Traditional Ecological Knowledge versus Ecological Wisdom: Are They Dissimilar in Cultural Landscape Research?

Rosyi Damayanti T. Manningtyas and Katsunori Furuya
Additional contact information
Rosyi Damayanti T. Manningtyas: Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Agriculture, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
Katsunori Furuya: Department of Environmental Science and Landscape Architecture, Graduate School of Horticulture, Chiba University, Chiba 271-8510, Japan

Land, 2022, vol. 11, issue 8, 1-16

Abstract: Research into traditional ecological knowledge has become a reference in environmental management. This is followed by ecological wisdom that has emerged and has become a new discourse in landscape planning and design. However, traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom are similar in research and confounding when determining the research scope. Therefore, this study aims to define the distinction between traditional ecological knowledge and ecological wisdom in research through a systematic review of research articles, book chapters, and reviews published from 2017 to 2021. The selected primary studies were analyzed using bibliometric analysis run by VOS Viewer, followed by comparative analysis towards thematic codes. The coding process for the comparative analysis was conducted using NVivo. This study found that research on traditional ecological knowledge and ecological wisdom converges, especially on the topic of indigenous cultural capital, ecosystem services, and sustainability. The distinction between TEK and EW lies in their definition, agent, source, and scope. We propose a conceptual framework to understand the relationship between TEK and EW in the cultural landscape and clarify the scope of the analysis in this research. This study would help scholars develop research on both topics precisely and avoid bias in the theoretical discussion.

Keywords: cultural landscape; ecological wisdom; NVivo; traditional ecological knowledge; VOS Viewer (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1123/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1123/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1123-:d:869014

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().