•   Technical developments that assume rather than test the superiority of external knowledge and technologies in actual conditions of use, conveyed by Transfer of Technology models of research-extension-farmer link­ages [ESAP Chapter 2; Global Chapter 3, 7, 8]. Formal research agencies and universities have lagged behind in developing criteria and processes for research prioriti-zation and evaluation that go beyond conventional per­formance indicators to include a broader range of cri­teria for equity, environmental and social sustainability developed by traditional people and local actors [LAC SDM]. Decision making processes in and the govern­ance of formal institutes of science and research gener­ally have excluded representatives or delegates of tradi­tional peoples, poor local communities or women [LAC SDM] who only in exceptional circumstances have had a voice on governing boards, impact assessment panels, advisory councils and in technology foresight exercises. Their inclusion has required deliberate and sustained processes of methodological innovation, institutional change and capacity development [Global Chapter 2].
•   Misappropriation. In some cases external actors have used without direct compensation the biological mate­rials developed under local and traditional communi­ties' management yet have largely ignored the knowl­edge and understanding that accompanied the in situ development of germplasm. The important public role of gene banks to return to local communities tradition­al germplasm that may have been lost at local levels has become more constrained under the evolution of Intellectual Property Rights regimes. Material transfer agreements in practice or law also may provide power­ful public and commercial actors privileged access to this germplasm [Global Chapter 2].
•   Suppression of local knowledge, wisdom and identity. In worst but far from rare cases educational curricula have been used deliberately to suppress traditional and local knowledge and identities. Inappropriate content or facili­ties in school-based education in some instances has wors­ened existing bias against attendance by traditional peo­ples or by girls and women [CWANA SDM; LAC SDM].

Asymmetries of power in institutional arrangements for AKST. The explanatory value of inequitable power relations has been demonstrated in the assessment of the positive and negative outcomes of encounters between knowledge actors in relation to development and sustainability goals. Formal AKST centers [CWANA SDM; ESAP SDM; LAC SDM], have privileged conventional systems of production; agro-ecological and traditional systems of production have been marginal in the R&D effort made [CWANA SDM; Global Chapter 3]. Knowledge actors based in formal research or­ganizations have neglected development of accountability for the costs of some technologies—such as highly toxic her­bicides and pesticides when applied in actual conditions of use [CWANA SDM; ESAP SDM] that have been borne dis­proportionately at local levels and often by the most mar­ginalized peoples [Global Chapter 2; NAE].

A globalizing world. A globalizing world has offered oppor­tunities that are welcomed and actively sought by tradition-

al and local people but also brought new risks, especially for the vulnerable and ill-prepared. Mutual misunderstanding across languages and other divides can undermine opportu­nities for collaboration especially when engagement is not mediated by inter-personal interactions but by impersonal bureaucracies, companies or commercial operations.
     Persistent concerns for which as yet no lasting reme­dies have been found include the increasing competition for groundwater and river systems between local and non-local users [CWANA SDM—Farm structures and production sys­tems] , as well as the alienation of land and restriction of access to the habitats that have sustained and nurtured traditional and local communities' knowledge generation [ESAP SDM; Global Chapter 3]. While years of protest from indigenous peoples, community organizations and activist groups by the 1990s helped ensure that the principles of benefit sharing in the exploitation of local and traditional resources were written into international conventions such as the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, these lacked enforcement mechanisms. There has been a progressive restriction of communities' and farmers "rights to produce, exchange and sell seed". The freedom of states to recognize these rights is limited under UPOV 1991 and further limitations are proposed by some powerful commercial and government actors. The slow pace of adjustment of national varietal approval mechanisms for materials generated by farmers' organizations and through PPB has raised new challenges [Global Chapters 2, 3, 4].

Challenges

Institutionalization and affirmation of traditional and local knowledge [Global Chapter 7, 8]. Concerned actors in a number of countries have developed strategies at local to national levels to institutionalize and affirm traditional and local knowledge for the combined goals of sustainable ag­ricultural modernization, NRM, social justice and the im­provement of well-being and livelihoods [Global Chapter 3; LAC SDM, Chapter 5]. Robust examples include the gram panchayat [village councils] in India [ESAP SDM] and local water user associations [Global Chapter 3]. Currently some countries (e.g., Mali, Thailand) also are establishing policy frameworks that are congruent with the overall objectives of market-oriented sustainable development yet recognize the importance of traditional and local AKST capacities. The wider application or scaling up of such experiences faces strong and persistent challenges [Global Chapter 2].
Education. The more widespread application of collaborative approaches in AKST practices would require [a] complemen­tary investments in the education of AKST technicians and professionals in order to strengthen their understanding of and capacity to work with local and indigenous individuals and communities; [b] support to curriculum developments that value and provide opportunity for field-based experi­ence and apprenticeships under communities' educational guidance; [c] farmers' access to formal training to enable them to connect to innovations in agroecology [CWANA SDM; ESAP Chapter 4; Global Chapter 2; LAC SDM].

The valuation of traditional and local AKST [Global Chap­ter 7; NAE SDM, Chapter 1]. Certification and similar