This encyclopedic entry examines the concept of indigenization as a multidimensional and evolving process within the social sciences and psychology. Initially employed as an adaptive tool in colonial missionary contexts, indigenization has been redefined by scholars from the Global South as a means of epistemic emancipation. Rather than merely adapting Western frameworks, indigenization seeks to generate culturally grounded paradigms and methodologies rooted in local worldviews, languages, and experiences. The entry explores five analytical dimensions—historical-epistemological, political-structural, operational, contextual-demographic, and conceptual—highlighting the tensions, risks, and transformative potential of the concept. Emphasis is placed on distinguishing indigenization from indigenous psychologies, as well as on the need for methodological flexibility and intercultural dialogue. Ultimately, indigenization is presented as a critical and pragmatic response to epistemic inequality, aimed at fostering plural, situated, and socially relevant forms of knowledge that challenge hegemonic assumptions and contribute to a more equitable global production of knowledge.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Indigenization

  • Fernando Andres Polanco,
  • Josiane Sueli Beria

摘要

This encyclopedic entry examines the concept of indigenization as a multidimensional and evolving process within the social sciences and psychology. Initially employed as an adaptive tool in colonial missionary contexts, indigenization has been redefined by scholars from the Global South as a means of epistemic emancipation. Rather than merely adapting Western frameworks, indigenization seeks to generate culturally grounded paradigms and methodologies rooted in local worldviews, languages, and experiences. The entry explores five analytical dimensions—historical-epistemological, political-structural, operational, contextual-demographic, and conceptual—highlighting the tensions, risks, and transformative potential of the concept. Emphasis is placed on distinguishing indigenization from indigenous psychologies, as well as on the need for methodological flexibility and intercultural dialogue. Ultimately, indigenization is presented as a critical and pragmatic response to epistemic inequality, aimed at fostering plural, situated, and socially relevant forms of knowledge that challenge hegemonic assumptions and contribute to a more equitable global production of knowledge.