Abstract
This commentary responds to a recent article in Trends in Ecology & Evolution that questions the assertion that Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLC) preserve traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) solely out of necessity due to poverty or deprivation. We argue that many IPLC maintain TEK through effective practices, supported by empirical evidence indicating that TEK plays a role as a source of innovation, challenging the narrow association with “poverty or deprivation.” Moreover, the preservation of TEK is paramount, especially for ensuring food and nutritional security in vulnerable populations. Additionally, we advocate for the feasibility of sustaining TEK, generating wealth, and integrating diverse adaptive technologies and strategies to create income for IPLC.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Abdullah A, Khan SM (2023) Traditional ecological knowledge sustains due to poverty and lack of choices rather than thinking about the environment. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 19:65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-023-00640-1
Agnoletti M, Santoro A (2022) Agricultural heritage systems and agrobiodiversity. Biodivers Conserv 31:2231–2241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02460-3
Alencar NL, Santoro FR, Albuquerque UP (2014) What is the role of exotic medicinal plants in local medical systems? A study from the perspective of utilitarian redundancy. Rev Bras Farmacogn 24:506–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjp.2014.09.003
Alier JM (2003) The Environmentalism of the poor: a study of ecological conflicts and valuation. Edward Elgar Pub
Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10:1251–1262. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2
Boof L (2015) Ecologia: grito da terra, grito dos pobres: Dignidade E direitos da mãe terra. Editora Vozes, São Paulo
Campos JLA, Silva TLL, Albuquerque UP et al (2015) Knowledge, Use, and management of the Babassu Palm (Attalea speciosa Mart. Ex Spreng) in the Araripe Region (Northeastern Brazil). Econ Bot 69:240–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-015-9315-x
Campos JLA, Araújo EL, Gaoue OG, Albuquerque UP (2019) Socioeconomic factors and cultural changes explain the knowledge and use of Ouricuri Palm (Syagrus coronata) by the Fulni–ô Indigenous people of Northeast Brazil. Econ Bot 73:187–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-019-09457-0
Campos-Silva JV, Hawes JE, Peres CA (2019) Population recovery, seasonal site fidelity, and daily activity of pirarucu (Arapaima spp.) in an amazonian floodplain mosaic. Freshw Biol 64:1255–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.13301
Campos-Silva JV, Hawes JE, Freitas CT et al (2020) Community-based management of amazonian Biodiversity assets. In: Baldauf C (ed) Participatory Biodiversity Conservation: concepts, experiences, and perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 99–111
Castello L, Viana JP, Pinedo-Vasquez M (2011) Participatory Conservation and Local Knowledge in the Amazon Várzea: the Pirarucu Management Scheme in Mamirauá. In: Pinedo-Vasquez M, Ruffino ML, Padoch C, Brondízio ES (eds) The Amazon Várzea: the Decade Past and the Decade ahead. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 259–273
Coombe RJ (2005) Protecting Traditional Environmental Knowledge and New Social Movements in the Americas: Intellectual Property, Human Right or claims to an alternative form of Sustainable Development? Fla J Int Law 17:115–135
Delgado A, Strand R (2010) Looking North and South: ideals and realities of inclusive environmental governance. Geoforum 41:144–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.09.008
Descola P (2013) Beyond Nature and Culture. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
FAO (2019) Traditional Agricultural System in the southern Espinhaço Range, Minas Gerais (Brazil). Rome. https://www.fao.org/3/ca8121en/ca8121en.pdf
FAO (2021) The impact of disasters and crises on agriculture and food security. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb3673enE
Fernández-Llamazares Á, Benyei P, Junqueira AB, Reyes-García V (2020) Participation in Biocultural Diversity Conservation: insights from five amazonian examples. In: Baldauf C (ed) Participatory Biodiversity Conservation: concepts, experiences, and perspectives. Springer, Cham, pp 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41686-7_11
Gamarra NC, Hawes JE, Costa ACL et al (2022) Arapaima comanagement through the lens of the protected areas assets Framework. J Nat Conserv 67:126161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126161
Gómez-Baggethun E, Reyes-García V (2013) Reinterpreting change in traditional ecological knowledge. Hum Ecol 41:643–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9577-9
Hanazaki N (2024) Local and traditional knowledge systems, resistance, and socioenvironmental justice. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 20:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-023-00641-0
Harris RL (2003) Popular Resistance to globalization and neoliberalism in Latin America. J Developing Soc 19:365–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0169796X0301900209
Hartel T, Fischer J, Shumi G, Apollinaire W (2023) The traditional ecological knowledge conundrum. Trends Ecol Evol 38:211–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2022.12.004
Horrigan L, Lawrence RS, Walker P (2002) How sustainable agriculture can address the environmental and human health harms of industrial agriculture. Environ Health Perspect 110:445–456. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.02110445
Hurrel A, Sengupta S (2012) Emerging powers, north–south relations, and global climate politics. Int Affairs 88:463–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01084.x
IBGE (2017) Censo Agropecuário 2017: Resultados definitivos. https://censoagro2017.ibge.gov.br/resultados-censo-agro-2017.html. Accessed 25 April 2023
Jacob M, Medeiros Souza A, Martins de Carvalho A, Alves de Vasconcelos Neto CF, Tregidgo D et al (2023) Food Biodiversity as an opportunity to address the challenge of improving human diets and Food Security. Ethnobio Conserv 10:12. https://www.ethnobioconservation.com/index.php/ebc/article/view/714
Laurentino M, Araújo EL, Ramos MA et al (2022a) Socioeconomic and ecological indicators in willingness to accept compensation for the conservation of medicinal plants in a tropical dry forest. Environ Dev Sustain 24:4471–4489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01608-5
Laurentino JSL, Silva AT, Silva ER, Silva CS, Almeida LPB (2022b) Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra E suas contribuições para a Segurança Alimentar E Nutricional durante a pandemia de Covid-19 no Brasil. Saúde E Sociedade 31(4):e210967pt. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902022210967pt
Lira Azevêdo E, Alves RRN, Dias TLP, Molozzi J (2017) How do people gain access to water resources in the Brazilian semiarid (Caatinga) in times of climate change? Environ Monit Assess 189:375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6087-z
Ludwig D, Macnaghten P (2020) Traditional ecological knowledge in innovation governance: a framework for responsible and just innovation. J Responsible Innov 7:26–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1676686
Matos A, Barraza L, Ruiz-Mallén I (2021) Linking conservation, Community Knowledge, and adaptation to Extreme climatic events: a Case Study in Gorongosa National Park, Mozambique. Sustainability 13:6478. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116478
Medeiros PM, Soldati GT, Alencar NL et al (2012) The Use of Medicinal plants by migrant people: adaptation, maintenance, and replacement. Evidence-Based Complement Altern Med 2012(e807452). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/807452
Morgan LH (1944) Ancient society or, Research in the lines of human progress from Savagery through Barbarism to civilization. Bharati Library, Calcutta
Pieroni A, Vandebroek I (eds) (2007) Traveling cultures and plants: the ethnobiology and ethnopharmacy of migrations, 1st edn. Berghahn Books, New York
Quintaneiro T, Oliveira MGM, Barbosa MLO (2017) Um Toque De Clássicos: Marx, Durkheim, Weber. Editora UFMG; 2ª edição, Belo Horizonte
Renck V, Ludwig D, Bollettin P, Reis-Filho JA, Poliseli L, El-Hani CN (2023) Taking fishers’ knowledge and its implications to fisheries policy seriously. Ecol Soc 28(2):7. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-14104-280207
Reyes-García V, Fernández-Llamazares Á, McElwee P et al (2019) The contributions of Indigenous peoples and local communities to ecological restoration. Restor Ecol 27:3–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12894
Rose J (2018) The meaning of corruption: testing the coherence and adequacy of corruption definitions. Public Integr 20:220–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2017.1397999
Shop B, Mapaya RJ, Maroyi A (2022) Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants traditionally used in Gokwe South District, Zimbabwe. South Afr J Bot 149:29–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2022.05.052
Silva JS, Nascimento ALB, Alves RRN, Albuquerque UP (2020) Use of game fauna by Fulni-ô people in Northeastern Brazil: implications for conservation. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 16:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00367-3
Soldati GT, Albuquerque UP (2012) Ethnobotany in Intermedical spaces: the case of the Fulni-ô indians (northeastern Brazil). Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2012:648469. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/648469
Funding
The authors did not receive specific funding for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All the authors wrote the main manuscript text and reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Ricardo Correia.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Albuquerque, U.P., Cantalice, A.S., Oliveira, D.V. et al. Why is traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) maintained? An answer to Hartel et al. (2023). Biodivers Conserv 33, 859–866 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-024-02794-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-024-02794-0