{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02826086956521739, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018695652173913044, 'mean_word_length': 4.9921875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 2, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Cultural Dimension of Development: Indigenous Knowledge Systems . Edited by D. M. Warren, L. J. Slikkerveer and D. Brokensha. London: Intermediate Technology Publications (1995), pp. 582, paperback £11.95, ISBN 1-85339-251-0, hardback £35.46, ISBN 1-85339-264-2.

This book provides a rich plethora of detail on developments in research into, and the understanding of the utility of knowing more about indigenous knowledge systems. Through 47 papers, most of which are based on empirical case studies, it illustrates the spread of interest in indigenous knowledge systems and the maturation of concepts, methods, utilization and archiving of research since the publication in 1980 of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Development]. As theeditors point out, the main areas of development emanate from the uptake of the subject by more disciplines, a greater recognition of the dynamic and varied nature of indigenous knowledge and an increased emphasis on the role of such knowledge in the decision making of those who 'own' the knowledge systems and of external development agencies. The richness of the detail and the huge variety encapsulated in the book will make it important reading for all those engaged in development, despite the fact that apparently weak editing lets individual papers differ greatly in quality and that the title implies that the editors believe indigenous knowledge to be the only cultural dimension of development. Two other weaknesses of the book are probably inherent in the evolution and nature of the field of enquiry. Despite the increased emphasis on the dynamic nature of indigenous knowledge in time and space, some of the authors continue to pose traditional/modern and them/us dichotomies and slip back into the habit of cultural generalization for example, '(w)omen in many villages of Nepal are often very shy' (p. 95). This is irksome and could have been avoided by stronger editing. However, as with all ethnographic work, the not always successful struggle to apply our increased understanding of particular indigenous knowledge systems to a broader canvas, which is apparent in many of the papers, is probably a creative weakness. By engaging in the attempt to resolve this constant conundrum, the book contributes to its evolution. Vanessa Scarborough