IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v34y2017i2d10.1007_s10460-016-9703-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The dispute over wild rice: an investigation of treaty agreements and Ojibwe food sovereignty

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda Raster

    (Iowa State University)

  • Christina Gish Hill

    (Iowa State University)

Abstract

The treaties established between the United States federal government and American Indian nations imply U.S. recognition of Native political sovereignty. Political sovereignty encompasses not only the ability to govern oneself but also self-determination regarding resource use, including food. This paper addresses The White Pine Treaty of 1837, which acknowledges the Ojibwe people’s right to hunt, fish, and harvest wild rice in their traditional landscape. This acknowledgement by extension recognizes the Ojibwe’s right to food sovereignty. From the perspective of the Ojibwe, continuing these activities requires not simply controlling access to important food resources but also protecting their rights to maintain traditional relationships with the plants and animals that provide food and to manage the landscapes that provision them. Therefore, true food sovereignty necessitates protecting a people’s relationships with the landscape. Appropriation of wild rice over the past century, however, has threatened food sovereignty among the Ojibwe because it has compromised their ability to maintain their traditional relationship with a staple food resource that is also central to their identity. In light of the White Pine Treaty, this threat to the Ojibwe’s food sovereignty is effectively a threat to their political sovereignty and, we argue, a violation of the treaty agreement.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda Raster & Christina Gish Hill, 2017. "The dispute over wild rice: an investigation of treaty agreements and Ojibwe food sovereignty," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 267-281, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:34:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10460-016-9703-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-016-9703-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-016-9703-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-016-9703-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salazar, Rene & Louwaars, Niels P. & Visser, Bert, 2007. "Protecting Farmers' New Varieties: New Approaches to Rights on Collective Innovations in Plant Genetic Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1515-1528, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pascual, Unai & Narloch, Ulf & Nordhagen, Stella & Drucker, Adam G., 2011. "The economics of agrobiodiversity conservation for food security under climate change," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(01), pages 1-30, November.
    2. Coomes, Oliver T. & McGuire, Shawn J. & Garine, Eric & Caillon, Sophie & McKey, Doyle & Demeulenaere, Elise & Jarvis, Devra & Aistara, Guntra & Barnaud, Adeline & Clouvel, Pascal & Emperaire, Laure & , 2015. "Farmer seed networks make a limited contribution to agriculture? Four common misconceptions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 41-50.
    3. Giovanna Sacchi & Leonardo Cei & Gianluca Stefani & Ginevra Virginia Lombardi & Benedetto Rocchi & Giovanni Belletti & Susanne Padel & Anna Sellars & Edneia Gagliardi & Giuseppe Nocella & Sarah Cardey, 2018. "A Multi-Actor Literature Review on Alternative and Sustainable Food Systems for the Promotion of Cereal Biodiversity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-29, November.
    4. Bertacchini, Enrico E., 2008. "Coase, Pigou and the potato: Whither farmers' rights?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 183-193, December.
    5. Witchuda Srang-iam, 2013. "Decontextualized Knowledge, Situated Politics: The New Scientific–Local Politics of Rice Genetic Resources in Thailand," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 44(1), pages 1-27, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:34:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10460-016-9703-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.