A Classification of Threats to Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Conservation

Responses
Author(s): Ruifei Tang and Michael C. Gavin
Source: Conservation & Society , 2016, Vol. 14, No. 1 (2016), pp. 57-70
Published by: Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment and Wolters
Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393228

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393228?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.

and Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to Conservation & Society

This content downloaded from

13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Conservation and Society 14(1): 57-70, 2016

Report

A Classification of Threats to Traditional Ecological Knowledge and

Conservation Responses
Ruifei Tanga,b,# and Michael C. Gavinc
a
Current affiliation: Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy, International Union for Conservation of Nature
b
Research conducted at: School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington,
Wellington, New Zealand
c
Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

#
Corresponding author. E-mail: trf615@gmail.com

Abstract
Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) shapes human-environment interactions across much of the globe.
Numerous case studies have provided evidence of TEK degradation, with substantial implications for the status of
biodiversity. Previous studies draw on diverse academic disciplines, each with a unique set of theoretical constructs
and discipline-specific jargon. The lack of a standard lexicon for TEK threats and conservation actions impedes
the comparative work needed to understand broad patterns of TEK degradation and implications for biodiversity
conservation planning. Based on a literature review (n=152 sources), questionnaires (n=137 respondents), and
semi-structured interviews (n=63 interviewees), we developed a classification system for both, threats to TEK
and corresponding conservation actions. We find TEK degradation to be widespread (89% of cases in literature
and 87% of cases from questionnaire) and typically driven by a complex web of threats acting at different spatial
and temporal scales. Conservation responses can best address this interconnectivity through the involvement of
multiple actors across different institutional and spatial levels. We also demonstrate the utility of the classification
system by applying it to an examination of TEK threats in Inner Mongolia, China.

Keywords: Traditional ecological knowledge, direct threat, underlying threat, TEK conservation, classification,
social-ecological systems

INTRODUCTION interactions (Berkes et al. 2000; Ross et al. 2011). In turn, TEK
is a central component of social-ecological systems worldwide,
Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) encompasses the and has been widely recognised as playing a critical role in
accumulated environmental knowledge, resource management conservation planning (e.g., Moller et al. 2004; Drew and
practices, related social institutions and worldview of local Henne 2006; Brook and McLachlan 2008). TEK also acts as
and indigenous people (Berkes 2012). TEK is a vital human an adaptive system, adjusting to the dynamic nature of the
resource as it can provide locally specific environmental data, social and ecological conditions in which the knowledge is
guide adaptive management, and shape human-environment embedded. In recent decades an increasing number of case
studies from across the planet have provided evidence of rapid
Access this article online TEK degradation (Tang 2013). Due to TEK’s role in shaping
Quick Response Code: natural resource management strategies, degradation of TEK
Website: can have substantial implications for the status of biodiversity
www.conservationandsociety.org
(e.g., Alcorn and Toledo 2000; Berkes et al. 2000; Maffi and
Woodley 2010).
DOI: What is driving TEK degradation? Previous studies have
10.4103/0972-4923.182799 identified a wide variety of mechanisms contributing to
TEK degradation, but have largely been based on individual
Copyright: © Tang and Gavin. 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use and distribution of the article, provided the original work is cited. Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow, Mumbai | Managed by the
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore. For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com

This content downloaded from

13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
58 / Tang and Gavin
case studies (e.g., Lizarralde 2001; Zarger and Stepp 2004;
Ellen 2007). These studies have originated from a diverse
set of academic disciplines—e.g., anthropology, geography,
ethnobiology, conservation biology—each with a unique set
of theoretical constructs and discipline-specific jargon. In turn,
synthesis of findings into a global-scale assessment of TEK
status and comparative analysis across case studies has not
occurred. The comparative work needed to understand drivers
of TEK degradation and the implications for biodiversity
conservation across multiple scales has been hampered by the
lack of a standard lexicon for TEK threats.
Similarly, responding to TEK degradation may incorporate
a wide variety of different conservation actions. In our view,
TEK conservation actions should recognise and accommodate
the dynamic nature of TEK, and aim to empower TEK holders
to use and manage TEK as an adaptive system over time. Even
though a number of international agreements have advocated
for the protection of indigenous rights and TEK conservation
(e.g., The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples, Convention on Biological Diversity
article 8j), potential TEK conservation actions have been less
studied than TEK threats. For example, only 23% of previous
studies of specific TEK threats (n=152) recommend specific
actions for TEK conservation, and of these, only 17 (11%)
provide examples of TEK conservation actions that have been
undertaken in the field (Tang 2013). However, even within this
limited set of studies, comparing best practices across different
locations is difficult in absence of a standard vocabulary to
describe key terms for TEK conservation.
Recent work in biodiversity conservation (Salafsky et al.
2008) has demonstrated that a standard classification system
for threats and conservation actions provides both a common
language to compare situations and share lessons learned
across sites, and can also serve as a diagnostic tool to ensure a
more comprehensive identification of all possible threats and
conservation responses for a given location. We use literature
review, a survey of key stakeholders, and semi-structured
interviews with TEK experts to develop a standard
classification system for TEK threats and corresponding
TEK conservation actions. We also emphasize that our
intention is not to prescribe particular TEK conservation
actions or panaceas to the widespread threats TEK faces. As
is the case with biodiversity conservation actions (Ostrom
2007), we believe any one TEK conservation action cannot
be used to address threats to TEK in all contexts. Rather, we
argue that any actions taken in response to threats to TEK
must reflect the specific context. Likewise, by producing this
classification system, we do not imply that TEK itself can be
standardised in any way. TEK varies widely from one cultural
group to another, within cultural groups, and across space
and time (Berkes 2012). Rather, our goal here is to develop a
common lexicon that can be used to compare cases and share
knowledge in the pursuit of social learning that will improve
the long-term effectiveness of TEK conservation actions
(Berkes 2009). We also provide an in-depth example from
Inner Mongolia, China to demonstrate how a classification
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
system of threats to TEK can be used in real world case
analysis.
Inspired by the International Union for Conservation of
Nature-Conservation Measures Partnership (IUCN-CMP)
classifications of threats and actions for biodiversity (Salafsky
et al. 2008, 2009), we suggest the following key concepts to
illustrate the general components of any field situation in TEK
research and conservation:
1) TEK degradation involves the loss of TEK components
(e.g., knowledge of plant names, social institutions that
guide resource management). TEK is inherently dynamic,
reflecting changing social and ecological conditions.
Therefore, alongside degradation, a TEK system may
also experience learning and gain new sets of knowledge
and practices. TEK degradation may also represent a key
threshold within a social-ecological system (cf. Liu et al.
2007), in which knowledge and management of natural
resources does not return to the former state that existed
prior to degradation.
2) Direct threats are the human activities that directly cause
the degradation of TEK.
3) Underlying threats are the causal factors that contribute to
the direct agents of TEK degradation, which usually include
cultural, economic, political and institutional factors.
4) Conservation actions are the actions undertaken by TEK
holders and/or practitioners to conserve or revitalise
TEK, and to empower TEK holders (e.g., community
cultural camps, customary schools, TEK documentation).
TEK conservation actions are a direct response to TEK
degradation, where actions may be either reactive or
proactive. Conservation actions can be employed to
underlying threats, direct threats, or both, or directly to
the target TEK system.
METHODS
We used a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach
comprised of literature review (n=152 sources), questionnaires
(n=137 respondents), and semi-structured interviews
(n=63 interviewees). The research started with a comprehensive
review of academic literature and literature from government
agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
We searched three academic sources, Web of Knowledge,
Science Direct and Google Scholar, for three key phrases:
traditional ecological knowledge, indigenous knowledge and
traditional knowledge. In addition, we targeted organisations’
websites, including the United Nations, International Union
for Conservation of Nature, The World Bank, and the
International Institute of Environment and Development. We
included literature and the content from organisations’ websites
available in English and Chinese. The review identified key
gaps in the TEK literature and provided a framework for the
questionnaire design.
The questionnaire was developed in three versions designed
for different target groups: 1) community members (TEK
holders); 2) TEK-focused researchers; and 3) TEK-focused
 Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 59
organisations. We asked respondents to identify where they
worked (for researchers and organisations) or lived (in the case
of community members), and the name of the cultural group.
Respondents assessed patterns of TEK change (e.g., loss, gain,
etc.) at the location over the past 50 years, and recorded their
perceptions of the main drivers of TEK change. They were also
asked what had been done to conserve TEK, which aspects of
TEK had been targeted, and their opinion of how successful
conservation actions had been.
Questionnaires were distributed at several international fora
(e.g., the 12th International Congress of Ethnobiology, the
23rd International Congress of Conservation Biology), and
through listserves and an online survey tool (i.e., Qualtrics)
between 2010 and 2012. The survey generated 216 responses,
of which, 137 completed the minimum effective questions.
These effective responses covered 48 countries and regions
(24% from Asia, 19% from Africa, 17% from North America,
15% from Oceania, 14% from Europe, and 11% are from South
America). In addition, we conducted follow-up interviews
with 46 of the survey participants to gather more detailed
information about research questions.
To create the classifications of threats and conservation
actions using these diverse sources of information, we
applied the three-step coding procedure of grounded theory
(Strauss and Corbin 1997): 1) open coding to synthesise and
conceptualise original data into categories; 2) axial coding to
reassemble data and identify connections between categories;
and 3) selective coding to produce the final classifications.
Once the draft classification systems were developed, we
incorporated feedback from 17 interviewees, including eight
community members and nine TEK researchers.
ARGUMENT
Classification of direct threats to TEK
We classified direct threats into six categories (Table 1). The
classification was comprehensive, including all possible threats
noted by respondents to the questionnaire and in the literature.
1. Loss of pathways of TEK transmission
Cultural transmission is defined as “the process of
acquisition of behaviours, attitudes, or technologies
through imprinting, conditioning, imitation, active teaching
and learning, or combinations of these” (Cavalli-Sforza
et al. 1982:19). TEK is often conveyed via indigenous
languages, and the loss of language diversity directly
affects loss of knowledge diversity (Maffi 2001, 2005;
Zent and Maffi 2009). For example, a community leader
from Cibecue (Dishchii bikoh) in Arizona, USA stated:
Our language and traditional practices are closely
tied to the land, in many ways it is used in describing
objects, teaching moral lessons, and expressing our
purpose on this land. Since the loss of our traditional
language…our traditional ecological knowledge has
become more and more threatened.
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Many published studies, and 42% of survey respondents,
claim that introduction and implementation (often forced)
of outside education systems negatively influences TEK
acquisition (e.g., Voeks and Leony 2004; Cruz García
2006; Quinlan and Quinlan 2007). For example, one
survey respondent from New Zealand noted that “formal
schooling does not include TEK or a Māori world
view, so it tends to displace TEK. Meanwhile, younger
people are not being taught the tikanga (tikanga=lore)
and mātauranga (mātauranga=TEK) by older family
members.” The absence of young indigenous people from
communities, often due to school or work opportunities,
can also undermine their chances of learning and
practising traditional knowledge and skills, and impede
the development of pride in traditional knowledge and
cultural identity. In addition, contact with and influence
from dominant cultures may reduce indigenous youth’s
interest in learning traditional practices (Lizarralde, 2001;
Case et al., 2005; Reyes-Garcia et al., 2007; Zent and
Maffi 2009).
2. Change of traditional livelihood practices
TEK change can also be driven by a reduced reliance
on traditional livelihood practices. Market integration
may catalyse changes in livelihoods through exposure
to alternative commodities or shifts to wage labour or
commercial production, which over time may result
in changes to ecological knowledge and management
of natural resources (e.g., Godoy et al. 1998; Reyes-
Garcia 2007). Fifty-nine percent of respondents to
our survey noted that increased reliance on external
(i.e., non-indigenous) products and technologies had
changed livelihood practices. As one respondent noted,
“[people nowadays have] more reliance on processed
foods and hunter-gathering in supermarkets. Fishing is
more a recreation than a staple food gathering need.”
3. Change of traditional religion and beliefs
Beliefs and world view serve as the foundational elements
shaping all other aspects of traditional ecological knowledge
(Berkes 2012). The conversion from or abandonment of
indigenous religious beliefs has been widely recorded,
especially in regions with a history of colonisation, (e.g.,
Wavey 1993; Ellen 2007). Many survey respondents
echoed these concerns. For example, a community elder
in Qinghai-Tibetan Plataea of China noted:
In my parents’ generation and my generation,
everyone followed Tibetan Buddhism, which
believes in the equity of all life forms, and respect to
the nature. From my son’s generation, they believe
more in communism instead of Buddhism. And to
my grandchildren’ generation, they believe no more
in communism, but in western stars.
4. Change of environment and natural resources
Environmental degradation can drive changes in TEK
(e.g., Rocha Silva and Andrade 2006; Harrison 2007a,
2007b; Zent and Maffi 2009). Environmental change can
60 / Tang and Gavin
Classification of direct threats to traditional ecological knowledge
Threats by categories
Loss of pathways of TEK transmission
Loss of traditional language (e.g., decline of speakers,
decline of the abundance of traditional vocabulary)
Influence induced by formal educational system
Younger generations’ absence from the traditional
community
Influence induced by dominant societies and reduced
incentive and interest in TEK
Change of traditional livelihood practices
Reduced land‑based/sea‑based activities
Reliance on modern products and/or technologies
Use of westernised primary production systems
Change of traditional religion and beliefs
Conversion to other dominant religions
Loss of traditional beliefs
Change of environment and natural resources
Shift of physical location and environment
Resource degradation
Loss of traditional rights
Loss of traditional land and/or land tenure
Loss of traditional land use
Loss of access to traditional resources
Loss of traditional institutions
Replacement of traditional resource governance
Loss of other aspects of traditional institutions
be driven by overuse, population growth, or pressures
originating from resource use by recent immigrants into
indigenous lands (Rocha Silva and Andrade 2006). In
addition, changes in the environmental basis of TEK
may also result from forced or voluntary relocation of
indigenous communities (e.g., Tang and Gavin 2010).
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Table 1
Definitions for each category and examples for each sub‑category
Complete or partial loss of the TEK transmission processes between individuals
and generations, within a community and/or across communities
Enforced use of coloniser’s language;
Elders passing away without transmitting the indigenous language to younger
generations
Suppression of traditional cultural expression in formal schools;
Devaluation and exclusion of TEK in curriculum;
Children learn knowledge from school in abstract, but not “learning by doing” from
their own community
Younger generations resident in town for jobs or education and disconnected from their
own communities
Increased amount of information and knowledge gained from TV;
Younger generations are more interested in the skills that enable them to find a job in
town
Reduced needs and practices of, or abandonment of traditional livelihood, which
often involves a transition from traditional subsistence livelihood to non‑traditional
livelihood activities, such as engaging with industrial and trading activities
Engaging with trading activities to earn cash rather than traditional crop plantation;
Working for factories instead of fishing
Prefer or need to buy processed food from stores rather than hunting or fishing for
food;
Rely on compass during fishing trips instead of traditional navigationskills
Western style agricultural system—cattle ranching and privatised land;
Replace traditional crops with introduced high yielding crops
Loss or change of traditional religion and beliefs in the importance of nature and
local environment
Conversion to Christianity or Islam
Younger generations do not believe in Holy Mountains any more
Change of physical environment due to relocation, and/or degradation or depletion
of natural resources
Enforced relocation of indigenous groups;
Indigenous people emigrate to urban areas
Desertification, grassland and forest degradation;
Loss of key species which carry cultural identity
Complete or partial loss of traditional land, loss of resource or resource rights,
and loss of traditional access to natural resources
Enforced removal of indigenous people from their traditional land by coloniser;
State government claims the ownership over indigenous land
Urban expansion occupies indigenous farm land
Reserve set aside inside of indigenous land, and banning of the traditional use of bush
meat
Complete or partial loss, or change in traditional social organisations, customary
norms and traditional rules of resource use and management
The government‑appointed community leaders replace traditional community institutions
Loss of the traditional way of resolving conflict regarding resource use and sharing;
Loss of traditional financial institutions, e.g., the use of national or regional currency
leads to the loss of the traditional mechanisms of exchange across communities;
Loss of traditional rituals, ceremonies and other cultural and spiritual practices
5. Loss of traditional rights
The complete or partial loss of access to traditional
lands and resources invariably has profound effects on
TEK. Unfortunately, in many locations biodiversity
conservation has included the eviction of communities
for protected area establishment, leading to the loss of
 Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 61
access to natural resources that form the foundation of
indigenous livelihoods (Agrawal and Ostrom 2001). For
example, a community member from Aberdare National
Park in Kenya noted that, “Since the national park was
established in the 1950s, our traditional hunting activities
have been banned. We hardly have any other sources
of living. The park is under the management of the
Kenya Wildlife Service, in which no local is community
involved.”
Migration and urbanisation can also impede on traditional
rights to land and resources. For example, an indigenous
community member from Maryland, USA described how:
“The access to our traditional resource is decreasing as
people from outside of the area are moving in and buying
properties. They are making the land no longer available
to locals for harvesting.” Suppression of indigenous
populations has taken place for centuries, and only
recently has the international community recognised
indigenous rights (inter alia) (e.g., via International
Labour Organisation Convention No.170 1985; Agenda
21 1992; The Rio Declaration 1992; Convention on
Biological Diversity 1993). However, many national-level
government policies and laws still reflect exclusionary
models of conservation and development (Colchester and
Erni 1999).
6. Change of traditional institutions
A limited number of studies in the literature (4%) and
respondents to our survey (6%) noted the threat caused
by loss or change in traditional social organisations,
customary norms, and traditional rules of resource use
and management. In many locations, state structures have
replaced or subordinated indigenous social institutions,
leaving little power or influence to traditional leaders
(Kipuri 2009). As one survey respondent explained,
in reference to southern Ethiopia, “The indigenous
institutions that enabled indigenous pastoralists to
operate in resource-scarce region of Borana zone for
centuries have been eroded by modern innovations and
governmental policies, including privatisation, settlement,
and cultivation land annexation.”
Classification of underlying threats to TEK
We identified ten distinct categories of underlying threats to
TEK (Table 2):
1. Government policy and legislation
Policy and legislation that devalues or suppresses
indigenous groups and their cultures contributes to
multiple direct threats to TEK, including the loss of
pathways of TEK transmission, change of traditional
livelihood practices, loss of traditional rights and loss
of traditional institutions. For example, as claimed by
many survey respondents, government bans on the use of
indigenous languages in public schools has detrimentally
impacted traditional languages and the TEK transmitted
via these languages. Government policies in many
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
locations have also undermined indigenous rights to
self-organisation and access to resources and land (e.g.,
Tang and Gavin 2010). One respondent summarised the
impact of government policies on Athabascan villages in
Alaska, USA: “[There are many] oppressive non-Native
policies, such as control of wildlife management, and the
division of land into state and federal. These policies have
largely led to the land and resources are more available
to non-Native users rather than to the local tribes.”
2. Contact with other cultural groups
Contact with other cultural groups can be caused
deliberately by non-indigenous groups or voluntarily by
indigenous groups, and can interrupt TEK transmission
pathways, and drive changes in livelihood practices,
beliefs, and traditional institutions. For example, survey
respondents commonly noted the increased influence of
television and other digital media affecting indigenous
youth incentives and interests in learning about traditional
lifestyles and culture. The most frequently cited means
of deliberate cultural contact was Christian missionaries.
Missionary practices may impose or promote a change
from traditional beliefs to Christianity, and have often
discredited the authority and prestige of indigenous
spiritual leaders (e.g., Minol 2000).
3. Influence of outside market
Increased links to national and regional markets may
ultimately drive changes in TEK transmission pathways
and livelihood practices. For example, markets increase
availability of processed foods, which, in some cases,
decreases incentives for transmission of traditional food
production knowledge (e.g., Godoy et al. 1998; Reyes-
Garcia 2007). Market-driven demands can also spur shifts
in production towards commercially valuable goods at the
expense of traditionally harvested species and varieties
(e.g., Soemarwoto 2007).
4. Colonisation
Colonisation, especially the establishment, maintenance,
acquisition, and expansion of colonial territories, may
cause five out of the total six direct threats to TEK: 1)
loss of pathways of TEK transmission; 2) change of
traditional livelihood practices; 3) loss of traditional
religion and beliefs; 4) loss of traditional rights; and
5) loss of traditional institutions. Colonial territorial
expansion has often included expulsion of indigenous
communities from traditional lands, and denial of access
to resources (Kastrup 1997; Colchester 2000). Colonial
and postcolonial policies have often also included
compulsory education systems that impede cultural
transmission mechanisms (e.g., Cruz García 2006;
Quinlan and Quinlan 2007).
5. Relocation
Forced or voluntary relocation may lead indigenous
communities to occupy new environments and necessitate
changes in livelihood practices. The United Nations’ State
of World’s Indigenous Peoples report (WGIP 2006: 225)
recognised this grave threat to indigenous lifeways and
62 / Tang and Gavin

Classification of underlying threats to traditional ecological knowledge
Underlying Threats
Government policy and legislation (policy
and legislation that devalue and/or suppress
indigenous groups and their cultures)
Contact with other cultural groups (can be
caused deliberately by non‑indigenous groups
or voluntarily by indigenous groups)
Influence of outside market (including the
availability of modern goods, access to market
and the possibility of engaging with trading
activities)
Colonisation (the establishment, maintenance,
acquisition and expansion of HYPERLINK
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony”colonies
in one territory by people from another
territory)
Relocation (enforced or voluntarily)
Marginalisation by dominant societies
(including social, economic and political
marginalisation, which often leads to reduced
self‑esteem of indigenous population)
War and military occupation
Indigenous population decline (including
natural demographic decline or human made
incidents, such as genocide)
Migration (including indigenous emigration
and non‑indigenous immigration)
Economic development pressure (sustained and
concerted actions that promote the standard
of living and economic health of a specific
area, usually driven by the dominant market
economy)
Table 2
Direct Threats influenced by
the underlying threat
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Change of traditional livelihood A forced settlement policy changes nomadic herders’
practices
Loss of traditional rights
Loss of traditional institutions
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Loss of traditional religion and
beliefs
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Change of traditional livelihood Market demand facilitates the shift from planting traditional
practices
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Change of traditional livelihood Enforced industrialisation processes
practices
Loss of traditional religion and
beliefs
Loss of traditional rights
Loss of traditional institutions
Change of traditional livelihood Agro‑forestry groups are relocated from mountain areas to
practices
Loss of traditional rights
Change of environment and
natural resources
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Loss of traditional rights
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Loss of pathways of TEK
transmission
Change in traditional livelihood
practices
Change in traditional religions
Loss of traditional rights
Change of traditional livelihood Urbanisation changes traditional farmland into city, and
practices
Examples
State government banning the use of native language in
public schools causing the loss of traditional language and
TEK carried by that language
traditional livelihood practices
Government claims state ownership of indigenous lands
Government appointed leadership replaced traditional social
hierarchy and leadership
Western TV programmes decrease young indigenous people’
incentives and interests in traditional knowledge and culture
Christian missionaries impose or promote a change from
traditional beliefs to Christianity
The availability of processed foods decreases incentives of
learning and of using traditional knowledge to make own
foods
crops (e.g., taro) to producing cash crops (e.g., potato)
Enforced Western education system causes reduced TEK
transmission
Enforced or voluntarily change from traditional belief to
coloniser’s religion, such as Christianity
Loss of traditional land ownership
Natural resource governance is controlled by the colonisers
agricultural areas, and have to practice agricultural activities
Indigenous people are removed from their land for mining
activities
Pastoral groups move to agricultural areas as ecological
refugees, and have to learn about a new environment and its
resource use
Under social racism, young indigenous people feel ashamed
about their indigenous identity, and therefore make more
effort to learn mainstream culture and skills instead of TEK
Military occupation of indigenous lands
Elders pass away without transmitting their knowledge to
younger generations
Indigenous youngsters who move to urban areas for jobs have
decreased incentives and interest in learning TEK
Indigenous people who move out from their traditional lands
have to adapt their living to the new environment
Immigrants bring new religion into indigenous populations
An increased number of outsider immigrants occupy the
traditional land‑base of indigenous populations
converts traditional farmers into urban labourers

culture: “…it is clear that one of the most significant
threats faced by indigenous peoples arises from their
displacement, eviction and separation from their lands,
territories and resources. These issues are expanding and
represent significant challenges to the security, health
and survival of indigenous peoples and their cultures.”
6. Marginalisation by dominant societies
Social, economic and political marginalisation may not only
undermine indigenous influence on government policies,
but also may negatively impact the value youth place on
indigenous culture. For example, in the Western Ghats of
India many indigenous families expressed shame at being

This content downloaded from

13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 63
seen collecting wild food plants, even though they recognise
these foods to be healthy and nutritious; and as a result
knowledge and use of wild food plants is declining (Cruz
García 2006).
7. War, military occupation and population decline
In nearly every region of the world, violence or militarism
has severely impacted indigenous peoples (Trask 2009),
by expropriating control over natural resources without
restitutions or compensation (WGIP 2006). War and
military occupation may also contribute to indigenous
population decline, and in turn, disrupt TEK transmission
pathways.
8. Migration
Voluntary or forced indigenous emigration and non-
indigenous immigration can underlie changes in TEK
transmission pathways, livelihood practices, and beliefs.
For example, the movement of indigenous youth to
urban centres for education or job prospects may affect
incentives, interest, and mechanisms for learning TEK
(Lizarralde 2001; Reyes-Garcia et al. 2007). As one survey
respondent, referring to the Korup region of Cameroon,
noted, “Younger people are staying in towns for education
and coming to villages just occasionally. As a result, they
are missing the skills to speak their dialect and to learn
what elders can do!” In other cases, indigenous people
have been forced to leave traditional lands and adapt
to new environments (Tang and Gavin 2010). Outside
immigrants occupying traditional indigenous lands also
bring exposure to alternative cultural practices (e.g., Case
et al. 2005; Zent and Maffi 2009).
9. Economic development pressure
Many government policies and actions, driven by
dominant market economies, have promoted increases
in the standard of living and economic wealth of
specific regions. These pressures have increased rates of
urbanisation and farmland conversion in many cases; and
the rights and welfare of indigenous communities have
often been compromised or ignored by decision makers
in favour of development agendas (DESA 2009).
Classification of TEK conservation actions
The comprehensive classification of TEK conservation actions
includes five categories (Table 3):
1. Action one–indigenous capacity building
Many indigenous communities are actively building
and improving their collective resources and skills to
conserve or revitalise traditional culture and lifestyles.
The success of increasingly widespread decentralisation
policies depends upon local capacity for collective actions
(Agrawal and Ostrom 2001). Institutional development
includes the strengthening of indigenous social cohesion
and social organisation, and the conservation or re-
establishment of traditional norms and rules regarding
resource use and management. Indigenous institutional
development has also been considered a key component
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
of steps towards self-determination, including self-
government and self-organisation (Stavenhagen 2005).
Capacity building processes benefit from external
institutional linkages that promote social learning,
including alliances among indigenous communities
facing similar threats to TEK, and partnerships with
governmental agencies, research institutions or other
external organisations that share the common target of
conserving traditional culture and practices (Berkes
2007). These linkages may also be vital for increasing
community fundraising capacity, which can be critical
for funding TEK conservation actions.
2. Action two–community-based TEK conservation
activities
Many practitioners and scholars argue that TEK conservation
is most effective in situ, with local indigenous control
(e.g., Berkes 2002, 2007; Gavin et al. 2007). Traditional
lifeway programmes aim to revitalise and promote
traditional lifestyles by increasing inter-generational TEK
transmission and instilling cultural pride in indigenous
youth. One survey respondent detailed programmes in
Pikangikum, Ontario, Canada, in which First Nations
celebrate “culture days” that permit indigenous children
to be absent from schools in order to participate in hunting
and other seasonal livelihood activities.
Community-based conservation approaches often draw on
TEK as the foundation for natural resource management
planning (Agrawal and Gibson 1999), and may, in turn,
reinforce communities’ traditional rights over land
and resources (Lemos and Agrawal 2006). Our survey
results and literature review highlighted two types of
indigenous environmental conservation activities:
1) community-initiated environmental conservation
programmes; and 2) ‘external’ environmental conservation
programmes tend to be initiated and led by external
organisations while incorporating indigenous community
participation, including the use of local knowledge in
conservation management.
Through commoditisation, TEK may gain appreciation from
both insiders and outsiders of an indigenous community,
bolster TEK transmission, as well as provide financial
benefits for the community. Our review identified two distinct
approaches to TEK commoditisation: 1) ethno-tourism or
eco-cultural tourism refers to tourism oriented towards
indigenous culture, local landscapes/seascapes, or local
species; and 2) trade of indigenous products, such as
handicrafts, traditional tools, etc.
3. Action three – education and awareness
Education programmes and public awareness campaigns
may have direct impacts on transmission pathways and
influence attitudes towards TEK. Survey respondents
noted the presence of programmes that integrate
indigenous language and culture into public schools and
universities in many countries, including Australia, Benin,
Canada, China, Italy, New Zealand, Peru, South Africa,
Tanzania, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Uganda and the USA. In
64 / Tang and Gavin
Category
1. Indigenous capacity building
1.1 Institutional development
1.1.1 Self‑ government
1.1.2 Self‑organisation
1.2 Alliance and partnership
development
1.2.1 Community alliance
1.2.2 Partnership with external
parties
1.3 Indigenous financing
2. Community‑based TEK
conservation activities
2.1 Traditional lifeway
programmes
2.2 Environmental
conservation activities
2.2.1 Community‑initiated
environmental conservation
programmes
2.2.2 Participation in ‘external’
environmental conservation
management
2.3 TEK commoditisation
2.3.1 Ethno‑ tourism or
eco‑cultural tourism
Table 3
Classification of TEK conservation actions
Definition/explanation Example
A long‑term, on‑going process in which indigenous communities
build or improve their collective resources and skills to maintain
and/or revitalise their traditional culture and lifestyles
The strengthening of indigenous social cohesion and social
organisation, the conservation or re‑establishment of traditional
norms and rules about resource use and management
The establishment and development of autonomous governance Political independence and
which is organised and led by the indigenous groups self‑governance achieved in Cook Islands,
Fiji and Vanuatu between the 1960s and
the 1980s
The establishment and development of organisations organised by An organisation formed in southwest
indigenous groups with a focus on promoting traditional practices, Yukon Territory, Canada with an aim to
traditional culture and indigenous empowerment promote the use of traditional medicine,
organic agriculture, general conservation
techniques, and defend indigenous land
rights
The formation and development of a network in which one
or multiple indigenous communities and/or external parties
participate, in order to advance participating parties’ common
goals and common interests in TEK
Networks formed among indigenous communities with a target of The International Alliance of the
conserving TEK and traditional culture Indigenous‑Tribal Peoples of the Tropical
Forests
A partnership that developed between indigenous community/ Co‑management between Inuit
ies and governmental agencies, research institutions and/or other communities and regional government in
external organisations with a target of conserving TEK and Nunavut Territory, Canada;
traditional culture
Participatory research relationship
between local Maori iwi and research
institute in New Zealand
Advancing the ability of fundraising and fund management
by indigenous communities regarding TEK conservation and
indigenous empowerment. The funding sources may include
governmental agencies, private foundations and international
agencies
Conservation actions undertaken in indigenous sites, usually with
the participation of indigenous people with a target of conserving
and revitalising TEK
Indigenous community‑based programmes that aim to revitalise or Elder camps and youth challenge in
promote traditional lifestyles Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Indigenous community‑based projects that aim to conserve
biodiversity and natural resources, in which TEK is protected and
TEK holders are involved
Conservation programmes initiated and led by indigenous Heritage seed programme in Cherokee,
communities North Carolina, USA;
Saxoul tree conservation project initiated
and managed by local community in
Alashan region, Inner Mongolia, China
Conservation programmes initiated and led by governmental Indigenous people are hired as rangers or
agencies or external organisations with indigenous community guards of protected areas in Mbirikani,
participation Kajiado, Kenya;
Indigenous people participate in the forest
management in Mashteuiatsh, Quebec,
Canada
The transformation of aspects of TEK, which are not normally
regarded as having monetary value, into commodities
Tourism oriented towards indigenous culture, local landscapes/ Ethno‑tourism enterprises showcasing
seascapes, or local species traditional song, dance and costume
in Shuar territory, Morona‑Santiago
Province, Ecuador
Contd...
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Category
2.3.2 Indigenous products
trading
3. Education and awareness
building
3.1 Include TEK in formal
education
3.1.1 Teach indigenous
languages in formal education
system
3.1.2 Include TEK in school
curricula
3.2 Customary education
3.3 Indigenous media and
informal learning
3.3.1 Indigenous media
3.3.2 Informal learning
4. Policy and legislative
support
5. Research and documentation
of TEK
5.1 TEK research and
documentation
5.2 TEK databases
addition, customary education programmes have been
initiated and managed by indigenous communities with
the aim of transmitting TEK and promoting traditional
knowledge, culture and lifestyles. For example,
Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 65
Table 3
Contd...
Definition/explanation
Small scale trading activities of indigenous products that earns
cash for the community and facilitates TEK transmission
Conserving and promoting TEK through educational systems and
public awareness raising
To advance TEK transmission through encompassing TEK and
indigenous languages in formal education system
To teach indigenous language in formal schools in order to
enhance students’ interests in, and familiarity with indigenous
language and culture
To teach the contents of TEK in order to enhance students’
knowledge of and interests in TEK and indigenous culture
Educational systems initiated and managed by indigenous
communities with aims of transmitting TEK and promoting
traditional knowledge, culture and lifestyle
Raising awareness of TEK and its values amongst indigenous
communities and general public, through communication
strategies and informal learning processes
Raising awareness and recognition of TEK and other indigenous
traditions by applying communication tools, such as newsletter,
radio station and website
Raising awareness of TEK and promoting TEK transmission
through non‑formal learning means, such as botanical garden,
indigenous museum and exhibition, and workshop
The establishment and implementation of policy and legislation
that protect indigenous rights, support and encourage traditional
culture and practices
Studying and recording TEK by TEK holders, outside
institutions, or their joint efforts
The studies of TEK and/or TEK conservation that carried out by
indigenous TEK holders, external research institutions, or joint
efforts
The organised collection of data regarding indigenous knowledge,
traditional practices and the cases of TEK conservation with an
aim of conserving TEK
one survey respondent highlighted programmes in
Whakatane, New Zealand, where a Māori indigenous
university—Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi—was
established in 1992 to provide a wide range of majors
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Example
Revival of aspects of traditional back
strap loom weaving using natural dyes by
women with new coop marketing outlets
in Tenejapa, Chiapas, Mexico
Schools invite native American Indian
speakers as instructors in cultural and
language classes in Pikangikum, Ontario
of Canada
Guidebook of local plants and animals
is included in school curriculum in
Pikangikum, Ontario, Canada
Maori universities that focuses on
promoting indigenous language and tribal
identities in New Zealand
(http://www.wananga.ac.nz)
Community newsletter in New Zealand;
Community radio programmes in
Pikangikum, Ontario, Canada, organised
by the local First Nation
Omora Ethnobotanical Park in Puerto
Williams on the north coast of Isla
Navarino (http://www.omora.org/english/
welcome.htm);
Indigenous museum and indigenous plants
nursery in Chitwan National Park, Nepal
Convention on Biological Diversity
8(j) (http://www.cbd.int/convention/text/)
Traditional herbalists are appointed
as public health officials. Traditional
herbal medicine is generally accepted
and encouraged in hospital systems in
Huamachuco and surrounding villages,
La Libertad, Peru
Database of best practices on indigenous
knowledge created by UNESCO
(http://www.unesco.org/most/bpindi.htm)
Australian indigenous knowledge
management system database
(http://www.environment.gov.
au/indigenous/publications/pubs/
knowledge‑management‑guide.pdf)
66 / Tang and Gavin
and courses with a significant emphasis on Maori history,
traditions, identities, and tribal development. This form
of customary education allows community members to
become self-oriented participants in the creation of the
learning environment, shaping their future through their
own educational system (Carson 1999; May 1999).
Indigenous media outlets, including radio and television,
newsletter and websites, may reach a wider public to
raise awareness of TEK and other indigenous issues.
For example, one survey respondent detailed the work
of an indigenous radio show in Chihuahua, Mexico
that highlights the cultural practices and indigenous
language of the Rarámuri people. Similarly, non-formal
learning settings, such as botanical gardens, as well
as indigenous museums and exhibitions, may raise
awareness of indigenous issues and build cultural pride
within indigenous communities. For example, one survey
respondent noted the importance of the community-run
Ese’eja ethno-botanical garden as a learning centre for
local and international visitors in the Peruvian Amazon.
4. Action four – policy and legislative support
Supportive policy and legislation is needed at multiple
scales to ensure the rights of indigenous communities.
Numerous international agreements emphasise the
protection of indigenous rights. For example, the
United Nation’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples stipulates rights to self-determination, collective
action, cultural and intellectual property, and obligates
signatory states to observe treaties (Mead 2005).
However, international agreements will not be influential
without supporting national and local level policies
and legislation. The literature and survey respondents
outlined many examples of national policies supporting
TEK conservation. For example, as one survey
respondent noted, in Huamachuco and surrounding
villages in Peru, “the top herbalists …have been
appointed as public health officials by the ministry of
health, and medicinal plant use seems to be generally
accepted and encouraged…”
More debate exists regarding the most effective means
of protecting the intellectual property inherent in
TEK. Several scholars recommend the use of existing
intellectual property rights mechanisms, such as patents,
trademarks, and copyrights (e.g., Mugabe 2000; Mathur
2003). The Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual
Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge
and Folklore (the IGC) of the World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO) has produced comprehensive
reviews of existing intellectual property tools for
protecting TEK and traditional cultural expressions
against misappropriation and misuse (WIPO 2011).
However, other scholars suggest alternative strategies,
such as Sui generis (Sui generis=of its own kind), which
can be designed according to the distinct attributes of
traditional knowledge and innovation processes, such as
holistic character, free sharing and exchange of resources,
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
collective custodianship and spiritual beliefs (Mead 2005;
IIED 2006; Swiderska 2006, 2009).
5. Action five – research and documentation
According to the survey and literature review results,
efforts by TEK holders and outside institutions to study
and document TEK is the most frequently used mechanism
of TEK conservation to date. The early development of
TEK databases was carried out mostly by international
organisations, and more recently community-initiated and
community-managed databases have emerged (DEWHA
2009). However, as some scholars and survey respondents
point out, research and documentation tend to be passive
conservation mechanisms compared with the active use
of TEK.
The overall trend of TEK change
TEK degradation is widespread. Our review of the literature
and our questionnaire found that TEK degradation was by
far the most common trend noted (89% of cases in literature;
87% of questionnaire respondents). Only 2% of studies or
questionnaire respondents noted that TEK remained unchanged
over recent time periods, whereas between 3% (questionnaire
respondents) and 7% (literature reviewed) found some increase
in TEK levels.
The application of the TEK threat classification
We used the classification system we developed for direct and
underlying threats to examine global trends in TEK threats. We
were able to classify all the threats noted in each of the cases
in the literature and from our questionnaire results. The most
commonly noted drivers of TEK degradation were the loss of
transmission pathways and changes in traditional livelihood
practices, which together accounted for approximately 40%
of all direct threats (Figure 1a). All the underlying threats to
TEK, except indigenous population decline (noted just once),
were recorded at least a dozen times. The most commonly
cited underlying threat was the influence of markets, which
accounted for 24% of indirect threats listed (Figure 1b).
Our analysis of the literature and questionnaire data also
highlights three critical trends in TEK degradation: 1) TEK
degradation is typically driven by a complex web of underlying
and direct threats; 2) threats to TEK are at multiple scales;
and 3) the threats vary across time. TEK degradation is rarely
caused by individual threats alone. The cases we reviewed
demonstrated that multiple threats tend to occur simultaneously,
and as a result of historical and cumulative processes. Usually
one direct threat is caused by several underlying threats. The
interconnectivity and causal relationships among TEK threats
illustrates that TEK and its holders are affected by various
political, social, economic and cultural forces. TEK is also
facing multiple threats across a range of institutional levels,
from local and regional, to national and international. Direct
threats occurring at the local level are usually influenced by
regional, national, or international factors. TEK threats are
 Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 67

a b
Figure 1
Number of survey respondents and studies in the literature that note different (a) direct threats and (b) underlying to traditional ecological knowledge.
See text and table 1 and 2
than one direct threat or underlying threat each

also acting at different temporal scales; some involving rapid
transitions, while other changes may be slower.
Below, we use one of the case studies we reviewed from
eastern Inner Mongolia, China to demonstrate how the TEK
threat classification can be used for scenario analysis.
Case study background
Prior to the 1960s, herders in much of the region had retained
their traditional nomadic life over millennia (Ao 2005;
Da and Si 2006). The government introduced the grand
commune reforms into the region in the 1960s, at which time
all land and resources previously owned by Mongolian herders
were claimed as state assets (Da and Zheng 2010), which
represents a loss of traditional rights. Government-appointed
committees, generally comprised of young, educated Han
Chinese, replaced traditional Mongolian elder leadership
models (Da and Zheng 2010; Tang and Gavin 2010), which
led to a loss of traditional institutions. In the late 1970s and
early 1980s the government established central services
(e.g., medical centres, schools, veterinary clinics), and
proceeded with a settlement policy that encouraged herders
to give up traditional nomadic lifestyles, and to migrate
away from traditional lands and settle in townships (Wang
2009). Economic growth has been one of the most important
underlying drivers of all these Chinese government policies
since the 1980s, and annual 8% growth in GDP has been a
stated goal since the 1990s (Wang 2009).
These government policies have had multiple, largely
negative, effects on traditional Mongolian herding
practices. Government actions have dissolved the traditional
institutions used to manage natural resources. The sedentary
lifestyle that resulted from the government policies has also
led to a reduction in the traditional practice of rotational
grazing; and more intensive grazing has caused degradation
in grassland habitat in many parts of Inner Mongolia (Ao
2005; Tang and Gavin 2010; Tang 2013). Government
policies have also led to major changes in education that
affect TEK in the region. For example, a government policy
enacted in 2002 led to the combining of townships and the
shifting of key social services, including schools, to city
centres in the region (e.g., Xiwu Qi Autonomous Region
People’s Congress 2006). This shift in government services
has required children to move away from extended families
and herding land to participate in compulsory education,
which has increased barriers to the transmission of herding
knowledge across generations. In addition, as Mongolian
children spend at least nine years in cities for education,
they interact extensively with other cultural groups and are
exposed to alternative, and increasingly western, lifestyles.
As a result many Mongolian youth have turned away
from traditional herding practices in favour of city-based
livelihoods (Tang 2013).
TEK threat analysis
The factors driving TEK change in Inner Mongolia form a
complex web of interacting direct and underlying threats,
both national- (e.g., government policies on education, land
ownership, and leadership in natural resource management)
and local-level (e.g., resource degradation via intensification
of use) processes shape TEK degradation in the region. In
addition, these changes are occurring at different temporal
scales. Some of the changes, such as mandates regarding
leadership of natural resource committees, had instant impact
on TEK, whereas others, such as education reform, were
instigated at different times and have had more long-term
influence on TEK. The complexity of factors driving TEK
change, including the variability of threats in space and time,
has important implications for planning conservation actions.

This content downloaded from

13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
68 / Tang and Gavin
Figure 2
Proportion of survey respondents that noted different traditional
ecological knowledge conservation options. See text and table 3 for
definitions of the conservation categories. Note that respondents may
have listed more than one conservation action each, and therefore total
across all categories sums to >100%
The application of the TEK conservation action
classification
We found that each of the TEK conservation categories had
been used by at least 10% of the case studies we examined
(literature review and questionnaires) (Figure 2). The most
widely cited conservation actions were focused on research
and documentation (54% of cases), which likely reflects
the fact that the data are drawn from the research-oriented
academic literature, and that the majority of respondents to the
questionnaire were academic researchers. Despite numerous
international agreements that recognise the importance of
TEK (e.g., Agenda 21 1992; the Convention on Biological
Diversity 1993; the United Nations Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous People 2007), only 12% of cases included
any reference to the use of policy or legislation in TEK
conservation efforts.
However, implementation of conservation efforts does
not guarantee success. Only 24% of respondents to our
questionnaire claimed that conservation efforts had been
definitively successful. Another 58% noted limited success,
whereas 18% felt either that no success had been attained
or that it was currently too early or too difficult to assess.
Respondents to our questionnaire and interviews highlighted
three factors that contribute to the success or failure of TEK
conservation efforts. For one, approximately one-third of
respondents noted that projects that were community-based
and engaged a large portion of the community tended to be
more successful. Non-TEK focused projects introduced by
outside agencies often left little time or resources available
for TEK conservation efforts. Secondly, the degree to which
governments officially recognised and provided financial and
technical support to TEK conservation projects was another
key determinant of TEK project outcomes. Finally, the most
common barrier to success was the competing interests and
cultural distractions from the outside world. These external
cultural influences often derive from migration to towns and
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
the subsequent increased interest, especially among younger
generations, in outside employment and town-based lifestyles.
These results reflect that TEK faces a complex web of threats
generated at different spatial and temporal scales. Therefore,
as is the case with biodiversity conservation efforts, success
of TEK conservation will depend on collaboration across a
range of institutional levels from local to international (Berkes
2010). This collaboration is vital to ensure that capacity and
resources are available to tackle threats at the appropriate
times and places. Successful cooperation across organisations
and communities will require meaningful sharing of power
and resources among the institutions involved (Colfer and
Capistrano 2005).
CONCLUSION
Overall, the use of the classification systems we developed has
allowed us to examine trends in TEK threats and conservation
actions based on the evidence currently available in the
literature and via our questionnaire. Most of the current
TEK research concentrates on specific locations and specific
communities (Tang 2013). The lack of comparable data
and common databases has been a major obstacle to TEK
research addressed by many researchers (e.g., Reyes-Garcia
et al. 2005). The classification systems presented here can
help facilitate cross-project and cross-region communication
regarding common threats and effective conservation actions.
It, therefore, may also help to identify and highlight ubiquitous
patterns, processes, challenges, and opportunities to TEK
conservation. At the community level, use of the classification
systems can assist in ensuring that all relevant TEK threats are
identified as an initial step in addressing TEK degradation.
A comprehensive understanding of the drivers of TEK
change and conservation options is lacking in most locations.
The research we present here should be considered as an
initial assessment of TEK threats and conservation on the
global scale. We hope this study will inspire further and more
comprehensive examination of TEK threats and conservation
actions across the globe.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank all survey participants and interviewees for generously
sharing their knowledge and experiences. We are also grateful for
research funding provided by Victoria University of Wellington and
the Royal Society of New Zealand.
REFERENCES
Agrawal, A. and C.C. Gibson. 1999. Enhancement and disenchantment: the
role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development
27(4): 629–649.
Agrawal, A. and E. Ostrom. 2001. Collective action, property rights and
decentralisation in resource use in India and Nepal. Politics and Society
29(4): 485–514.
Alcorn, J.B. and V.M. Toledo. 2000. Resilient resource management in
Mexico’s forest ecosystems: the contribution of property rights. In:
 Threats to and conservation of traditional ecological knowledge / 69
Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and
Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience (eds. Berkes, F., C. Folke,
and J. Colding). 1st edition. Pp. 216–249. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ao, R.Q. 2005. Institutional change and pastoral civilisation [in Chinese].
Huhehaote, China: Inner Mongolia People’s Press.
Berkes, F. 2002. Cross-scale institutional linkages: perspectives from the
bottom up. In: The drama of the commons (eds. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N.
Dolsak, P.C. Stern, S. Stonich and E.U. Weber). 1st edition. Pp. 293–321.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Berkes, F. 2007. Community-based conservation in a globalised world.
National Academy of Sciences of the USA 104(39): 15188–15193.
Berkes, F. 2009. Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation,
bridging organisations and social learning. Journal of Environmental
Management 90: 1692–1702.
Berkes, F. 2010. Devolution of environment and resource governance: trends
and future. Environmental Conservation 37: 489–500.
Berkes, F. 2012. Sacred ecology: traditional ecological knowledge and
resource management. London: Taylor and Francis.
Berkes, F., J. Colding, and C, Folke. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional
ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications
10(5): 1251–1262.
Brook, R.K. and S.M. McLachlan. 2008. Trends and prospects for local
knowledge in ecological and conservation research and monitoring.
Biodiversity and Conservation 17: 3501–3512.
Carson, D. 1999. Community-based education for indigenous cultures. In:
Indigenous Community-based Education (ed. May, S.). 1st edition. Pp:
8-19. PA: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Case, R.J., G.F. Pauli, and D.D. Soejarto. 2005. Factors in maintaining
indigenous knowledge among ethnic communities of Manus Island.
Economic Botany 59: 356–365.
Cavalli-Sforza, L.L., M.W. Feldman, K.H. Chen, and S.M. Dornbusch. 1982.
Theory and observation in cultural transmission. Science 218(4567):
19–27.
Colchester, M. 2000. Self-determination or environmental determination
for indigenous peoples in tropical forest conservation. Conservation
Biology 14(5): 1365–1367.
Colchester, M. and C. Erni, C. 1999. Indigenous peoples and protected areas
in South and Southeast Asia: from principles to practice. Document No.
97. Forest Peoples Programme and the International Work Group for
Indigenous Affairs, Copenhagen.
Colfer, C.J.P. and D. Capistrano. 2005. The politics of decentralisation: forests,
people and power. London: Earthscan.
Cruz García, G.S. 2006. The mother-child nexus. Knowledge and valuation
of wild food plants in Wayanad, Western Ghats, India. Journal of
Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2: 39–45.
Da, L.T. and H. Si. 2006. The causes of desertification in Inner Mongolia
[in Chinese]. In: The grassland forum organised by the Friends of
Nature. Pp. 3–7 Beijing: September 21, 2005.
Da, L.T. and Y.S. Zheng. 2010. Pastoral areas and the market: pastoral
economy [in Chinese]. Beijing: The Centre for Rural Environment and
Social Studies.
DESA (Department of Economic and Social Affairs of UN). 2009. The State
of World’s Indigenous Peoples. UN Document. http://www.un.org/esa/
socdev/unpfii/documents/SOWIP/en/SOWIP_web.pdf. Accessed on
March 5, 2012.
DEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts of
Australian Government). 2009. Indigenous knowledge management
systems: guide for indigenous communities. Government Document.
http://www.environment.gov.au/indigenous/publications/knowledge-
management-guide.html. Accessed on August 5, 2012.
Drew, J.A. and A.P. Henne. 2006. Conservation biology and traditional
ecological knowledge: integrating academic disciplines for better
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
conservation practice. Ecology and Society 11(2): 34. http://www.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art34/. Accessed on March 5, 2012.
Ellen, R. F. 2007. Modern crises and traditional strategies: local ecological
knowledge in islands Southeast Asia (Vol. Studies in Environmental
Anthropology and Ethnoecology). New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
Gavin, M.C., A. Wali, and M. Vasquez. 2007. Parks, people, and participation:
towards collaborative and community-based natural resource
management. In: Connecting People, Participation and Place:
Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods (eds. Kindon,
S., R. Pain, and M. Kesby). Pp. 60–70. London: Routledge.
Godoy, R.A., N. Brokaw, D.S. Wilkie, D. Colón, A. Palermo, S. Lye, and
S. Wei. 1998. On trade and cognition: markets and the loss of folk
knowledge among the Tawahka Indiansof the Honduran rain forest.
Anthropological Research 54: 219–233.
Harrison, K. D. 2007a. An extinction of (ideas about) species. In: When
languages die: the extinction of the world’s languages and the erosion
of human knowledge. 1st edition. Pp.23–59. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Harrison, K. D. 2007b. A world of Many (fewer) voices. In: When languages
die: the extinction of the world’s languages and the erosion of human
knowledge. 1st edition. Pp. 1–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
IIED (International Institute of Environment and Development). 2006.
Protecting community rights over traditional knowledge: implications of
customary laws and practices: Interim Report 2005-2006. London: IIED.
Kipuri, N. 2009. Chapter II: culture. In: DESA of UN, state of world’s
indigenous peoples Pp.52–81. United Nations Document. New York,
NY, USA.
Lemos, M.C. and A. Agrawal. 2006. Environmental governance. Annual
Review of Environment and Resources 31: 297–325.
Liu, J.G., T. Dietz, S.R. Carpenter, M. Alberti, C. Folke, E. Moran, A.N. Pell,
et al. 2007. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science
317: 1513–1516.
Lizarralde, M. 2001. Biodiversity and loss of indigenous languages and
knowledge. In: On biocultural diversity: linking language, knowledge,
and the environment. (ed. Maffi, L.). Pp. 265–281. Washington, DC:
Smithson Institution Press.
Maffi, L. (ed.) 2001. On Biocultural diversity: linking language, knowledge,
and the environment. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Press.
Maffi, L. 2005. Linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. Annual Review
of Anthropology 34: 599–617.
Maffi, L. and E. Woodley. 2010. Biocultural diversity conservation: a global
sourcebook. London: Earthscan.
Mathur, A. 2003. Who owns traditional knowledge? Working paper No.96.
Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations.
New Delhi.
May, S. 1999. Language and education rights for indigenous people. In:
Indigenous Community-based Education (ed. May, S.) Pp: 42-66. PA:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Mead, T.P.A. 2005. Emerging issues in Maori traditional knowledge: can
these be addresses by United Nations agencies? Paper presented at the
UNPFII Workshop, Panama, September 2005.
Minol, B. 2000. Manus from the legends to year 2000: a history of the people
of Manus. Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea: UPNG Press.
Moller, H., F. Berkes, P.O. Lyver, and M. Kislalioglu. 2004. Combining
science and traditional ecological knowledge: monitoring populations
for co-management. Ecology and Society 9(3): 2. http://www.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art2/. Accessed on March 15, 2012.
Mugabe, J. 2000. Intellectual property protection and traditional knowledge:
an explanation in international policy discourse. Working paper. African
Center for Technology Studies. Nairobi, Kenya.
Ostrom, E. 2007. A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States
of America 104(39): 15181–15187.
70 / Tang and Gavin
Ostrom, E. 2009. A general framework for analysing sustainability of
social-ecological systems. Science 325(5939): 419–422.
Quinlan, M.B. and R.J. Quinlan. 2007. Modernization and Medicinal plant
knowledge in a Caribbean Horticultural village. Medical Anthropology
Quarterly 21(2): 169–192.
Reyes-Garcia, V., N. Marti, T. McDade, S. Tanner, and V. Vadez. 2007.
Concepts and methods in studies measuring individual ethnobotanical
knowledge. Journal of Ethnobiolog 27(2): 182–203.
Rocha Silva, A.J. and L.H. Cavalcante Andrade. 2006. Cultural significance
of plants in communities located in the coastal forest zone of the State
of Pernambuco, Brazil. Human Ecology 34(3): 447–465.
Ross, A., K. Sherman, J. Snodgrass, H. Delcore, and R. Sherman. 2011.
Indigenous peoples and the collaborative stewardship of nature:
knowledge binds and institutional conflicts. Walnut Creek, CA: Left
Coast Press.
Salafsky, N., D. Salzer, A.J. Stattersfield, C. Hilton-Taylor, R. Neugarten,
S.H.M. Butchart, B. Collen, N. Cox, L.L. Master, S. O’Conner, and D.
Willkie. 2008. A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified
classifications of threats and actions. Conservation Biology 22: 897–911.
Salafsky, N., D. Salzer, A.J. Stattersfield, C. Hilton-Taylor, R. Neugarten,
S.H.M. Butchart, B. Collen, N. Cox, L. L. Master, S. O’Conner, and D.
Willkie. 2009. Pragmatism and practices in classifying threats: reply to
Balmford et al. Conservation Biology 23: 488–493.
Soemarwoto, R. 2007. Kasepuhan rice landrace diversity, risk management and
agricultural modernisation. In: Modern crises and traditional strategies:
local ecological knowledge in Islands Southeast Asia(ed. Ellen, R.). Pp.
84–111. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
Stavenhagen, R. 2005. Indigenous peoples: an essay on land, territory,
autonomy and self-determination. Available online at Land Research
Action Network (LRAN) http://www.landaction.org. Accessed on
April 4, 2011.
Strauss, A.L. and J.M. Corbin. 1997. Grounded theory in practice. London:
SAGE publication Limited. HYPERLINK “http://www.cabdirect.org:80/
search.html?q=au%3A”Swiderska, K. 2006. Banishing the biopirates:
a new approach to protecting traditional knowledge. Gatekeeper
series, International Institute for Environment and Development,
Environmental Economics Programme 2006(129): 24. HYPERLINK
“http://www.cabdirect.org:80/search.html?q=au%3A”Swiderska,
K. 2009. Protecting traditional knowledge: a framework based on
customary-law and bio-cultural heritage. In: Conserving and valuing
Received: March 2014; Accepted: September 2015
This content downloaded from
13.234.189.56 on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:21:22 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
ecosystem services and biodiversity: economic, institutional and social
challenges (ed. Ninan, K.N.). Pp. 338–349. London: Earthscan.
Tang, R. 2013. An analysis of traditional ecological knowledge’s status and
its conservation options. Ph.D. thesis. Victoria University of Wellington,
New Zealand.
Tang, R. and M. Gavin. 2010. Traditional ecological knowledge informing
resource management: saxoul conservation in Inner Mongolia, China.
Society and Natural Resources 23: 193–206.
Trask, M. 2009. Chapter VII: Emerging issues. In: DESA of UN, State of the
World’s Indigenous Peoples. Pp. 219–238. United Nations Document.
New York, NY, USA.
Voeks, R. A. and A. Leony. 2004. Forgetting the forest: assessing medicinal
plant erosion in Eastern Brazil. Economic Botany 58: 294–306.
Wang, X.Y. 2009. Pastoral communities under environmental pressure: case
studies of six villages in Inner Mongolia [in Chinese]. Beijing: Social
Sciences Academy Press.
Wavey, R. 1993. International workshop on indigenous knowledge and
community-based resource management In: Traditional ecological
knowledge: concepts and cases (ed. Inglis, J). Pp. 11–16. Ottawa,
Canada: International Programme on Traditional Ecological Knowledge
& International Development Research Centre.
WGIP (Working Group on Indigenous Populations). 2006. Report of the
Working Group on Indigenous Populations on its 24th Session, Geneva.
UN Document. A/HRC/Sub.1/58/22 Accessed on August 14, 2006.
WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation). 2011. The protection of
Traditional Knowledge: Revised objectives and principles. http://www.
wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_18/wipo_grtkf_ic_18_5.pdf.
Accessed on February 11, 2012.
Xiwu Qi Autonomous Region People’s Congress. 2006. The planning outline
of the 11th five-year (2006-2010) of economy and social development in
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region [in Chinese]. http://www.xwq.gov.
cn/zwgk_21/fzgh/sywfzgh/201010/t20101022_524223.html. Accessed
on November 7, 2011.
Zarger, R.K. and J.R. Stepp. 2004. Persistence of botanical knowledge among
Tzeltal Maya children. Current Anthropology 45: 413–418.
Zent, S. and L. Maffi. 2009. Final report on indicator No. 2: methodology
for developing a vitality index of traditional environmental knowledge
(VITEK) for the project “global indicators of the status and trends of
linguistic diversity and traditional knowledge.” Terralingua.