I think that focusing on social learning (which refers to learning processes among a group of people who seek to improve a common situation and take action collectively), could facilitate the use of TEK. Because with social learning, the indigenous (or traditional) knowledge are passed down informally (though sometimes formally) from generation to generation.

I wrote about this in the 1990s in relation to arboreal-based subsistence practices in island Southeast Asia and the Pacific - i.e., Wallacea to Greater Near Oceania as termed by Roger Green. It was a large part of my anthropology dissertation - 1999; University of Hawaii; summed up in a World Archaeology 2000 paper - primarily the archaeological part. I “do” a version of historical ecology: using archaeological, environmental, historic and ethnographic data to look at long-term human-environment trends (i.e., very diachronic ecologies with humans as the central point of analysis). In the case with Maluku to the Solomons and arboreal-based economies, it’s 40-50 thousand years. As far as the knowledge goes, hundreds and probably thousands of years of successful and unsuccessful practices (all of which can essentially be viewed as experiments and their results) are condensed into various knowledge and belief packages for more effective and efficient cultural transmission and enforcement of “TEK”. “Sasi" and “Matakau” (generally resulting in supernatural threats or curses for breaking resource extraction taboos ranging from individual holdings to community holdings), for example, are effective means of preventing over-extraction of resources in Maluku (pant, animal, etc.). A penchant for multi-cropping rather than mono-cropping keeps biodiversity high and overall subsistence resiliency strong (although it was disrupted by western and modern plantation systems which has taken a social, economic, and environmental toll); the same with food choices and eating habits. They do and have produced, extracted and managed at “industrial” scales (at least large scales; not only subsistence) of export production of various resources (damar, clove, nutmeg, sago, hard woods, aromatic woods, construction woods, etc.)... Can read about it if further interested.

The main point here: a considerable amount of long-term, multi-generational, multi-community “scientific” ecological experimentation is found in traditional ecological knowledge, although it’s often coded in daily habits, rituals, heuristics, taboos, beliefs, and so forth. The fact that it’s been tested for generations makes it all the more valuable. The knowledge and practices face evolutionary process. Some fall out over time. New ones emerge. And some are enduring for very good reasons. It’s often a matter of translating the “TEK” as you call it into modern scientific-speak to realize the science has always been there.

Hope this helps. Interesting project/ideas. And, my apologies for the rather rapid off the cuff and poorly edited answer. More coming. Thanks again.

Dear David,

Thank you. I am looking forward to receive more input from your end in particular how TEK is being used or would be applied in resource management, healing human health and planet's health .

But you have stated "In the case with Maluku to the Solomons and arboreal-based economies, it’s 40-50 thousand years old" How it is possible while human agriculture and economy  are not more than 10000 to 12000 years' old! Don't restrict yourself to responding to this silly query.

You have much more to contribute in this regard.

Best wishes

Jayanta

It’s really a matter of humans becoming part of the ecosystem. You can take the approach of Humans being different from a “natural” system or being “naturally part of it” in various areas throughout time. In the case with Maluku, it’s a matter of when humans became part of an ecosystem. Per agriculture and technology: there are certainly thresholds of significant changes [and grossly larger impacts; many negative] by humans to various ecologies; fire, agriculture; landscaping; water control; urbanization; industrialization; introduction of invasive species; massive use of fertilizers/pesticides... For example, you might want to ask, “what is the degree of transformation of the species-genera list and ratio before and after the advent of agriculture, or colonialisation, or urbanization, or industrialization, etc. in any specified eco-zone?” What are the consequences and how do you assign good, neutral or bad? You could ask, “what are the chemical changes in soil, water and atmospheric conditions?” You could also ask, “what are the major ecosystem changes [e.g., forest conversion to grazing lands; grassland to desert; desert to monocropped ag systems...” Additionally, “what are the depletion rates of soil fertility, or mining resources, or forests?” It depends on your interest.

You can also apply it to Homo erectus, Australopithicenes, or even any other species in the ecosystem (plants, animals, viruses, etc.). You’re question on “how old” - if you’re specifically referring to genetically modern H. sapiens as the focal point - depends on when they became a member of whatever ecosystem; and there are many that they became part of throughout the planet to include "New World" (N and S America) migrations in the Pleistocene. As for H. Sapiens and the "Old World", Most of the “Old World” (e.g., Laurasia, Africa, India, etc.) as well as Sunda and Sahul (New Guinea, Australia to include island areas such as Sulawesi, Maluku, Philippines, Tasmania and Solomons/Bismarcks) were systematically colonized by the late Pleistocene. This also included plant and animal transfers (to also include microbes, etc.).

One of the central themes in the traditional relationship between man and nature is contained in the calendar. Studying the calendar on the basis of traditional knowledge can represent an important source of knowledge that should be cross-checked with formal and official calendars, especially those relating to agriculture, including those marketed through seeds.

And there is strong evidence that calendars existed well before agriculture, as smart humans began noticing all sorts of activities that recurred cyclically- moon phases, seasons, wet and dry periods, running of prey animals like deer, etc. The more we look at certain myths, the more we fathom that they also contain astronomic knowledge, which could indicate a change in the people's original location/migration, and so on. I think that we have to look at the affluent foragers before agriculture as a vast source of environmental knowledge, since their relatively stable environments still demanded of them a really deep knowledge of those resources.