Ethnoecology and Traditional Ecological Knowledge

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), or Indigenous Knowledge, represents the invaluable wisdom accumulated by indigenous and local communities over centuries of direct interaction with their environments. It encompasses a rich tapestry of beliefs, practices, and understandings that shape a community's relationship with the land, plants, animals, and the broader ecosystem.

In ethnoecology, TEK is critical to understanding how communities have implicitly and embodiedly engaged with their local environments. Unlike traditional scientific approaches, ethnoecology acknowledges that there is not a singular, universal perception of the world. Instead, it delves into how culture influences how communities perceive, value, and interact with their surroundings.

Within this context, TEK offers profound insights into how communities navigate various aspects of their lives alongside their natural environments. This includes considerations for plants and animals, sustainable land practices, societal institutions and rituals, and a worldview that informs their daily lives.

Crucially, however, there is a need to defend against the romanticising and characterising of those who practice TEK. Whilst once regarded as “primitive”, there is now a tendency to ascribe qualities purely based on the usage of TEK, most notably where it aligns with a subsistence lifestyle. This form of “neo-primitivism” is generally well-intentioned. However, it results in unhelpful generalisations and “othering”.

Additionally, there must also be a critique of the colonial act of employing another resource, in this case, their culture, for its own benefit. Whilst TEK across different communities, including those that would be regarded as indigenous, can be shared freely, we must, none the less, work with those communities with parity rather than simply taking from them as a form of tourism.

Traditional ecological knowledge is as likely to be found within Cornwall's fishing communities or Derbyshire's coppice workers as anywhere else. Ethnoecology works to patiently investigate the differences between adopting the practice of other people aesthetically and how we might look within our communities and histories to recognise a practice that we can relate to.

Moreover, the study of TEK challenges the traditional divide between cultural systems and ecosystems, recognising humans as integral components of the ecological whole. Communities often act as keystone species, playing vital roles in ecosystem processes such as seed dispersal, pedogenesis, and biodiversity maintenance.

Ethnoecologists explore the parallels between TEK and scientific knowledge framing and structures, recognising the immense potential for learning from local practices. This approach enriches our understanding of ecological and cultural adaptation and offers pathways towards more sustainable futures.

By embracing and studying TEK, ethnoecology fosters a more profound understanding of diverse cultural perspectives and ecological stewardship. It recognises the depth of cultural wisdom and its relevance in addressing environmental challenges. Critically, it also turns our attention away from universal notions and approaches towards culturally embodied, place-responsive practice.

Studying communities and how they perceive the local environment can elicit how distinct parts of the local landscape are recognised, signified, managed and valued, recognised by a combination of vegetation, topography, and hydrology (Wartmann and Purves, 2018).

TEK is a rich repository for challenges faced by mainstream positions. As we delve into the ontological qualities of culture and its influence on environmental perceptions, we encounter a variety of means of encouraging more sustainable, equitable, and interconnected approaches.




Citations

Wartmann, F.M. and Purves, R.S. (2018) “‘This is not the jungle, this is my barbecho’: semantics of ethnoecological landscape categories in the Bolivian Amazon,” Landscape Research, 43(1), pp. 77–94. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1269882.

Previous
Previous

Ethnoecology and Local Ecological Knowledge

Next
Next

Introducing Ethnoecology