Indigenous Knowledge in Disaster Management Research: A Science-Mapping Analysis

Disasters are becoming more frequent and intense, driven by a changing climate and growing human populations. For decades, the standard response has come from the top down: governments and experts design plans, build infrastructure, and issue warnings based on scientific data. While this approach has saved countless lives, it often misses the subtle, on-the-ground realities of specific communities. In recent years, a different kind of knowledge has gained serious attention. This is indigenous knowledge, the deep understanding of local environments, weather patterns, and survival strategies that communities have developed over generations. It includes things like reading the behavior of animals to predict storms, knowing which plants signal a coming flood, or using traditional building methods that withstand earthquakes. The question researchers are now asking is not just whether this knowledge exists, but how it is being used in the global conversation about saving lives and protecting communities.

A team of researchers set out to map exactly how the world of science has been studying this connection between local wisdom and disaster management. They did not conduct new field experiments or interview survivors directly. Instead, they performed a massive review of the written record, looking at nearly 1,000 scientific articles published between 2005 and 2025. By using computer tools to analyze the words, authors, and countries involved in these papers, they created a picture of how this field of study has grown and changed. Their work reveals a field that is exploding in size, moving from simple observations of local habits to a complex, integrated system where ancient wisdom and modern science are increasingly working together to build resilience against climate change.

The researchers found that interest in this topic has surged dramatically. In the early years of their review, only a handful of papers were published each year. By 2025, that number had jumped to 168 publications in a single year. This rapid growth suggests that the academic world is finally recognizing that local knowledge is not just a cultural curiosity, but a vital resource for safety. The study shows that this research is no longer confined to a few isolated pockets; it has become a global effort. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia lead in the number of papers produced, but there is a strong and essential contribution from countries like Indonesia, China, Japan, India, and South Africa. This geographic spread is crucial because the people who hold this knowledge live in the very places most threatened by floods, droughts, and storms.

When the researchers looked at what these papers were actually saying, a clear story of evolution emerged. In the beginning, around 2012, the focus was narrow. Scientists were mostly trying to identify specific hazards, like how to predict a flood in a particular village or how to manage the risks of a specific storm. The conversation was about the event itself. But as time passed, the focus broadened. By the mid-2010s, the discussion shifted toward how communities perceive risk and how they use early warning systems. The most recent years show a significant transformation. The conversation has moved away from just reacting to disasters and toward building long-term resilience. Now, the central themes are climate change, adaptation, and how communities can survive and thrive despite environmental shifts. The research is no longer just about surviving a flood; it is about how local knowledge helps a community adapt to a world that is getting wetter and more unpredictable.

The analysis also revealed how these ideas are connected. The researchers identified three main clusters of thought that are weaving together. One cluster focuses on the big picture of disaster management and governance, looking at how to organize societies to be safer. Another cluster deals with the specific challenges of climate change, vulnerability, and the need to adapt. The third cluster is the most practical, focusing on how local and traditional knowledge is actually used to manage specific dangers like floods and landslides. The study found that these three areas are becoming more intertwined. Indigenous knowledge is no longer seen as separate from scientific disaster management; it is increasingly viewed as a necessary partner in the process.

However, the study also points out where the work is still incomplete. While the connection between general traditional knowledge and disaster risk reduction is strong, the specific application of local knowledge to formal government plans is still developing. The research suggests that we are good at documenting what people know, but we are still figuring out the best ways to formally integrate that knowledge into official safety frameworks. There is a gap between knowing that a community has a traditional way of predicting floods and actually using that method in a national early warning system. The authors suggest that future research needs to move beyond just describing these practices and start testing how they can be systematically combined with modern science to create better, more inclusive safety nets.

The global network of researchers working on this is also becoming more connected. The study shows that scientists from different continents are increasingly collaborating, sharing data and insights across borders. This is vital because a flood in one part of the world often shares lessons with a drought in another. The map of collaboration shows that while the major research hubs are in the West, the most important insights are coming from the places where the knowledge lives. The United States and Europe provide a lot of the funding and analysis, but the heart of the discovery lies in the partnerships with countries in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific.

Ultimately, this review of the literature tells us that the way we think about disaster safety is changing. We are moving away from a model where experts tell communities what to do, toward a model where experts and communities learn from each other. The data shows that the most effective path forward is not to choose between modern technology and ancient wisdom, but to combine them. As the climate continues to change, the ability to listen to local voices and integrate their deep understanding of the land will likely become just as important as any satellite data or computer model. The field is young and still growing, but the direction is clear: the future of disaster management lies in the hands of those who know the land best, working alongside those who have the tools to measure it.