Traditional Ecological Knowledge
Why TEK matters and what practitioners must do differently in practice.
Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) has shaped resilient landscapes and livelihoods for generations. Yet too often, in Nature‑based Solutions, TEK is treated as a ‘nice‑to‑have’.
High‑integrity Nature‑based Solutions aren’t just about what we do in ecosystems. They’re about how decisions are made, who holds power, and whether stewardship actually lasts once a project ends. This is why TEK matters so much. Drawing on CRxN experience and wider research, this learning program examines how TEK contributes to ecological fit, legitimacy, cultural continuity and durable outcomes – and the risks of recognising knowledge without shifting authority.
TEK isn’t “local data” - it’s a living governance system
One of the most important points found through our research is that TEK isn’t simply a collection of observations about seasons, species, soils, or water. TEK is a cumulative, intergenerational, place-based system that includes ecological knowledge, customary law and institutions, cultural values and spiritual responsibilities, and governance structures that regulate access, use, and care. In other words, TEK includes both knowledge and authority. The research says this plainly: when you separate knowledge from decision making power, you aren’t “using TEK” - you’re extracting information. ‑based system that includes‑making power, you aren’t “using TEK”
That matters because NbS are inherently political. When projects bring in outside expertise and keep decision making external (while “integrating” TEK as an input), NbS can inadvertently reproduce the same colonial dynamics that have historically dispossessed Indigenous Peoples and undermined local governance .
TEK is what makes NbS work - ecologically and socially
The research finds consistent evidence across Australia, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific that NbS centred on TEK and embedded in Indigenous/community governance deliver more durable outcomes across biodiversity, climate adaptation, and livelihoods. Why? Because TEK improves NbS quality in four big ways:
It improves ecological “fit” - TEK is deeply specific to place- local soils, water cycles, species behaviour, seasonal variability, and disturbance regimes. That helps NbS avoid generic, one-size-fits-all models that fail once conditions shift. ‑size‑fits‑all models that fail once conditions
It strengthens legitimacy and compliance - Where customary governance is strong, NbS are often extensions of existing stewardship institutions, not external projects imposed on top of them. That legitimacy drives stronger participation, monitoring, and long-term rule enforcement. ‑term rule enforcement.
It supports cultural continuity (which is an enabling condition for stewardship) - Biodiversity outcomes are tied to the survival of languages, cultural practices, and governance systems that carry ecological knowledge. Cultural continuity is not a “co-benefit” - it’s part of the machinery of stewardship.‑benefit”
It shifts power (and that shift improves outcomes) - “Biocultural NbS” are defined not by project type, but by who holds authority. The research distinguishes NbS that treat communities as knowledge contributors to external objectives, versus NbS where communities are rightsholders and decision-makers shaping objectives, trade-offs, implementation, and monitoring. That difference drives better equity and stronger sustainability.
What should practitioners do?
The report and learning brief, as well as webinar (recording above) shares recommendations on what practitioners need to do differently in practice. For those designing and delivering NbS — especially across Australia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific — the implications are clear:
Start with rights, tenure and authority. Before jumping into activities, we need to understand who holds rights to land and water, which institutions govern stewardship, and where decision‑making authority really sits.
Co‑design early — not after the concept note is locked in. Objectives, trade‑offs, benefit‑sharing and success measures need to be shaped with communities from the start.
Treat FPIC as a process, not paperwork. Consent needs to be revisited as projects evolve, and properly resourced with time, accessibility and facilitation.
Align finance and timelines with stewardship. TEK operates on intergenerational timeframes. Short project cycles create real risks. Durable NbS need longer‑term, flexible support for Indigenous‑ and community‑led institutions.
And finally, measure what makes NbS last. That means tracking governance quality, equity, cultural continuity and knowledge transmission — not just biophysical outputs.
Want to learn more?
Check out the resources to learn why Traditional Ecological Knowledge matters and what practitioners must do differently.