The search was carried out with
keywords in English, Spanish and Portuguese.
www.sciencedirect.com
In Step 2, we classified the articles according to the types
of slow-onset and extreme weather events discussed,
following the categories defined by the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
[11,12,13]. The impacts of climate change pertained to
(a) Slow-onset events — these included desertification,
glacial retreat, and related impacts, as well as forest
degradation, loss of biodiversity, ocean acidification, ris-
ing temperatures and sea level rise; (b) Extreme weather
events — these included drought, heat waves, storm
surges, tropical cyclones and floods; (c) Both slow-onset
and extreme events — when the article presented both
slow-onset events and extreme weather events; (d) Exclu-
sion criteria — we used three varieties of exclusion
criteria: (1) that explicitly used an integrative approach
to observe ecosystem disturbances but did not necessarily
associate these effects with climate change; (2) that
explicitly mentioned a participatory approach on climate
change and adaptation and sustainability, but carried out a
research review or associate with natural hazard; (3) that,
while recognizing the importance of TLK and participa-
tory approach, did not apply a participatory method for
integrating local observation. Table SM2 shows the arti-
cles excluded based on these criteria.
In Step 3, we classified participation as either passive/low or
active/high, referring to the interaction between the scien-
tists and the participants [20,45,47]. In general, what was
understood to be passive participation meant that there was
a formal or contractual agreement between both parties.
This meant the participants were effectively data subjects,
with no specific benefits from participating. In contrast,
active participation was associated with collaborative activ-
ities between scientists and local communities, such as co-
designing the research project. We adapted these terms
using the question #Q1: “Which level of participation?” to
describe the level of participation according to the power
relations between scientists and participants. We catego-
rized these levels as informative/ consultative, analytical,
collaborative with strong orientation by scientists, and
finally, collaborative with community members and scien-
tists contributing equally in co-creation/ co-production. We
classified the methods adopted in these studies, using
question #Q2: “Which participatory methods were
implemented?”, to refer to such methods as focus groups,
social cartography, participant observation, interviews, and
so on. To differentiate the diverse types of knowledge
involved, we selected a participatory approach that exclu-
sively used local knowledge (farmers, local community),
traditional knowledge (Indigenous and other ethnic
groups), or both TLK knowledge systems, using question
#Q3:“Who participates?”.
Local observations on climate research in
Latin America and the Caribbean
Based on the findings of seven global systematic review
articles (Table SM1), we observed that there is an
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
34 Slow onset events related to climate change
Figure 1
Representation of the review methodology.
Credits: the icons were used from the Noun Project. The icons for traditional knowledge were produced by Canita Ilustradora.
apparent dearth of studies on local observations of climate
and environmental changes in Latin America and the
Caribbean (LAC) — Savo et al. [18] found 96 studies
(9.4% of total findings) in LAC, followed by Hicks et al.
[46] with 18 studies (16.9% of total studies identified).
Although these review articles take different approaches
to paper and document selection, in general these find-
ings also indicate that scaling up research based on local
observations is scarce in LAC.
There are some elements that must be investigated in
more detail to understand why there are fewer studies on
TLK and local observations in LAC when compared to
other regions in the world. First, despite the recognition
of TLK in scientific research, colonial power structures
continue to be present in LAC, without sufficient respect
by academic and public policy institutions for the episte-
mic diversity of TLK [25,26,28,29,38,40,48]. This
may result in an extractive research model which does not
recognize the role of local observations to support
research on climate change and sustainability.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Second, the discontinuity of long-term participatory
research, due to lack of or limited funding [18,40],
results in a series of specific case studies with scarce
funding to disseminate their findings locally and continue
engaging with local research participants over time. In
turn, the result of this is a limited ability to report on
collaborative, participatory research findings in studies
that effectively show these results. This shortcoming is
particularly unfortunate regarding research on slow-onset
climate impacts.
Third, another potential hazard is a lack of equipment and
recording tools for local observations — such as GPS,
audio recorders, cameras, and so on — and/or resources to
train local working groups and community-based research
partners. These can be very important to strengthen
bonds of trust, and promote the co-production and dis-
semination of knowledge, as well as influencing the
effectiveness of local observations. Such lack of capacity
building of local groups affects how participatory research
is conducted, often characterizing an extractive research
www.sciencedirect.com
 Slow-onset events in Latin America and Caribbean Iwama et al. 35
model. If communities share their knowledge, with little
feedback or benefits in return, this results in the advance-
ment of research and professional accomplishments by
certain groups of scientists at the expense of local knowl-
edge-sharing and awareness-building within the commu-
nities, without which the local community will not be able
to benefit from its results —a betrayal of their participa-
tion. One way of seeking to minimize this is to build deep,
long-term reciprocity among those involved, with respect,
transparency, responsibility and trust in the local place.
The fourth challenge we noted is that the search language
itself can be a barrier. Because of the global dominance of
the English-language literature, the review studies have
been conducted in English only, producing a disadvan-
tage in the search for critical results about the LAC region
that are reported in Spanish or in Portuguese. The find-
ings of Savo et al. [18] or Guerrero-Gatica et al. [49], who
based their searches on terms with at least two languages
(English and Spanish), corroborate this problem. Their
research documents a much larger number of studies and
initiatives using the terms of TLK and local observations
in LAC, when compared with studies performed in
English only (Table SM1). These four elements are
further discussed in Section 4, in light of our review
results.
Do participatory approaches in climate
research in Latin America and the Caribbean
include traditional and local knowledge?
We found 87 studies with 147 observations about slow-
onset events and participatory approaches in LAC. More
than 2/3 of slow-onset observations are associated with
rising temperatures (29.3% | n = 43), land and forest
degradation (27.9% | n = 41) and loss of biodiversity
(15.6% | n = 23), found mainly in multi-site studies dis-
tributed over LAC [34,50,51]. More than 60% (n = 94) of
studies were done with local communities and 26.5%
(n = 39) with Indigenous people, exclusively, followed
by 9.5% (n = 14) by both TLK.
Figure 2 shows the geographic distribution of studies
included in our literature review. In the map we also
represent the extreme weather events — which in LAC
continue to receive the most attention [12] — with a total
of 215 observations, 53% of which were associated with
local observations of flood risk (n = 59) or drought risk
(n = 55). The list of references from the literature review
with #Q1, #Q2 and #Q3 analysis is available in the sup-
plementary material — Table SM3.
Our findings showed 58.5% (n = 86) of the studies associ-
ated with slow-onset events are related to collaborative
research, with guidance by the scientific researchers
followed by informative/consultative research (19% |
n = 28) and analytical research (18.4% | n = 27) —
Figure 3.
www.sciencedirect.com
All of these studies acknowledged the importance of
integrative analysis, using local or traditional knowledge
in different disciplines of understanding. Those identi-
fied were disaster risk [22,46,52,53,54,55], marine eco-
logical monitoring [56], and biodiversity and ecosystem
change [26,30,44]. Despite this, our investigation rein-
forces that there remains a dominant extractive model in
which researchers use TLK without co-design or collab-
orative analysis. We found just 4.1% (n = 6) of these
studies involved mutual collaboration to co-create com-
plementary knowledges; five were associated with land
and forest degradation and one with rising temperatures
in relation to agriculture and land use.
However, we highlight that more than half (58.5% |
n = 86) of these studies associated with TLK had a
collaborative approach with researcher leadership. These
included studies focusing on rising temperatures (29.1% |
n = 25), land and forest degradation (22.1% | n = 19), loss
of biodiversity (17.4% | n = 15) and sea level rise (16.3% |
n = 14). Particularly, studies conducted on land/forest
degradation, loss biodiversity and rising temperatures
are related with TLK’s importance in protecting territo-
rial rights and traditional cultures. These are geographi-
cally distributed in mountain regions such as the Andes
[34,57,58] or mountains in Central America [59–61],
Amazonian tropical forests [62,63], and coastal zones
[34,64,65] including the Caribbean region [66–70].
We identify that a group of community-based adaptation
studies show that climate changes indicate a cascade
effect is likely between slow-onset and extreme events.
In Peru and Mexico, for example, communities have been
observing a trend of rising temperatures, forest degrada-
tion and glacial retreat [71,72], resulting in drought, flood
or increased frost. In turn, these events require commu-
nity-based adaptation to reduce impact on agricultural
production, which is important for the subsistence econ-
omy of these local communities.
Slow-onset observations can provide important signals of
climatic effects triggered by human activities. They can
in the short-term cause droughts, heavy rainfalls, or
heatwaves. This can cause cascading and interconnected
effects, which has increased fires and forest degradation
such as in Mexico [33]. Local communities have
responded with locally appropriate changes in agroeco-
logical practices to cope and adapt to climate effects (i.e.
in Mexico [72], Guatemala [50,61], Honduras [50], Nicar-
agua [50,73], Colombia [50] Peru [72,74], Bolivia [75],
Brazil [76]. These practices also represent examples of
epistemologies in resistance, as communities struggle to
ensure their culture and ancestry in their territories.
A smaller number of these studies consider glacial retreat
(6.1% | n = 9). All of these are in the mountains of Peru or
Bolivia [34,77,78]. We highlight that studies related to
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
36 Slow onset events related to climate change

Figure 2

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Slow-onset events and participatory approaches in Latin America and Caribbean, based on the literature review (Table SM4).

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42 www.sciencedirect.com

 Slow-onset events in Latin America and Caribbean Iwama et al. 37
Figure 3
Slow-onset events by typology of participation in the papers reviewed (Table SM4).
ocean acidification are concentrated in the Caribbean
region [67,69,79,80], and draw attention to protection
of reef corals in this region, which serves as a habitat
for important marine biodiversity. Also, all these studies
are associated with collaborative research, led by
researchers (2.7% | n = 4). In the Dominican Republic
[69], Jamaica [67] and Barbados [79], in addition to
acidification effects, there are impacts of increasing ocean
surface temperature and salinization on mangroves or
estuaries. Finally, the smallest number of studies relate
to desertification in Argentina [51], Peru [81] and Brazil
[76] (2% | n = 3), associated with analytical and informa-
tive/consultative research.
Our findings showed that so-called ‘participatory’ research
approaches to slow-onset climate effects rarely included
research co-design. Instead, studies about slow-onset
events that were labelled participatory approaches tended
to be led by researchers and/or to exemplify extractive
research. Considering that there are an increasing number
of studies taking transdisciplinary approaches, transpar-
ency in the description of data and methods is a necessary
condition if scaling-up projects is a goal. This is particularly
important for those that involve participatory approaches
on climate change [20], sustainability [26], or the socio-
ecological nexus [82]. Several authors have already
www.sciencedirect.com
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
emphasized the importance of participatory research,
highlighting steps that can deepen participation at the
level of community co-production in research projects
[20,21,26,28,30,40,48]. In addition, the documen-
tation and research protocols for local observations can be
supplemented by strengthening the ‘community of
practice’ to ensure that feedback circulates around the
community [83]. In order to develop a structure for the
integration of local observations of climate change in the
future, these studies highlight that it is important to ensure
that the narratives and cosmological views of traditional
knowledge-holders are equally weighted whilst being
understood in their own context [26,28,48].
Furthermore, whilst developing co-design and co-produc-
tion of knowledge in this context, one must identify the
epistemic and ontological differences of the dominant
narratives [41,47]. This can work to decentralize power
away from academia [40] and support acknowledgment
of TLK as an equally important knowledge system
[21,26].
Our review showed that with rare exceptions, there is a
scarcity of climate studies on the LAC region that inte-
grate traditional and local knowledge. In fact, while there
are many studies that investigate vulnerability, exposure
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
38 Slow onset events related to climate change
to weather events, and climate projections, there are still
no large-scale or multi-site studies that systematically
associate these factors with slow-onset climate effects.
This is acknowledged by Guerrero-Gatica et al.’s [49]
literature review on Chile’s traditional and local knowl-
edge and Reyes-Garcı́a et al.’s [17] global scale review of
local observations of climate change.
Studies integrating local knowledge with scientific data for
disaster risk reduction research have been conducted in
many countries in LAC, including Chile [84–86], Brazil
[53,87], Peru [88] and Caribbean region [67,69,79,89,90].
These studies have identified the diversity of knowledges
involved, and the importance of integrating a multiplicity of
approaches to collaborative learning exchanges
[16,28,48]. Parsons et al. [47] and Klenk et al. [28] rein-
force that co-design in climate research requires the inves-
tigators to adapt culturally to the local context, which
frequently makes the research much more time-intensive.
For these participatory elements to come together and
succeed, funding for long-term research is required.
Long-term projects can promote social learning by both
scientists and the community, and community autonomy
in decisions about their territory, while also building trust
between scientists and communities and developing
close collaboration over time [17,22]. This in turn
can help produce new knowledge towards sustainability
and understanding global climate change [31]. When the
research topic itself is slow-onset climate change, such a
long-term approach is particularly appropriate.
Conclusions
We found that there are a few, though not many, studies
on Latin America and the Caribbean that adopt partici-
patory approaches to slow-onset climate change, in addi-
tion to studies focusing on extreme weather events. Based
on our findings, we believe that there is a need for studies
to more fully describe and emphasize participatory
approaches, to deepen participation and increase the
benefits for those involved. Although many studies and
scientists recognize the importance of TLK in climate
research, we still observed that the majority in the LAC
region still reflect an extractive model of research — an
approach that does not fully recognize the role of local
observations to support research on climate change or
sustainability, and which continues to reinforce the dom-
inant power structures of academia.
Our focus on the LAC region showed the importance of
considering studies written in Spanish and Portuguese.
On the other hand, it also showed the need to investigate
the reasons why TLK and climate research are not more
widely represented in research in the LAC region. We
found research on several initiatives that are already in
progress — for example, System Observation and Monitoring
in the Indigenous Amazon (SOMAI) and Cemaden-Educaça˜o
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
[87] in Brazil and Proyecto Glaciares in Peru — that have
the potential to implement systematic research whilst
moving forward the co-production of knowledge and
literature, by assessing social representation and commu-
nity cohesion.
Despite this, more than two-thirds of the documents we
found were written in English. It seems the LAC
researchers and TLK holders often need to seek interna-
tional funds to support their participatory projects and
initiatives (e.g. the Glaciares project in Peru or SOMAI
project in Brazil, with funding from a Swiss agency and
the Norwegian Embassy, respectively), which results in
publications written in English. Future research may be
able to investigate whether there is a relationship
between the lack of studies on TLK and climate research
in LAC written in a native language (Portuguese, Span-
ish) and national funding sources.
We agree with investigators who have pointed out that
collaboration among researchers and local communities
[17,21,30,40,48] can help to build a community of
practice, creating spaces for collaboration between TLK
holders that involves the integration of multiple
knowledges.
To be able to scale-up these approaches, or perhaps
more appropriately to scale them down in a more
horizontal way, we believe it is key that participatory
and citizen-science projects support the co-production
of research with traditional and local knowledge
holders. More reflexive research practices are needed,
and multiple knowledge bases and epistemologies
should have a role in the working practices of scientific
research, in the increasingly dynamic and vital field of
climate change research [30]. Knowledge production
must be situated ethically within the local cultural
context. At the same time, expanding the principles
of transparency with open data and replicable method-
ologies is also important.
In this sense, efforts to facilitate dialogues among multi-
ple knowledge systems and to promote knowledge-action
networks [83] can open new paths of collaboration to
mobilize funding in a way that ensures the long-term
continuation of participatory research and citizen science
projects. For example, we note that projects should be
able to attract funding that can support local commu-
nities’ current capacities and guarantee longer time-series
and richer local observations, whilst building skills and
agency and providing communities with better equip-
ment for collecting data. These improvements in turn can
strengthen bonds of trust between researchers and com-
munities, and thus promote the co-production, dissemi-
nation, and application of useful knowledge about the
long-term impacts of climate change and slow-onset
events.
www.sciencedirect.com
 Slow-onset events in Latin America and Caribbean Iwama et al. 39
Declaration of competing interest
The authors report no declarations of interest.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by A.Y.I. – ANID/FONDECYT [3180705/2018],
Faperj [202413/2017] and Fapesp [2010/18501-8]; F.A. – ANID/
FONDECYT [11180066/2018] and ANID/PAI [79170113/2017]; J.A-E. –
ANID/FONDECYT [3190473/2019]; V.M. – Fapesp [2018/06093-4]; A.R-
L. – CONACYT [PN-2017-4764]; and P.E.P. – International Development
Research Centre and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada through Universities Canada, The Rideau Hall Foundation, and the
Community Foundations of Canada – Queen Elizabeth Scholars project on
“Ecological Economics, Commons Governance, and Climate Justice”
[2017-0082].
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material related to this article can be
found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cosust.2021.01.010.
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review,
have been highlighted as:
 of special interest
 of outstanding interest
1. Adger WN, Brown I, Surminski S: Advances in risk assessment
for climate change adaptation policy. Phil Trans R Soc A 2018,
376:20180106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0106.
2. Cinner JE et al.: Building adaptive capacity to climate change in
tropical coastal communities. Nat Clim Change 2018, 8:117-123
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41558-017-0065-x.
3. Anderson SE et al.: The dangers of disaster-driven responses
to climate change. Nat Clim Change 2018, 8:651-653 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0208-8.
4. Cai W et al.: Climate impacts of the El Niño–Southern
Oscillation on South America. Nat Rev Earth Environ 2020,
1:215-231 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0040-3.
5. Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Dahe Q (Eds): Managing the Risks
of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change
Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.
6. Rodrigues RR, Taschetto AS, Sen Gupta A, Foltz GR: Common
cause for severe droughts in South America and marine
heatwaves in the South Atlantic. Nat Geosci 2019, 12:620-626
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0393-8.
7. Reguero BG, Losada IJ, Dı́az-Simal P, Méndez FJ, Beck MW:
Effects of climate change on exposure to coastal flooding in
Latin America and the Caribbean. PLoS One 2015, 10:e0133409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133409.
8. Melet A, Meyssignac B, Almar R, Le Cozannet G: Under-
estimated wave contribution to coastal sea-level rise. Nat Clim
Change 2018, 8:234-239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-
0088-y.
9. Nagy GJ et al.: Climate vulnerability, impacts and adaptation in
 Central and South America coastal areas. Reg Stud Mar Sci
2019, 29:100683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2019.100683
This paper focused a non-systematic review on vulnerability elements,
impacts, constraints to adaptation in Central and South America. The
authors pointed out there is an adaptation deficit in the implementation of
measures and strategies against climate-related hazards, such as sea
level rise.
10. Wong PP et al.: Coastal systems and low-lying areas. Climate
Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A:
Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge University Press; 2014:361-409.
www.sciencedirect.com
11. Siegele L: Loss & Damage: The theme of slow onset impact.
2012:20.
12. UNFCCC: Slow Onset Events. . [Online]. Available: https://unfccc.
 int/resource/docs/2012/tp/07.pdf 2012
This working paper brings an important concept about slow-onset and
extreme weather effects of climate change.
13. UNFCCC: Loss and Damage: Online Guide. . [Online]. Available:
https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/
Online_Guide_feb_2020.pdf 2020.
14. CEPAL: Efectos del Cambio Climático en la Costa de América
Latina y el Caribe. Efectos Teóricos. . [Online]. Available: https://
www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/3996-efectos-cambio-
climatico-la-costa-america-latina-caribe-efectos-teoricos 2012.
15. Calil J, Reguero BG, Zamora AR, Losada IJ, Méndez FJ:
 Comparative Coastal Risk Index (CCRI): a multidisciplinary
risk index for Latin America and the Caribbean. PLoS One 2017,
12:e0187011 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187011
This study employs a combination of machine learning clustering tech-
niques (Self Organizing Maps and K-Means) and a spatial index, to assess
coastal risks in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) on a comparative
scale.
16. Barnes ML et al.: Social determinants of adaptive and
transformative responses to climate change. Nat Clim Change
2020, 10:823-828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0871-4.
17. Reyes-Garcı́a V et al.: A collaborative approach to bring insights
 from local observations of climate change impacts into global
climate change research. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 39:1-8
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.04.007
This paper based on a review of research on place-based observations of
climate change impacts, exploring ways to address these challenges. The
authors pointed out that a network coordinating the scalability of place-
based research on climate change impacts is needed to bring Indigenous
and local knowledge into global research and policy agendas.
18. Savo V, Lepofsky D, Benner JP, Kohfeld KE, Bailey J, Lertzman K:
 Observations of climate change among subsistence-oriented
communities around the world. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:462-
473 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2958
This paper conducted a meta-analysis of climatic changes observed by
subsistence-oriented communities. The authors suggest that climate
change is having profound disruptive effects at local levels and that local
observations can make an important contribution to understanding the
pervasiveness of climate change on ecosystems and societies.
19. Nakashima DJ, Galloway McLean K, Thulstrup HD, Ramos
Castillo A, Rubis JT: Weathering Uncertainty: Traditional
Knowledge for Climate Change Assessment and Adaptation. .
[Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
259609164_Weathering_Uncertainty_Traditional_Knowledge_for_
Climate_Change_Assessment_and_Adaptation Paris: UNESCO,
and Darwin, UNU; 2012.
20. David-Chavez DM, Gavin MC: A global assessment of
 Indigenous community engagement in climate research.
Environ Res Lett 2018, 13:123005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-
9326/aaf300
This paper provides the first global systematic review of levels of Indi-
genous community participation and decision-making in all stages of the
research process (initiation, design, implementation, analysis, dissemi-
nation) in climate field studies that access Indigenous knowledge. The
authors conclude with a series of guiding questions and methods to
support responsible research practice with Indigenous and local
communities.
21. Cains MG, Henshel D: Community as an equal partner for
region-based climate change vulnerability, risk, and resilience
assessments. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 39:24-30 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.005.
22. Chari R et al.: Enhancing community preparedness: an
 inventory and analysis of disaster citizen science activities.
BMC Public Health 2019, 19:1356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/
s12889-019-7689-x
The authors reviewed articles on the theme of disaster citizen science.
They argued that a little research has focused on understanding as ‘non-
professional’ scientists or volunteers, may be a promising way to enhance
public health emergency preparedness and build community resilience.
The paper address research gaps, resulting in a project inventory
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
40 Slow onset events related to climate change
established a baseline for future research, address limitations, and help
disaster citizen science achieve its potential.
23. Anbleyth-Evans J, Lacy SN: Feedback between fisher local
ecological knowledge and scientific epistemologies in
England: building bridges for biodiversity conservation. Marit
Stud 2019, 18:189-203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40152-019-
00136-3.
24. Hill R et al.: Working with Indigenous, local and scientific
 knowledge in assessments of nature and nature’s linkages
with people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2020, 43:8-20 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.006
The authors present an Approach and analyse how it supports indigenous
local knowledge in IPBES assessments. The authors argued that cus-
tomary institutions that ensure the integrity of indigenous and local
knowledge for an effective empowering dialogue, and shared governance
are among critical capacities that enable inclusion of diverse conceptua-
lizations of sustainability in assessments.
25. Álvarez L, Coolsaet B: Decolonizing environmental justice
 studies: a Latin American perspective. Capital Nat Social 2018,
31:50-69 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2018.1558272
This paper analyses the problems which arise when Western concepts
are used as the main organizing principles of non-Western environmental
justice movements. Drawing on decolonial thought, a Latin American and
Caribbean theoretical movement, the authors through examples showed
the failing to account for cases involving mutually undermining modes of
life, hence presenting deliberate exposure to environmental harm as a fair
solution.
26. Lam DPM, Hinz E, Lang DJ, Tengö M, von Wehrden H, Martı́n-
 López B: Indigenous and local knowledge in sustainability
transformations research: a literature review. E&S 2020, 25:
art3 http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-11305-250103
This paper based on a systematic literature review to investigate how
indigenous and local knowledge is represented in peer-reviewed empiri-
cal scientific papers in contexts of transformation, transition, and change.
The authors conclude that future research needs to investigate how to
gain a more plural understanding of transformations that leads potentially
to more inclusive actions toward more just, equitable, and sustainable
futures on a local and global level.
27. Berkes F: Indigenous ways of knowing and the study of
environmental change. J R Soc N Z 2009, 39:151-156 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1080/03014220909510568.
28. Klenk N, Fiume A, Meehan K, Gibbes C: Local knowledge in
 climate adaptation research: moving knowledge frameworks
from extraction to co-production. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.475
This review consists of a systematic assessment of climate change
adaptation literature to elicit major trends, discourses, and patterns in
how local knowledge is conceived. In critically assessing the dominant
trends we draw special attention to problems associated with the extrac-
tion of local knowledge without due consideration of how this process is
embedded and inextricable from local contexts and sociotechnical
orders.
29. Gaudry A: Researching the resurgence: insurgent research
and community-engaged methodologies in 21st-century
academic inquiry. In Research As Resistance, Second Edition
Revisiting Critical, Indigenous, and Anti-Oppressive Approaches.
Edited by Brown L, Strega S. 2015:243-266.
30. Norström AV et al.: Principles for knowledge co-production in
 sustainability research. Nat Sustain 2020, 3:182-190 http://dx.
doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2
This paper argued that co-production promises to address the complex
nature of contemporary sustainability challenges better than more tradi-
tional scientific approaches. The authors proposed a set of four general
principles that underlie high quality knowledge co-production for sustain-
ability research.
31. Olazabal M, Chiabai A, Foudi S, Neumann MB: Emergence of
 new knowledge for climate change adaptation. Environ Sci
Policy 2018, 83:46-53 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
envsci.2018.01.017
This paper uses a semi-quantitative method based on cognitive map-
ping to demonstrate how new knowledge emerges when combining
knowledge from diverse agents. The results support knowledge co-
production and allows to account for the interconnectedness of urban
sectors under climatic impacts in view of formulating more robust
adaptation strategies.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
32. Garcı́a-del-Amo D, Mortyn PG, Reyes-Garcı́a V: Including
indigenous and local knowledge in climate research: an
assessment of the opinion of Spanish climate change
researchers. Clim Change 2020, 160:67-88 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10584-019-02628-x.
33. Audefroy JF, Sánchez BNC: Integrating local knowledge for
climate change adaptation in Yucatán, Mexico. Int J Sustain
Built Environ 2017, 6:228-237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijsbe.2017.03.007.
34. Kronik J, Verner D: Indigenous Peoples and Climate Change in
 Latin America and the Caribbean. 2010:208
This document presents case studies and research activities related to
climate change and Indigenous Peoples in Latin America and Caribbean.
35. Galloway McLean K: Advance Guard: Climate Change Impacts,
 Adaptation, Mitigation and Indigenous Peoples – A Compendium
of Case Studies. . [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/259609189_Advance_Guard_Climate_Change_
Impacts_Adaptation_Mitigation_and_Indigenous_Peoples-A_
Compendium_of_Case_Studies/link/
545bee5c0cf249070a7a83c8/download 2010
This compendium presented a wide-ranging overview of more than
400 projects, case studies and research activities specifically related
to climate change and Indigenous Peoples.
36. Reyes-Garcı́a V, Benyei P: Indigenous knowledge for
conservation. Nat Sustain 2019, 2:657-658 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1038/s41893-019-0341-z.
37. Garnett ST et al.: A spatial overview of the global importance of
Indigenous lands for conservation. Nat Sustain 2018, 1:369-374
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6.
38. Merçon J et al.: From local landscapes to international policy:
contributions of the biocultural paradigm to global
sustainability. Glob Sustain 2019, 2:e7 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
sus.2019.4.
39. UNFCCC: Best Practices and Available Tools for the Use of
Indigenous and Traditional Knowledge and Practices for
Adaptation, and the Application of Gender-Sensitive Approaches
and Tools for Understanding and Assessing Impacts, Vulnerability
and Adaptation to Climate Change. . [Online]. Available: https://
webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:
rObcoP_plpUJ:https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/tp/11.pdf
+&cd=1&hl=pt-BR&ct=clnk&gl=br&client=firefox-b-d 2013.
40. Alonso-Yanez G, House-Peters L, Garcia-Cartagena M, Bonelli S,
 Lorenzo-Arana I, Ohira M: Mobilizing transdisciplinary
collaborations: collective reflections on de centering
academia in knowledge production. Glob Sustain 2019, 2:e5
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/sus.2019.2
The authors describe and discuss an international transdisciplinary col-
laboration and draw upon the authors’ experiences after five years of
ongoing collaborative work in the realm of global sustainability research in
the Americas. Based on your collective experience illustrates that pro-
cesses of unlearning serve to decenter academia in transdisciplinary
collaborations leading to a more equitable positioning of practitioners
engaged in research.
41. Turreira-Garcı́a N et al.: What’s in a name? Unpacking
“participatory” environmental monitoring. E&S 2018, 23:art24
http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-10144-230224.
42. Nakashima D, Rubis JT, Krupnik I: Indigenous Knowledge for
Climate Change Assessment and Adaptation: Introduction.
2018:20.
43. Madhanagopal D, Pattanaik S: Exploring fishermen’s local
knowledge and perceptions in the face of climate change: the
case of coastal Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Dev Sustain 2020,
22:3461-3489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00354-z.
44. Tengö M, Brondizio ES, Elmqvist T, Malmer P, Spierenburg M:
Connecting diverse knowledge systems for enhanced
ecosystem governance: the multiple evidence base approach.
AMBIO 2014, 43:579-591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-
0501-3.
45. Marchezini V: The power of localism during the long-term
disaster recovery process. Disaster Prev Manag 2019, 28:143-
152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/DPM-05-2018-0150.
www.sciencedirect.com
 Slow-onset events in Latin America and Caribbean Iwama et al. 41
46. Hicks A et al.: Global mapping of citizen science projects for
disaster risk reduction. Front Earth Sci 2019, 7:226 http://dx.doi.
org/10.3389/feart.2019.00226.
47. Shirk JL et al.: Public participation in scientific research: a
framework for deliberate design. E&S 2012, 17:art29 http://dx.
doi.org/10.5751/ES-04705-170229.
48. Parsons M, Fisher K, Nalau J: Alternative approaches to co-
 design: insights from indigenous/academic research
collaborations. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2016, 20:99-105 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.07.001
This paper presents insights relating to indigenous issues in a global
environmental change context and illuminates key components of the
process of co-creation of knowledges for and with indigenous commu-
nities, and describes some of the main challenges to, and opportunities
for, transdisciplinary and cross-cultural knowledge production.
49. Guerrero-Gatica M, Mujica MI, Barceló M, Vio-Garay MF,
 Gelcich S, Armesto JJ: Traditional and local knowledge in Chile:
review of experiences and insights for management and
sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12:1767 http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/su12051767
This paper synthesizes and evaluate TLK studies in Chile, discuss how
this progress compares to the international scientific literature in the field,
and contextualize our results according to the multiple evidence base
approach. Based on this review, the authors showed that papers had an
emphasis on natural, rather than social sciences; and the studies where
concentrated on the extreme northern and southern regions of Chile
where more indigenous populations are found.
50. Aggarwal PK et al.: The climate-smart village approach:
framework of an integrative strategy for scaling up adaptation
options in agriculture. E&S 2018, 23:art14 http://dx.doi.org/
10.5751/ES-09844-230114.
51. Ashwill M, Flora C, Flora J: Building Community Resilience to
Climate Change. 2011:64.
52. Marchezini V, Horita FEA, Matsuo PM, Trajber R, Trejo-Rangel MA,
 Olivato D: A review of studies on Participatory Early Warning
Systems (P-EWS): pathways to support citizen science
initiatives. Front Earth Sci 2018, 6:184 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/
feart.2018.00184
The authors review projects associated with a citizen science compo-
nent to people-centered or participatory EWS). The authors identify a
gap in the literature between citizen science and disaster prevention:
most effort has been concentrated on developing new technologies,
platforms, and methodologies, rather than understanding the livelihoods
of non-scientist stakeholders, or elucidating ways of better engaging
them. This paper provides a social science framework to determine the
elements of how citizen science and participatory early warning systems
can be bridged.
53. Marchezini V, Iwama AY, Pereira DC, da Conceição RS, Trajber R,
Olivato D: Designing a Cultural Heritage Articulated Warning
System (CHAWS) strategy to improve disaster risk
preparedness in Brazil. DPM 2019, 29:65-85 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1108/DPM-07-2018-0227.
54. Paul JD et al.: Citizen science for hydrological risk reduction
 and resilience building: citizen science for hydrological risk
reduction and resilience building. WIREs Water 2018, 5:e1262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1262
This eBook compiles 13 contributions that interrogate the manifold ways
in which citizen science has been interpreted to reduce risk against
hazards that are (i) water-related (i.e. floods, hurricanes, drought, land-
slides); (ii) deep-earth-related (i.e. earthquakes and volcanoes); and (iii)
responding to global environmental change such as sea-level rise. The
eBook sought to analyse the particular failures and successes of natural
hazards-related citizen science projects to understand of “best practice”
in a citizen science context.
55. Cadag JRD, Gaillard J: Integrating knowledge and actions in
disaster risk reduction: the contribution of participatory
mapping: Integrating knowledge and actions in disaster risk
reduction. Area 2012, 44:100-109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1475-4762.2011.01065.x.
56. Anbleyth-Evans J, Lacy SN, Aguirre-Muñoz C, Tredinnick-Rowe J:
Port dumping and participation in England: developing an
ecosystem approach through local ecological knowledge.
Ocean Coast Manag 2020, 192:105-195 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105195.
www.sciencedirect.com
57. IFAD: The Traditional Knowledge Advantage Indigenous Peoples’
Knowledge in Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation
Strategies. 2016.
58. López-Sandoval MF, Salazar J, González D: Potentials of
participatory mapping to approach perceived community
limits in the central Andes of Ecuador. Ann Univ Mariae Curie
Sklodowska Sect B 2019, 74:59-77 http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/
b.2019.74.0.59-77.
59. Pásková M: Can indigenous knowledge contribute to the
sustainability management of the aspiring Rio Coco Geopark,
Nicaragua? Geosciences 2018, 8:277 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
geosciences8080277.
60. Molina-Murillo SA, Valerio-Hernández V, Arguedas-Quirós S,
Aguilar-Arguedas A: Toward Inclusive and Collaborative Climate
Change Governance at the Municipal Level in Costa Rica.
2017:944-954.
61. Hellin J, Ratner BD, Meinzen-Dick R, Lopez-Ridaura S: Increasing
social-ecological resilience within small-scale agriculture in
conflict-affected Guatemala. E&S 2018, 23:art5 http://dx.doi.
org/10.5751/ES-10250-230305.
62. Samuel S: Witsaja iki, or the good life in Ecuadorian Amazonia:
knowledge co-production for climate resilience. In Indigenous
Peoples and Climate Change: Emerging Research on Traditional
Knowledge and Livelihoods. Edited by Ahearn il, Oelz ri, Dhir sahK.
International Labour Organization - ILO; 2019.
63. Lima A, Mendes M: Mudanças Climáticas e a Percepção Indı´gena.
. [Online]. Available: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/
search?q=cache:0aLGsFgCg7UJ:https://amazonianativa.org.br/
mudancas-climaticas-e-a-percepcao-indigena/+&cd=2&hl=pt-
BR&ct=clnk&gl=br&client=firefox-b-d 2015.
64. Freitas LE, Sato AM, Schottz S, Coelho Netto AL, Lacerda N:
Community, university and government interactions for
disaster reduction in the mountainous region of Rio de
Janeiro, Southeast of Brazil. In Climate Change and Health:
Improving Resilience and Reducing Risks. Edited by Leal Filho le,
Azeiteiro Ulisses MissM, Alves act;. Springer International
Publishing; 2016:313-328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
24660-4.
65. Setti AFF, Ribeiro H, Gallo E, Alves F, Azeiteiro UM: Climate
change and health: governance mechanisms in traditional
communities of Mosaico Bocaina/Brazil. In Climate Change
and Health: Improving Resilience and Reducing Risks. Edited by
Filho le e, Azeiteiro Ulisses MissM, Alves act;. Springer
International Publishing; 2016:329-351 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-24660-4.
66. CARIBSAVE Antigua and Barbuda: The CARIBSAVE Climate
Change Risk Atlas (CCCRA). Climate Change Risk Profile for
Antigua and Barbuda. . [Online]. Available: https://www.
caribbeanclimate.bz/blog/2010/02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-
climate-change-risk-atlas-cccra/ 2012.
67. CARIBSAVE Jamaica: The CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Atlas
(CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Profile for Jamaica. .
[Online]. Available: https://www.caribbeanclimate.bz/blog/2010/
02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-climate-change-risk-atlas-
cccra/ 2012.
68. CARIBSAVE Saint Lucia: The CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk
Atlas (CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Profile for Saint
Lucia. . [Online]. Available: https://www.caribbeanclimate.bz/blog/
2010/02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-climate-change-risk-atlas-
cccra/ 2012.
69. CARIBSAVE Dominican Republic: The CARIBSAVE Climate
Change Risk Atlas (CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk
Profile for Dominican Republic. . [Online]. Available: https://www.
caribbeanclimate.bz/blog/2010/02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-
climate-change-risk-atlas-cccra/ 2012.
70. CARIBSAVE Dominica: The CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk
Atlas (CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Profile for
Dominica. . [Online]. Available: https://www.caribbeanclimate.bz/
blog/2010/02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-climate-change-risk-
atlas-cccra/ 2012.
71. Reinthaler J, Paul F, Granados HD, Rivera A, Huggel C: Area
changes of glaciers on active volcanoes in Latin America
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
42 Slow onset events related to climate change
between 1986 and 2015 observed from multi-temporal satellite
imagery. J Glaciol 2019, 65:542-556 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
jog.2019.30.
72. AdapCC - Adaptation for Smallholders to Climate Change: How
can small-scale coffee and tea producers adapt to climate
change? AdapCC Final Report - Results & Lessons Learnt. 2010.
73. Holt-Giménez E: Measuring farmers’ agroecological resistance
after Hurricane Mitch in Nicaragua: a case study in
participatory, sustainable land management impact
monitoring. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2002, 93:87-105 http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00006-3.
74. Zapata F, Dourojeanni P, Gagliardi G: El Clima Cambia, Cambia Tú
También. Adaptación al Cambio Climático en Comunidades
Locales del Perú. 2012.
75. Villaseñor V, Laura JPN, Gonzales Pérez F: In El Clima Cambia,
Cambia Tú También. Adaptación al Cambio Climático en
Comunidades Locales de Bolivia. Edited by Ruiz ne, Müller y
Thomas Joa ., Flórez cict. 2012.
76. Padovezi A, Oliveira M, Jacob LB: Conhecimento Agroecológico
Local: Caminhos para a Adaptação às Mudanças Climáticas e
Restauração da Caatinga. 2018.
77. Rhoades R: Disappearance of the glacier on Mama Cotacachi:
ethnoecological research and climate change in the
Ecuadorian Andes. Pirineos 2008, 163:37-50 http://dx.doi.org/
10.3989/pirineos.2008.v163.20.
78. Bury JT et al.: Glacier recession and human vulnerability in the
Yanamarey watershed of the Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Clim
Change 2011, 105:179-206 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-
010-9870-1.
79. CARIBSAVE Barbados: The CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk
Atlas (CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Profile for
Barbados. . [Online]. Available: https://www.caribbeanclimate.bz/
blog/2010/02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-climate-change-risk-
atlas-cccra/ 2012.
80. CARIBSAVE Belize: The CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Atlas
(CCCRA). CARIBSAVE Climate Change Risk Profile for Belize. .
[Online]. Available: https://www.caribbeanclimate.bz/blog/2010/
02/11/2009-2011-the-caribsave-climate-change-risk-atlas-
cccra/ 2012.
81. MINAM: La Desertificación en el Perú. Ministerio del Ambiente;
2011.
82. Araujo M et al.: The socio-ecological Nexus+ approach used by
the Brazilian Research Network on Global Climate Change.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 50:31–42
Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 39:62-70 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.cosust.2019.08.005.
83. Kondo Y et al.: Interlinking open science and community-based
 participatory research for socio-environmental issues. Curr
Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 39:54-61 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
cosust.2019.07.001
This paper review three case studies in Japan, to discusses how open
science can be interlinked with community-based participatory research
(CBPR) to address socio-environmental issues.
84. Bacigalupe G, Ojeda L: Tecnologı´as Emergentes para la
Participación Comunitaria en la Reducción del Riesgo de
Desastres: El DronLab, Una iniciativa de CIGIDEN-CINVIT-ADRA.
Ciudad, Observación, Territorio, Arte: OTA; 2018.
85. Cubelos C et al.: Understanding community-level flooding
awareness in remote coastal towns in northern Chile through
community mapping. Geosciences 2019, 9:279 http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/geosciences9070279.
86. Valenzuela VPB et al.: Comparative analysis of tsunami
recovery strategies in small communities in Japan and Chile.
Geosciences 2019, 9:26 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
geosciences9010026.
87. Trajber R et al.: Promoting climate change transformation with
 young people in Brazil: participatory action research through a
looping approach. Action Res 2019, 17:87-107 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/1476750319829202
The authors present a ‘looping’ methodology, developed through colla-
borative work between two distinct but complementary research projects
in Brazil in the perspectives on climate-related disasters and the food–
water–energy nexus. The approach brings together the theoretical fram-
ings of citizen science and nexus thinking under the aegis of participatory
action research, to identify points of mutual learning in relation to the
knowledge, action and critique co-produced with young people.
88. Warner J, Oré MT: El niño platforms: participatory disaster
response in Peru: El niño platforms: participatory disaster
response in Peru. Disasters 2006, 30:102-117 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00309.x.
89. Mercer J, Kelman I, Alfthan B, Kurvits T: Ecosystem-based
adaptation to climate change in Caribbean small island
developing states: integrating local and external knowledge.
Sustainability 2012, 4:1908-1932 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
su4081908.
90. Carby B: Integrating disaster risk reduction in national
development planning: experience and challenges of Jamaica.
Environ Hazards 2018, 17:219-233 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
17477891.2017.1415864.
www.sciencedirect.com