**4.4 TK holders' institutions and transformative entrepreneurship**

UNCTAD identifies the institutional framework, as one of the priority areas in devising an entrepreneurship policy in developing countries [66]. The institutional framework has a strong impact on the type of entrepreneurship that arises, and its broader societal impact, including its contribution to structural transformation [67].

TK holders' institutions contain data that has a decisive impact on the prevalence, type and nature of entrepreneurial activities [68] that TK holders can engage in. The data also assists in determining if, how, and under what conditions community members can access available resources such as knowledge to generate output, skills, innovation, labour, finance etc. [68, 69].

Social capital enables TK holders access vital contacts, resources (markets, credit, and diverse domains of knowledge) and information by linking them to other social and economic agents, within the community and beyond, whose capabilities could boost entrepreneurship ([2], note 2 at 20), ([34], note 52 at 10), ([45], note 65 at 3), ([33], note 50 at 37). Conversely, the new actors (entrepreneurs) provide the necessary resources needed in the innovation process such as tools, production equipment, access to seed capital and grant funds for innovation development [33]. Thus, while spurring innovation, TK holders' institutions also enhance and promote their entrepreneurial spirit ([51], note 76 at 9), ([67], note 111 at 11), [70].

Successful entrepreneurship is also seen as 'a cooperative endeavour, mediated by social networks' rather than 'a purely individualistic and competitive' effort [70]. Consequently, the environment within which entrepreneurship takes place impacts its nature and success. Rutert and Traynor show in their research that TK holders are social entrepreneurs ([54], note 82 at 5), ([67], note 111 at 9) who generate process innovations, for example, in 'networking, collaboration, group formation, and organisational governance and management practices' ([54], note 82 at 4). These activities are entrepreneurial, irrespective of their economic outputs, as they not only produce 'tangible, alienable (economic) values' but also develop 'inalienable (social) values and (inter)actions' ([54], at 5). Likewise, Oriakhogba's study shows how rural Zulu women bead workers, are addressing personal and shared social challenges of poverty, inadequate health care, housing, access to education for their children, among others, through social entrepreneurship and inclusive innovation ([65], note 108 at 145-172). Thus, TK holders engage in entrepreneurship to meet local needs due to gaps left by a State, which is no longer supplying the much-needed products and services [71, 72].

TK holders' institutions, also hold great promise in driving transformational entrepreneurship among TK holders, since transformational entrepreneurship foresees the possibility of transformational contribution by non-firms, that is, organisations such as cooperatives, non-governmental organisations and public institutions [73]. Be that as it may, existing literature has not critically examined the role of TK holders' and their institutions in promoting entrepreneurship yet they hold vital data that can be tapped to spur entrepreneurship for community benefit.

#### **4.5 TK holders' institutions, data and data governance**

TK holders' institutions are data repositories explaining why they are able to generate innovations, and contribute towards the strengthening of other institutions. Through the institutions, vital data is collected, shared, analysed and applied to provide expertise, monitor, plan, and manage disasters such as drought, famine, disease or bad omen to the community ([18], note 16 at 11). For instance, the Afar pastoralists in Ethiopia are able to predict weather and climate through the observation of stars, winds, livestock, insects, birds, trees and other wildlife [74].

While data is defined as 'factual information that has been collected together for reference or analysis, or numerical information represented in a form suitable for computer processing' ([6], note 4 at 18) in the context of Indigenous peoples, the term refers to 'information or knowledge, in any format or medium, which is about and may affect Indigenous peoples both collectively and individually' [75]. Data is a critical tool for advancing and attaining the cardinal objectives and development aspirations of Indigenous Peoples [76] including realising the right to self-determination. However, data is intimately linked to the sovereignty and self-determination of all nations ([76], at 4) hence the term data sovereignty, which refers to the right of States in relation to other States or entities to govern the collection, ownership, access and use of data within its jurisdiction [76, 77]. Consequently, the concept of data sovereignty allows States to control and own data belonging to TK holders (some of whom are Indigenous peoples).

Due to contestation over the sovereignty of Indigenous peoples and some of their rights in specific national contexts, they have had a troubled relationship since colonial times regarding how data concerning them is generated, accessed, shared, applied and owned by the State ([47], note 128 at 4). This is in spite of the fact that their ability to realise their rights to self-determination and leverage their development aspirations is anchored, to a large degree, on the issue of data sovereignty ([47], at 10).

While the conventional conceptions of the term data are broad, this study conceptualises the term data narrowly, by focusing on the TK that is generated, maintained, controlled, protected and developed by a community, and that is essential to their survival and livelihoods. Such TK (data), is developed within, and through TK institutions.

The data produced by TK holders provides 'information, guidance, help and support and gain most from developing social capital' ([31], note 126). In the context of Indigenous peoples, 'authentic data drives policy formulation, decision making and mapping of development aspirations, problem solving and other calculations critical to Indigenous resurgence in a range of fields' ([47], note 128 at 5). Moreover, data produces ways of doing which are unique to a specific place ([52], note 79 at 4); and is responsible for 'the effective and sustainable expansion of the capabilities and opportunities of the poor' [12, 78]. This is because it is accessible and applicable, and communities are able to effectively build on it to create innovative processes ([34], note 52 at 10). In a collaborative context, TK can 'empower other types of knowledge and innovation,' ([29], note 43 at 31) explaining why development activities that work with and within TK and traditional institutions have several advantages over projects that operate outside them ([34], note 52 at 10). Indeed, development agencies including the World Bank recognise the importance of integrating TK into development and poverty eradication ventures ([78], note 136 at 3) yet there is little research about the role of TK in innovation policies and ISs ([57], note 87 at 90).

The social networks created by TK holders around their innovations do enhance their capacities to create, use and disseminate TK ([34], note 52 at 1). As noted earlier, such networks interface with external networks, thus giving insights into how TK holders' innovation can be influenced by, or interact with, scientific (secondary) innovation specifically, and formal systems at large. While this interaction can result in the revitalisation of TK, it might occasion the conversion of TK into commodities that are controlled by new elites, due to power imbalances ([34], note 52 at 1). This

*Harnessing Traditional Knowledge Holders' Institutions in Realising Sustainable Development… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98802*

is so because some of the efforts at revitalisation of TK, such as documentation, may among other things, alienate the relevant TK from the "protocols and epistemologies in which they were previously embedded" ([34], note 52 at 1). In addition, engagement with external actors may invoke concerns regarding what kind of TK should be disclosed in local innovation networks, and what should not. Moreover, engagement with external entities, primarily science-based innovation firms, tends to fill the void left by insufficient government investment in TK, only in instances where they become entitled to the appropriation of TK through the IP system [79]. This justifies an exploration of TK holders' institutions, and the roles they can perhaps play, in defining what constitutes TK holders' data, and appropriate ways of securing that data.
