Page 142 [142]
140 ANNA VARGA
— traditional methods of learning (e.g., directly transmitting knowledge from
generation to generation through tales and stories, as well as learning directly
from nature) (Berkes et al. 2000; Turner et al. 2000; Whiteman — Cooper
2000; Berkes 2008: 203-220; Zs. Molnar 2014).
The research into traditional knowledge of nature, including traditional
ecological knowledge (e.g. use of medicinal herbs and domestication of diverse
animal and plant species) has intrigued the realm of science for thousands of years
(first of all, medical and agrarian sciences, e.g., Cato De agriculture [c. 160 BC],
Columella De re rustica |c. 61-65 AD; 2005]). Contemporary research in traditional
ecological knowledge gathered momentum in the second half of the 20% century,
first of all in response to cultural anthropological, ecological and environmentalist
questions, and also connected to the protection of the human rights of indigenous
people in the colonies (Smith 2010; Hunn 2007; Berkes 2008: 258). These
investigations tend to formulate some recommendations for sustainability or nature
conservation, which may refer to the solution of the given question (Berkes et al.
2000), or to the support and application of traditional ecological knowledge (Varga
et al. 2017b; Varga et al. 2019). In the past decades, there has been a steady increase
in conservationist activities which have effectively applied TEK at both theoretical
and practical levels (e.g. Hunn et al. 2003: 79; Ens et al. 2015; Roué — Molnar
2017). It is important to mention, however, that there are also some less successful
cases. These warn us to have a more thorough knowledge of this kind of cognition
and a more humble approach (Nadasdy 1999; Ween Riseth 2011; Padilla — Kofinas
2014; Pooley et al 2014). There can be several factors that aggravate the employment
of TEK in science and nature conservation. The extended list of Huntington
(2000) and Heikkinen et al. (2012) include:
— traditional and academic (Western scientific) knowledge types are
fundamentally (e.g. epistemologically) different (Barkes 2008: 10-16);
— TEK often provides knowledge of different species and habitats which
conservationists would like to protect (Biré et al. 2014);
— in many communities, TEK is largely lost, often living in memory alone,
and does not form part of living practice (Benz et al. 2000; Biirgi et al. 2013);
— the fortress-type nature conservation practice which completely excludes
human activity, chased local people away; with them, traditional ecological
knowledge of that area also disappeared (Riseth 2007);
— owing to the excessively accelerated social, economic and environmental
changes, the former traditional ecological knowledge lags behind in adaptation,
and may lose validity (Fernandez-Llamazares et al. 2015);
— in many cases, only the easily applicable TEK elements (general practical
information) were applied to nature conservation (Reo 2011: 1-2), whereas
the ethical and effective application of TEK requires that all four aspects of
traditional ecological knowledge be integrated and fostered in their entirety
(e.g., Nadasdy 1999; Berkes et al. 2000).