Future is traditional: Traditional ecological knowledge’s transformative potential in Canadian law

Law360 Canada (October 1, 2025, 9:22 AM EDT) --

Kaelan Leslie

Indigenous peoples in Saskatchewan have long cultivated diverse and sustainable land stewardship practices that are integral to their cultural frameworks and relational worldviews. Yet, despite their proven ecological value, traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) remains largely peripheral within provincial environmental policy. In the West, where agriculture and extractive industries dominate economic life, the proactive incorporation of Indigenous epistemologies of land, grounded in reciprocity, respect, and intergenerational responsibility, has the capacity to reshape sustainability discourse, embed resilience and foster dialogue between competing normative orders. The integration of TEK within legal regimes, both in Western provinces and throughout Canada, thus offers more than a niche perspective; it represents a pathway toward strengthened community resilience, cross-cultural collaboration and a more just ecological future.

TEK provides a jurisprudential framework for understanding the inseparability of environment, land and resource governance. Rooted in intergenerational transmission of knowledge and stewardship, it emphasizes holistic and context-specific approaches to sustainability. At a time when climate instability, biodiversity loss and structural inequality converge as global challenges and demand legal response, TEK offers valuable insights into how legal systems might simultaneously engage ecological and social imperatives. Its incorporation can inspire doctrinal and institutional reforms that prioritize ecological responsibility, relational accountability and reconciliation, long-term.

TEK and the western paradigm

While no single authoritative definition of TEK exists, its scholarly adoption since the 1980s has focused on knowledge, practice and belief systems transmitted intergenerationally and oriented around living being-environment relations. TEK is not merely a set of techniques; it constitutes a holistic epistemology rooted in centuries of lived experiences, embedding land use within cultural identity, spiritual obligation and ecological stewardship. For instance, the Dene Peoples of northern Saskatchewan exemplify this ethic through their sustained relationship with caribou herds: sustainable harvesting practices, spiritual ceremonies and cultural narratives converge to reinforce conservation as both a material and moral imperative.

By contrast, Western scientific paradigms often privilege reductionist inquiry, analyzing discrete components of ecological systems in isolation, insulating culture from nature. This epistemic divergence has historically relegated TEK to the margins of resource governance, environmental protection and policy development. Thus, decision-making frameworks remain anchored in Eurocentric methodologies that presume human dominion over nature, positioning TEK as secondary rather than co-equal.

TEK in provincial and federal law

At the provincial level, Saskatchewan’s legal recognition of TEK is budding. The Government of Saskatchewan First Nation and Métis Consultation Policy Framework provides a procedural mechanism for engagement, particularly in environmental assessments. Yet, as of 2025 the Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Act itself does not embed statutory requirements for Indigenous consultation or the incorporation of TEK. Current ministry guidelines remain under development, underscoring the lack of binding legislative integration. Embedding reconciliatory and TEK-specific provisions directly into statute would enhance the legitimacy and robustness of provincial environmental governance by ensuring Indigenous ecological perspectives are not discretionary, but mandatory components of decision-making.

Federally, TEK has gained more explicit legislative footholds. The Impact Assessment Act requires consultation with Indigenous peoples and includes procedural protections, such as confidentiality safeguards and exceptions from registry disclosure, to preserve TEK integrity. These mechanisms reflect a federal institutional recognition of TEK’s relevance to environmental assessments and resource project approvals. Yet, TEK often remains framed as supplementary to Western scientific methodologies, reinforcing asymmetrical authority. A more meaningful integration would involve granting Indigenous communities greater authority in environmental decision-making, such as required co-management regimes, legal recognition of Indigenous-led impact assessments, and legal and institutional pluralism between Indigenous and Western epistemologies within federal regulatory processes.

TEKs transformative promise

While there is a clear awareness that locally produced historical and contemporary knowledge and wisdom are vital to conversations about the environment and biodiversity and Indigenous empowerment, their practical integration into Canadian environmental law and policy still faces challenges and criticisms. Tokenistic actions to collect knowledge without establishing cross-cultural understandings and securing fair negotiating terms risk undermining trust and perpetuating epistemic injustice. Genuine integration demands frameworks that respect Indigenous self-determination, safeguard intellectual and cultural property and reconfigure legal institutions in a cohesive and sustainable manner.

In Saskatchewan and across Canada, TEK has the immense potential to recalibrate environmental law by bridging ecological and social justice imperatives. Enshrining TEK within binding statutory and regulatory frameworks would reconceptualize Indigenous knowledge holders as co-equal partners in governance, not accessory consultees. Such reform would advance reconciliation, strengthen environmental health, and embed intergenerational equity at the core of legal decision-making. In doing so, TEK challenges Canadian law to expand its normative foundations toward a symmetrical jurisprudence that honours relational responsibility to land and to future generations.

Kaelan Leslie is a Juris Doctor candidate (Class of 2027) at the University of Saskatchewan College of Law, holding a First Class Honours Bachelor of Arts in Law and Society with a minor in History from the University of Calgary, where she developed an interdisciplinary foundation in legal, historical and sociopolitical analysis. Through her recent work with Pro Bono Students Canada and the Saskatchewan Association for Environmental Law, she has cultivated a commitment to creating accessible, community-engaged legal content that bridges the gap between complex legal frameworks and public understanding.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.