See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/366788186

Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management: A Conceptual

Framework

Chapter · January 2023

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-16840-6_1

CITATIONS READS

14 828

2 authors:

S. C. Rai Prabuddh Kumar Mishra

delhi school of economics University of Delhi
151 PUBLICATIONS 2,908 CITATIONS 82 PUBLICATIONS 1,145 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Prabuddh Kumar Mishra on 16 September 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Chapter 1
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
and Resource Management:
A Conceptual Framework

Suresh Chand Rai and Prabuddh Kumar Mishra

1.1 Introduction

The concept of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in common parlance is

referred to as local knowledge, traditional knowledge, native knowledge, traditional
environmental knowledge, people’s science, indigenous technological knowledge,
farmer’s knowledge, ethnoecology, folk knowledge, rural people’s knowledge, etc.
(Ellen and Harris 2000). In general, such knowledge systems evolve in the local
environment and suit to adopt the requirement of local environmental conditions
and people. This knowledge system makes progress through trial-and-error methods
and consistently incorporates outside influence to meet their condition. Globally,
different cultures have gradually evolved and developed different perspectives of
nature throughout human civilization, which is deeply embedded in indigenous
systems of beliefs and faith, through which people interpret and understand their
biophysical environment (Iaccarino 2003). The traditional ecological systems of
environmental protection have become a fundamental part of the cultural and social
identity of many ethnic communities throughout the world. Geographers, anthropol-
ogists, ethnobotanists, policymakers, and other social scientists have conceptualized
the concept of TEK from their perspectives. Till the twentieth century, culture-specific
knowledge was predominant in anthropology, but recently scholars from various
disciplines have shown interest in realizing the importance of this vast untapped
knowledge system. There are mainly four different approaches which characterize the
anthropological knowledge on research: descriptive historical particularism, cogni-
tive anthropology, cultural ecology, and human ecology. The first two approaches

S. C. Rai (B)
Department of Geography, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, Delhi 110007, India
e-mail: raisc1958du@[Link]
P. K. Mishra
Department of Geography, Shivaji College, University of Delhi, Delhi 110027, India
e-mail: prabuddh@[Link]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 1

S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra (eds.), Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Resource
Management in Asia, [Link]
2 S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra

are especially more relevant for the debate related to intellectual property. Whereas,
descriptive historical particularism highlights the individuality and importance of
each culture as demonstrated in its valuable knowledge of natural resource conser-
vation, plants, animals’ astronomy, weather, etc. On the other hand, cultural ecology
focuses on the role of indigenous knowledge in adapting to a particular physical
condition (Orlove 1980).
In recent decades, TEK has been recognized as an important starting point to
bring out effective technology packages for the management and conservation of
natural resources. According to Richards (1980), indigenous knowledge is managed
and maintained by the people in the native communities, often over several centuries
in response to the specific environmental and social milieu. Blaikie and Brookfield
(1987) raised several questions regarding the efficiency of indigenous water and soil
conservation methods. Such as How serious are these problems, and for whom?
Answers to these questions are still some of the most crucial issues in develop-
ment today. Warren (1991) advocated the positive strength of TEK in developmental
projects. Biggelaar (1991) focused on the use of TEK in agriculture in order to formu-
late more adaptable and suitable technologies for the prevailing farming conditions.
Wellard and Copestake (1993) investigated that through TEK farmers can provide
better insights into agro-ecosystems.
Berkes (1993) advocated that indigenous knowledge is gathered through an array
of observations communicated or passed on from one generation to another. For
ages, indigenous people are dependent for their survival on local resources, and they
have developed ways to conserve their surrounding natural resources. Regarding
the insight on indigenous ecological knowledge, DeWalt (1994) says “we are not
unsure what it is, it is local people’s knowledge, what ordinarily folk knows”. TEK
was previously dismissed by referring to “unscientific” but it is now considered more
environmentally sound and productive and often becomes crucial for the development
of successful sustainable development strategies.
Mathias (1994) in his work reviewed the characteristics, conservational aspects,
and usefulness of TEK in sustainable resource management. He described about the
methodology and strategy for the conservation of indigenous knowledge that can
be carried out within and outside the indigenous communities. Biot et al. (1995)
in their study present the critical reviews of approaches to tackle land degradation.
Birmingham (1998) in different agro-ecological zones of West Africa tried to develop
approaches and methodologies to recover TEK of land typologies and soil types
among ethnic groups.
Kessler (2006) presented a detailed analysis and synthesis of soil degradation in the
Inter-Andean valleys of Bolivia wherein he emphasized the loss of soil fertility that
often occurs due to land-use changes and inappropriate land management practices.
Such results lead to reduced infiltration rates, higher runoff and erosion, and thus
continuous soil degradation. He also focused on the participation of the local people
in fair SWC practices and strategies to tackle land degradation. Mishra and Rai (2013,
2014) discussed adequately indigenous conservation practices for the conservation
of soil, water, and nutrient conservation and their financial efficiency.
1 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management … 3

Several studies and investigations have appeared in the literature over the past few
decades which focused on a better understanding of TEK and its potential develop-
ment in various fields (Warren 1991; Sillitoe 1998). A systematic enquiry and review
of the literature represent that there is no shortage of studies on the theme, but very
few specific studies have been undertaken to understand the complexity of TEK and
its role in sustainable environmental management. In this context, it’s imperative to
widen the scope of the field for a better understanding of the theme. Therefore, the
present study tries to attempt for better understanding of various aspects of TEK as
scientific knowledge and its role in sustainable environmental management.

1.2 Understanding Knowledge

Knowledge can be understood as a processed result of information and learning

systems of cognitive action of knowing and perceiving. A cognitive system coheres—
it sticks together different knowledge and still remains a single whole. It goes beyond
the modernist single way, or even the post-modernist recognition of fractured and
multiple different knowledge systems. It implies synthesis and the capacity to change
and adapt. Knowledge has become the most important factor in any kind of develop-
ment. The ability of a society to produce, select, adapt, and depend upon the knowl-
edge they possess. Knowledge is more a context-specific interpretation, which is
endowed in the mind o the people, who evolve. Knowledge varies between persons,
socially and developmentally. Moreover, knowledge is substantive (Cohen 1993),
“practice” (Hobart 1993), and practical, situated activity, constituted by a past but
changing history of practices. To construct local knowledge as systematic or even to
classify practice of dealing with the world of knowledge is to domesticate practices
by recourse yet again to a hegemonic epistemology. For local people, the disputa-
tion with experts may not call into question the substance of their knowledge but its
appropriateness. The sense of discrete local knowledge does not deny that outsiders
could know “what we know but rather they could know” as we know. Within the
framework of local knowledge, there is much real local knowledge as Geertz use
the term, suggesting differing hermeneutic, way of imagining and interpreting “real-
ity” (Geertz 1983). So, knowledge is socially generated as the authentic expression
of cognitive diversity within the community, common sense thinking of everyday
life what Berger and Luckmann (1967) term “reality”, i.e. socially constructed and
oriented toward resolving the practical problem of everyday life. In the positivist
doctrine formulated by August Comte, scientific knowledge was only true knowl-
edge. Durkheim understood social reality in terms of objective measurable social
facts (Durkheim 1964).
Barth (1981) in his study of the ethnography of human knowledge maintains that
“knowledge in its different modes can range from an assemblage of disconnected
empirical detail to a ‘theory of everything’… as we are in the world constructed on
the principle of sociality and morality, not mechanical causality”. Knowledge goes
4 S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra

hand in hand with culture for anthropologists. According to Barth (1981) knowl-
edge enables people with material for reflection and premises for action, whereas a
culture too readily comes to embrace also that reflection and those actions. Further-
more, actions become knowledge to others only after the fact. Thus, the concept of
“knowledge” situates its items in a particular and undisputable way relative to events,
social relationships, and actions.
Knowledge is distributed in a population while culture makes us think in terms of
diffuse sharing. Out scrutiny is directed to the distribution of knowledge—its pres-
ence or absence in particular persons—and the processes affecting these distributions
can become the objects of study. Russel (1948) says knowledge is “what a person
knows”. He points out that knowledge is dependent on that person’s own individual
experience saying “he knows what he has seen and heard, what he has read and
what he has been told, and also what from these data he has been able to infer”.
Much of our knowledge is accumulated by learning from others (Barth 1981), which
are always ineluctably locally invisible from their instrument and their encasement.
Barth (1981) presents three components of knowledge. First, any traditional knowl-
edge contains a corpus of substantive assertions and ideas about the aspect of the
world. Second, it must be instantiated and communicated in one or several media as
a series of partial representations in the form of words, concrete symbols, pointing
gestures, and actions. And thirdly, it will be distributed, communicated, employed,
and transmitted within a series of instituted social relations. These three facets of
knowledge are interconnected as appeared together precisely in the particular actions
of every event of the application of knowledge, in every transaction of knowledge,
and in every performance.
Different modes of traditional knowledge are entangled from the mode of iden-
tity. Fact knowledge is not treated on its inherent merits, even if it was possible to
establish what these might be. Therefore, knowledge is related to use and practice.
It can maintain, transfer, and exchange that serves a purpose. An ideal system of
knowledge is generally seen as one that derives its corpus from the abstract prin-
ciple of systematic deduction. Modern academic knowledge is a “way of knowing”
that emerged historically through the union of a number of ideas that are subjected
to global systematization through centers of calculation nurturing its spectacular
accumulation, scope, and power (Latour 1987).

1.3 Concept of Traditional Ecological Knowledge

Traditional ecological knowledge is a concept that is being recognized by conser-

vationists, particularly at the grassroots community level. In this concept, the word
“traditional” is a little complex. For some people, the word “traditional” signifies
that people are still practicing the old ways or their knowledge is based on some
kind of superstition. Whereas, for many others, the meaning of TEK is having or
knowing about the knowledge in different ways. It is different from the dimension
of knowledge itself. Their knowledge is undergoing continuous revision. In more
1 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management … 5

simple words, we can say that TEK is an assimilation of learning and sharing of
local knowledge.
Traditional indigenous knowledge is unique local knowledge for any community,
society, or its culture. On the grassroots level of these local communities, all the
decisions are based on local knowledge in various fields such as agriculture, educa-
tion, food, health, and management of natural resources (Warren 1991). This is a
form of informal knowledge of a geographical region that is based on local tradi-
tion, customs, culture nonwestern beliefs, and practices and survived for a long time.
(Horsthemke 2004). This type of indigenous knowledge is being utilized and prac-
ticed by the people for generations and it is developed and progressed by way of
a trial-and-error process. This method has provided enough flexibility to this local
knowledge to endure with the changes in different time periods. (Kalawole 2001;
Stone 2007). In various cases, it has been observed that the local knowledge has
been continuously passed in the oral form from one person to another person for

Fig. 1.1 Factors that influence traditional knowledge system (Gopalan and Reedy 2006)
6 S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra

generations in the form of arts, stories, songs, paintings, laws, etc. According to
Leach and Mearns (1996), “indigenous knowledge is frequently charged with being
methodically wide…. unproven populist or politically naive; and that it generates
findings that are too complicated to be of practical use to policymakers”. Often it
has been observed that indigenous knowledge and western sciences are two different
approaches and dualistic knowledge systems. The modern sciences are believed that
it is based on systematic, rational, logical, open and very much based on intelligence
and objective reality. Whereas, traditional indigenous knowledge is considered as
being based on primitive, traditional, closed, emotional, and unintellectual systems
(Mitchel 1995; Herbert 2000). Therefore, the western knowledge is basically seen
as modernity, and the traditional knowledge system is mainly considered as the
backward and traditional way of life. According to Davies et al. (1994) and Kallard
(2000) in the context of underprivileged poor communities, the traditional knowledge
system has some advantages over the modern science. They argue that in TKS the
local knowledge is tested and it is examined in the situation of survival which is more
meaningful for the day-to-day existence. Therefore, traditional knowledge is based
on sensible, realistic, and practical considerations of everyday life. Due to the pres-
ence of these elements, traditional knowledge incorporates experimental, creative,
and dynamic dimensions. It is also influenced by various innovations inside to meet
the new conditions. In nutshell, TEK is the practices and innovations of indigenous
and local communities in different parts of the world. The TEK is mainly derived
from one generation to another in the form of folklore, stories, songs, cultural beliefs
and values, proverbs, community rituals, customs, and laws including knowledge of
agricultural practices, animal breeds, and plant species. The traditional knowledge
is shared and communicated orally through the culture that centers on educational
initiatives, known practices and derived technologies, belief systems, more than all,
and the operating human resources as represented in (Fig. 1.1).

1.4 Linking Culture and Nature

There is a very close relationship between culture and nature. India, China, and
ancient Babylon and Egypt have seen great civilizations. In these regions, various
religions such as Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, and even
Shamanism have shaped links between humans and nature for thousands of years.
There has been a continuous link between the management of sustainable resource
use for the conservation and management of natural and cultural landscapes. In border
areas of India, China, Bhutan, and Nepal, there are many examples of environmental
protection such as sacred forests, lakes, headwater forests, and mountains maintained
by local communities.
1 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management … 7

1.4.1 Knowledge-Practice-Belief: A Framework for Analysis

The TEK or local knowledge starts at the level of the systematic classification and
then moves toward a more precise understanding of the processes. There are many
ways to understand and comprehend the traditional knowledge systems; a pioneer of
the discipline Berkes (1993) considered four interrelated levels. Initially, local people
have the knowledge about the soil, various plants grown over it, animals, and land-
scape. This is the level that includes the identification and classification of various
species, their distribution and behavior, and life histories. This type of knowledge
has survival values as it is based on the first-hand empirical observation. It is also
important to note that for ensuring the sustainable use and management of resources,
only local knowledge may not be helpful or sufficient. Therefore, in the second level
with the local indigenous environmental knowledge, appropriate techniques, tools,
and methods are also included for the resource management. It also requires the
understanding of the functional and symbiotic relationship among various species
and other ecological processes. The third level of analysis includes suitable social
institutions and codes of relationships. Whereas, the fourth level includes the world-
wide view which moderates and manages the environmental perception and provides
meaning to the observation. This level incorporates belief systems, ethics, religion,
etc. which all together analyzes the traditional knowledge.
Originally the indigenous knowledge focused more upon technique-based knowl-
edge of the environment but after time its scope has widened and now its philosophy
goes beyond this narrow understanding. In the border sense, the IK is contemplated
with cultural knowledge socio-economic, political, and spiritual aspects of life. This
type of knowledge has greater potential in the fields of natural resource manage-
ment, ecological research, environmental and biological assessment conservation,
and preparation of alternative economic strategies. Besides this, TEK has its own
limitation which must be recognized. Generally, it is considered or we have a common
notion that whatever the local people in the community do is in harmony with the
natural environment. It is not always critically evaluated before reaching a final
conclusion. There are several examples and evidence that indigenous people have
also done “sins” such as over-cultivation, overhunting, overgrazing, and overfishing.
For the utilization of more TEK, it should be properly documented and method-
ological and ethical considerations must be followed by the researchers while doing
the research in the indigenous communities. For all such studies, the participatory
rural appraisal is a widely accepted method in which people from the local communi-
ties can be engaged in the research process. In this process, there is very less outside
involvement and local people are assisted by researchers to record their indigenous
knowledge. Here, it’s very important for the researcher to understand about their
right over intellectual property. People in the local communities have become more
concerned about that knowledge. They feel that their indigenous knowledge is being
stolen without any awareness or consent and frequently used by the companies for
the economic befits. The local communities are not getting any kind of benefit out
of their traditional knowledge. Therefore, ethical consideration and protection of
8 S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra

local knowledge have become a matter of concern. It has been realized over time
that while carrying out or planning for any project, TEK must be taken into consid-
eration as it can provide valuable information about the environment and also for
its sustainable management in an effective manner. IK is also very helpful and it is
advantageous because it is based on locally available materials and skills which is
more cost-effective in comparison with outside technologies because local people do
not require any kind of specialized training. The incorporation of TEK into various
developmental or research projects can strengthen self-determination and sufficiency
with local empowerment. These practices may further enhance management plans
and reliability among the local communities and outside researchers and will motivate
them to tackle local problems with their local knowledge.

1.5 Methods of Documentation of TEK

The indigenous practices are documented by using various methods by different

scholars. International Institute for Rural Reconstruction (1996) outlined several
ways to identify indigenous knowledge such as field observation, participant and
non-participant observation, surveys, case studies, in-depth interviews, group discus-
sions, brainstorming sessions, SWOT analysis, village workshops, village reflec-
tions, taxonomies, flow chart mapping, and participatory video/photo documenta-
tion. Similarly, the TEK is also recorded and documented in several descriptive
texts including stories, reports, taxonomies, songs, audiovisuals, seasonal patterns,
etc. The TEK is stored in various forms in the local communities such as books,
Journals, audiovisuals, museums, and other textual documents.
According to Karter (1993), the verbal type of assessment does not always provide
desired results but field-based prolonged observations are critically crucial for real
insight while documenting TEK. Chande (1993) suggested that personal interviews,
surveys, and competitions help in the documentation of TEK. Dubey et al. (1993) have
suggested various other methods for the documentation of local people’s knowledge.
This type of method includes oral history, critical incidents, case studies, making
diagrams, farmers’ indicator inventory, and preference ranking.
Mane and Singh (1993) used methods like field observation, dialogues, and joint
interpretations to arrive at conclusions to document indigenous practice. Rajasekaran
(1993) documented details of the indigenous knowledge system using participatory
farmer methods such as participant observations and unstructured exchanges. Singh
and Rajoo (1993) used various methods such as agroecosystem analysis, interviews,
and participant observations while Vivekanandan (1993) advised methods such as
group discussion and village-level workshops with farmers along with extensive field
studies in the interiors. He also indicated publishing newsletters in the local language
for the communication of traditional farm technologies. As reported by Hanyani et al.
(1996), the essential sources of indigenous culture are innovative farmers, indige-
nous experts, opinion leaders, and village elders. Kanagasabapthi (1996) concluded
that various methods that involve local participants are essential for documenting
1 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management … 9

indigenous practices. These methods include individual and group interviews, obser-
vations of participants, joint interpretations, structured and unstructured interactions,
and preference ranking along with field observations and case histories.
In the era of science and technology, any practice without a scientific basis for
its successful results is not considered valid and fruitful. In many cases, respondents
are not able to give an explanation regarding the scientific basis behind the indige-
nous practices; therefore, scientists are responsible for documenting, testing, veri-
fying, validating, and advocating practices and finding out their rationality. Pulmate
and Babu (1993) and Somasundaram (1995) reported few studies on the rationality
of indigenous knowledge. Hence, testing rationality, as perceived by the scientist
globally, has been one of the means to validate the indigenous knowledge system.

1.6 Conclusion

In developed countries, social and scientific researchers have started to recognize that
traditional indigenous knowledge system can play a very important positive role in the
implementation and formulation of sustainable development policies and programs.
The final statement of the world commission on environment and development has
also recognized a similar conclusion about TEK. Some traditional lifestyles are
threatened with virtual extinction by insensitive development over which the indige-
nous peoples have no participation. It was emphasized that the traditional rights of
the local communities should be recognized and they should be given a more decisive
voice in formulating policies about resource development in their areas. Many people
are of the opinion that our species and our Earth are approaching toward intersec-
tion. Even some agree on the need for change in terms of behaviors, human values,
and institutions. Some recommend an elitist approach, driven by the dominant value
system of western liberal industrial democracies. Others seek the inclusion of many
different voices and views within the dominant paradigm through accommodation
or assimilation. These discussions have implications for traditional communities and
for traditional ecological knowledge. If the dominant paradigm takes only the tools
of traditional ecological knowledge and assimilates them, we may see changes, but
they will be circumscribed by the assumptions of that dominant paradigm.
Over the past few years, many scholarly discussions have recognized traditional
ecological knowledge as a significant resource for development. The present article
also attempts to examine the concept of indigenous knowledge and the strategies
its advocates present to promote development. To productively engage indigenous
knowledge in development, we must go beyond the dichotomy of indigenous vs.
scientific and work toward greater autonomy for “indigenous” peoples.
10 S. C. Rai and P. K. Mishra

References

Barth F (1981) Process and form in social life: selected essays of Fredrich Barth, vol I. Routledge,
Kegan Poul Ltd
Berger PL, Luckmann T (1967) The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of
knowledge. Penguin Book, London
Berkes F (1993) Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective. In: Inglis JT (ed) Traditional
ecological knowledge: concept and cases. International Research Center and International
Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Canada
Biggelaar CD (1991) Farming systems development: synthesizing indigenous and scientific
knowledge systems. Agric Hum Values 8(1/2):25–36
Biot Y, Laikie PM, Jackson C, Jones P (1995) Rethinking research on land degradation in developing
countries. World Bank, Washington, DC
Birmingham D (1998) Learning local knowledge of soils: a focus on methodology. Indigenous
Knowl Dev Monitor 6(2):111–113
Blaikie P, Brookfield H (1987) Land degradation and society. London
Chande S (1993) Developing a strategy for integrating indigenous knowledge system in the area of
food, nutrition and family welfare with formal research system. In: Indigenous technologies for
sustainable agriculture, paper presented in national seminar, March 23–25. New Delhi
Cohen AP (1993) Segmentary knowledge: a Whalsay sketch. In: Mark Hobart (ed) Anthropological
critique of development: the growth of ignorance. Cambridge University Press, New York
Davies BR, Thoms MC, Walker KF, O’Keefe JH, Gore JA (1994) Dryland rivers: their ecology,
conservation and management. In: Calow P, Petts GE (eds) The rivers handbook, vol 2. Blackwell
Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 484–511
De Walt B (1994) Using indigenous knowledge to improve agriculture and natural resource
management. Hum Organ 53(2):123–131. [Link]
3n73
Dubey VK; Naraina GS; Gupta SL (1993) Methodologies for taping and documenting indigenous
knowledge technologies. Paper presented at the national seminar on indigenous technologies for
sustainable agriculture, March 23–25. New Delhi
Durkheim E (1964) The rules of sociological method. Free Press, Glencoe
Ellen RF; Harris H (2000) Indigenous knowledge and its transformations: critical anthropological
perspectives. Hardwood Academic Publishers
Geertz C (1983) Local knowledge: facts and law in comparative perspective. In: Local knowledge:
further essay in interpretive anthropology. Basic Book, New York
Gopalan A, Reedy PVRM (2006) Empowerment through traditional knowledge system for
agricultural sustainability. Indian J Tradit Knowl 5 (1):158–161
Hanyani M, BT Hebinck P (1996) Formal and informal knowledge networks in conservation forestry
in Zimbabwe. Indigenous Knowl Dev Monitor 4(3):3–6
Herbert S (2000) For ethnography. Progr Hum Geogr 24:550–568
Hobart M (1993) Introduction in Anthropological critique of development: the growth of ignorance
(ed). Rutledge Press, London
Horsthemke K (2004) Knowledge, education and the limits of africanisation. J Philos Educ 38(4)
Iaccarino M (2003) Science and culture. EMBO Rep 4:220–223
IIRR (1996) Recording and using indigenous knowledge: a manual. International Institute for Rural
Reconstruction (IIRR), Silang, Cavite, Philippines
Kalawole OP (2001) Local knowledge utilization and sustainable rural development in the 21st
century. Indig Knowl Monitor 9(3) November
Kallard A (2000) Indigenous knowledge: prospects and limitations. In: Ellen R, Parkes P, Bicker A
(ed) Indigenous environmental knowledge and its trasformations. Harwood Academic Publishers,
Amsterdam, pp 1–33
1 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management … 11

Kanagasabapthi K (1996) Indigenous knowledge system of tribals for agricultural develop-

ment. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Department of Agricultural Extension, Annamalai University,
Annamalainagar
Karter A (1993) Indigenous learning in crafts: a pilot research effort. Indig Knowl Dev Monitor
1(1):20–22
Kessler A (2006) Moving people-towards collective action in soil and water conservation’s
experiences from the Bolivian mountain valleys. Ph.D Dissertation, Wageningen University
Latour B (1987) Science in action. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Leach M, Mearns R (1996) The use of the land: challenging received wisdom in the African
environments (ed). International African Institute, London
Mane PM, Singh RP (1993) Study and documentation of indigenous knowledge/traditional agri-
cultural practices of the tribal farmers. Paper presented at the national seminar on indigenous
technologies for sustainable agriculture, March 23–25. New Delhi
Mathias E (1994) Indigenous knowledge and sustainable development. Working Paper No. 53,
International Institute of Rural Reconstruction, Silang
Mishra PK, Rai SC (2013) Use of indigenous soil and water conservation practices among farmers
in Sikkim Himalaya. Indian J Trad Knowl 12(3):454–464
Mishra PK, Rai SC (2014) A cost-benefit analysis of indigenous soil and water conservation
measures in Sikkim Himalaya India. Mt Res Dev 34(1):27–35
Mitchel T (1995) The object of development: America’s Egypt. In: Crush J (ed) Power of
development. Routledge, London, pp 129–157
Orlove BS (1980) Ecological anthropology. Ann Rev Anthropol 235–273
Pulmate L, Babu AR (1993) A reasoned exposition of the traditional farm practices under use by
the farmers of shifting and settled cultivation system in Manipur. Paper presented at the national
seminar on indigenous technologies for sustainable agriculture, March 23–25, New Delhi
Rajasekaran B (1993) A framework for incorporating indigenous knowledge system into agriculture
research, extension and NGO’s for sustainable agricultural development. Studies in technology
and social change. Paper. No.21. Technology and social change program, Iowa State University,
Ames
Richards P (1980) Community environmental knowledge. In: Brokensha DW, Warren DM, Werner
O (eds) Indigenous knowledge systems and development. University Press of America, Lahham,
MD, USA, pp 183–196
Russel B (1948) Human knowledge: the scopes and limits. Simon and Schuster, New York
Sillitoe P (1998) The development of indigenous knowledge: a new applied anthropology. Curr
Anthropol 39(2):223–252
Singh V, Rajoo RK (1993) Traditional knowledge and wisdom of tribal farmers with particular
reference to district Lahul Spiti (HP). Paper presented at the national seminar on indigenous
technologies for sustainable agriculture, March 23–25, New Delhi
Stone GD (2007) Agriculture deskilling and the spread of genetically modified cotton. In Warrangil
current anthropology the 21st century. Indig Knowl Monitor 9:(3) November
Vivekanandan P (1993) Approaches in documenting traditional technologies: process and outcome
in Tamil Nadu. Paper presented at the national seminar on indigenous technologies for sustainable
agriculture, March 23–25, New Delhi
Warren DM (1991) Using indigenous knowledge for agricultural development. World Bank
Discussion Paper, No 127, p 46
Wellard K, Copestake JG (1993) NGOs and the State in Africa: rethinking roles in sustainable
agricultural development. Routledge, London
 Part I
Concept

View publication stats