In this presentation I discuss some of the basic assumptions that are commonly encountered in reports of recent research on natural resources and environment management in Southeast Asia. Four basic assumptions seem to be especially prevalent: 1. Traditional agricultural systems are superior to modern systems because they are always sustainable and environmentally benign. 2. Indigenous agroecological knowledge is always correct and valuable. 3. Community-based resource management is always the most effective and equitable system for managing resources and protecting the environment. 4. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) is always the best research method for investigating natural resources and environment management. These four assumptions form an interlinked system of thought, with each tending to support the others. Although when they were first proposed these assumptions were seen as representing a radical alternative to the conventional thinking that guided national efforts to manage natural resources and the environment, in recent years these assumptions have themselves collectively become the new conventional wisdom. In this talk I will raise some questions about the universal validity of these assumptions and will suggest that, like the old conventional wisdom that they have largely displaced, their applicability is context dependent. Thus, in doing research on natural resources and environment management we should be more sensitive to the ways in which these fundamental assumptions may influence our perceptions of problems and shape the way we design our investigations. My goal in raising these questions is not to overturn any of these assumptions or replace them with new assumptions of my own but only to stimulate more thinking and discussion about their strengths and limitations