Dynamics of pastoral traditional ecological knowledge: a global state-of-the-art review

Hussein T. Wario,Mar Cabeza,Abolfazl Sharifian,Álvaro Fernández-Llamazares,Zsolt Molnár

doi:10.5751/es-12918-270114

Abstract

Traditional ecological knowledge enables pastoralists to cope with social-ecological changes, thereby increasing the sustainability of their practices and fostering social-ecological resilience. Yet, there is a significant knowledge gap concerning the extent to which pastoral traditional ecological knowledge has changed over time at the global level. We aim to fill this gap through a systematic literature review of 288 scientific studies on pastoral traditional ecological knowledge. We reviewed 152 papers in detail (selected randomly from the 288) for their content, and focused specifically on 61 papers that explicitly mentioned one of the four types of knowledge transition (i.e., retention, erosion, adaptation, or hybridization). Studies on pastoral traditional knowledge represent less than 3% of all the scholarly literature on traditional ecological knowledge. Geographical distribution of the 288 case studies was largely biased. Knowledge domains of pastoral knowledge such as herd and livestock management, forage and medicinal plants, and landscape and wildlife were relatively equally covered; however, climate-related knowledge was less often studied. Of the 63 papers that explicitly mentioned transition of pastoral traditional ecological knowledge, 52 reported erosion, and only 11 studies documented explicitly knowledge retention, adaptation, or hybridization of traditional knowledge. Thus, adaptation and hybridization was understudied, although some case studies showed that adaptation and hybridization of knowledge can efficiently help pastoralists navigate among social-ecological changes. Based on the review, we found 13 drivers which were mentioned as the main reasons for knowledge transition among which social-cultural changes, formal schooling, abandonment of pastoral activities, and transition to a market economy were most often reported. We conclude that future research should focus more on the diverse dynamics of pastoral traditional knowledge, be more careful in distinguishing the four knowledge transition types, and analyze how changes in knowledge impact change in pastoral practices and lifestyles. Understanding these phenomena could help pastoralists’ adaptations and support their stewardship of their rangeland ecosystems and biocultural diversity.

Highlights

Since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the importance of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in the conservation of biological and cultural diversity has been increasingly acknowledged by both the scientific community and policy-makers around the globe (Maxted et al 2002)
Taking into account the global relevance of pastoralism, with its extent and the large number of people depending on the practice, this observation supports calls for bringing more attention to pastoral TEK concerns (Molnár 2014, FernándezGiménez 2000) that are in the agenda of the proposed International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists for 2026
The United Nations Environment Programme report on the number of studies on rangeland and pastoralism confirms that compared to other topics, research on rangelands and pastoralism is substantially lower (96,414 records from 71 million records), and that pastoral TEK studies account for only 1% of the total studies and projects on rangeland and pastoralism (Johnsen et al 2019)

Summary

Introduction

Since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the importance of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in the conservation of biological and cultural diversity has been increasingly acknowledged by both the scientific community and policy-makers around the globe (Maxted et al 2002). TEK plays a vital role in the livelihoods of rural communities and the sustainable management and use of natural resources by Indigenous peoples and local communities (Olsson and Folke 2001). Opinions about TEK, previously rife with negative characteristics such as being static and archaic, are appreciating the dynamic nature of this knowledge and related practices. There is mounting evidence that TEK is adaptive to changes in the environment and is fluid with social-economic and cultural changes (Berkes et al 2000, McCarter et al 2014). Not all changes in Indigenous and local knowledge systems should be labeled as knowledge loss as long as loss of knowledge is not accidental and does not impair the efficient functioning of the practice. Changes should often be evaluated from an adaptation perspective (Jandreau and Berkes 2016)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion