IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v19y2019i3p120-132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Including Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Environmental Assessments: Restructuring the Process

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Arsenault
  • Carrie Bourassa
  • Sibyl Diver
  • Deborah McGregor
  • Aaron Witham

Abstract

Indigenous peoples around the world are concerned about the long-term impacts of industrial activities and natural resource extraction projects on their traditional territories. Environmental impact studies, environmental risk assessments (EAs), and risk management protocols are offered as tools that can address some of these concerns. However, these tools are not universally required in jurisdictions, and this Forum intervention considers whether these technical tools might be reshaped to integrate Indigenous communities’ interests, with specific attention to traditional knowledge. Challenges include unrealistic timelines to evaluate proposed projects, community capacity, inadequate understanding of Indigenous communities, and ineffective communicatio, all of which contribute to pervasive distrust in EAs by many Indigenous communities. Despite efforts to address these problems, substantive inequities persist in the way that EAs are conducted as infringement continues on constitutionally protected Indigenous rights. This article highlights challenges within the EA process and presents pathways for improving collaboration and outcomes with Indigenous communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Arsenault & Carrie Bourassa & Sibyl Diver & Deborah McGregor & Aaron Witham, 2019. "Including Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Environmental Assessments: Restructuring the Process," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(3), pages 120-132, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:19:y:2019:i:3:p:120-132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/glep_a_00519
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barbara L. Harper & Brian Flett & Stuart Harris & Corn Abeyta & Fred Kirschner, 2002. "The Spokane Tribe's Multipathway Subsistence Exposure Scenario and Screening Level RME," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 513-526, June.
    2. Diver, Sibyl, 2017. "Negotiating Indigenous knowledge at the science-policy interface: Insights from the Xáxli’p Community Forest," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-11.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Kröger, Markus & Dressler, Wolfram, 2022. "From pro-growth and planetary limits to degrowth and decoloniality: An emerging bioeconomy policy and research agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    2. Bodwitch, Hekia & Song, Andrew M. & Temby, Owen & Reid, John & Bailey, Megan & Hickey, Gordon M., 2022. "Why New Zealand’s Indigenous reconciliation process has failed to empower Māori fishers: Distributional, procedural, and recognition-based injustices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Alfath Satria Negara Syaban & Seth Appiah-Opoku, 2024. "Unveiling the Complexities of Land Use Transition in Indonesia’s New Capital City IKN Nusantara: A Multidimensional Conflict Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-38, April.

    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. Hoelting, Kristin R. & Morse, Joshua W. & Gould, Rachelle K. & Martinez, Doreen E. & Hauptfeld, Rina S. & Cravens, Amanda E. & Breslow, Sara J. & Bair, Lucas S. & Schuster, Rudy M. & Gavin, Michael C., 2024. "Opportunities for improved consideration of cultural benefits in environmental decision-Making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2021. "Whose expertise counts? Assisted migration and the politics of knowledge in British Columbia’s public forests," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    3. Sibyl Diver & Daniel Ahrens & Talia Arbit & Karen Bakker, 2019. "Engaging Colonial Entanglements: “Treatment as a State†Policy for Indigenous Water Co-Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(3), pages 33-56, August.
    4. Marc Stifelman, 2003. "Letter to the Editor," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 859-860, October.
    5. Morgan, Edward A. & Osborne, Natalie & Mackey, Brendan, 2022. "Evaluating planning without plans: Principles, criteria and indicators for effective forest landscape approaches," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    6. González, Nidia Catherine & Kröger, Markus, 2020. "The potential of Amazon indigenous agroforestry practices and ontologies for rethinking global forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Walter Leal Filho & Franziska Wolf & Edmond Totin & Luckson Zvobgo & Nicholas Philip Simpson & Kumbirai Musiyiwa & Jokastah W. Kalangu & Maruf Sanni & Ibidun Adelekan & Jackson Efitre & Felix Kwabena , 2023. "Is indigenous knowledge serving climate adaptation? Evidence from various African regions," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(2), March.
    8. Hoelting, Kristin R. & Martinez, Doreen E. & Schuster, Rudy M. & Gavin, Michael C., 2024. "Advancing knowledge pluralism and cultural benefits in ecosystem services theory and application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    9. Melissa Jackson & Rodney A. Stewart & Kelly S. Fielding & Jessie Cochrane & Cara D. Beal, 2019. "Collaborating for Sustainable Water and Energy Management: Assessment and Categorisation of Indigenous Involvement in Remote Australian Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Schroeder, Heike & González P., Nidia C., 2019. "Bridging knowledge divides: The case of indigenous ontologies of territoriality and REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 198-206.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:tpr:glenvp:v:19:y:2019:i:3:p:120-132. 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: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.