Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
Publication Indigenous research sovereignties: Sparking the deeper conversations we need(Sage, 2023-05-23) Johnson, Jay T.; Brewer, Joseph P., II; Nelson, Melissa K.; Palmer, Mark H.; Louis, Renee PualaniThis article seeks to spark a conversation and further debate through the 15 papers and 3 commentaries comprising this special issue entitled “Indigenous Research Sovereignty.” By inviting the authors to publish in this special edition and address Indigenous Research Sovereignty from a variety of viewpoints, we have brought together a collection that inspires, transforms, and expands on the ways in which Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers are engaging with Indigenous communities to address the research agendas of communities across the globe. Through our work together over the past 8 years, the editorial team have identified eight themes within this broad concept of Indigenous Research Sovereignty. This article provides an introduction to those eight themes in the broadest strokes, while the papers and commentaries explore and refine them with significant depth. We seek to spark a conversation, we do not intend to provide answers to any of the dilemma facing Indigenous communities as they engage, or choose not to engage, in research. Our primary goal is to express an all-encompassing concern for the protection of Indigenous Communities’ inherent rights and knowledges.Publication Environment and Planning F: Special issue on Indigenous Research Sovereignty(Sage, 2023) Johnson, Jay T.; Brewer, Joseph P., II; Nelson, Melissa K.; Palmer, Mark H.; Louis, Renee PualaniPublication Mentoring Our Own Native Scientists: 2021 MOONS Workshop Report(University of Kansas, The Center for Indigenous Research, Science, and Technology, 2021-08-25) Johnson, Jay T.The goal of the MOONS workshop was to inform the Facilitating Indigenous Research, Science, and Technology (FIRST) Network of scholars, and other Native scientists, currently working on these issues with innovative ideas to aid in these efforts. The FIRST Network is an interdisciplinary group of Native scholars all working at the intersection of Indigenous and Western scientific traditions to explore how Indigenous communities are utilizing both traditions to meet their research needs, particularly regarding their efforts to sustain resilient ecosystems. The overall goal of this Network is to develop strategies for meeting the research needs of Indigenous communities, including the capacity to lead their own research initiatives.Publication Bridging Indigenous and science-based knowledge in coastal and marine research, monitoring, and management in Canada(BMC, 2019-11-14) Alexander, Steven M.; Provencher, Jennifer F.; Henri, Dominique A.; Taylor, Jessica J.; Lloren, Jed Immanuel; Nanayakkara, Lushani; Johnson, Jay T.; Cooke, Steven J.Background Drawing upon multiple types of knowledge (e.g., Indigenous knowledge, local knowledge, science-based knowledge) strengthens the evidence-base for policy advice, decision making, and environmental management. While the benefits of incorporating multiple types of knowledge in environmental research and management are many, doing so has remained a challenge. This systematic map examined the extent, range, and nature of the published literature (i.e., commercially published and grey) that seeks to respectively bridge Indigenous and science-based knowledge in coastal and marine research and management in Canada. Methods This systematic map applied standardized search terms across four databases focused on commercially published literature, carefully selected specialist websites, and two web-based search engines. In addition, reference sections of relevant review articles were cross-checked to identify articles that may not have been found using the search strategy. Search results were screened in two sequential stages; (1) at title and abstract; and (2) at full text following a published protocol. All case studies included were coded using a standard questionnaire. A narrative synthesis approach was used to identify trends in the evidence, knowledge gaps, and knowledge clusters. Results A total of 62 articles that spanned 71 Canadian case studies were included in the systematic map. Studies across the coastal and marine regions of Inuit Nunangat accounted for the majority of the studies. Whether the focus is on management and decision making or research and monitoring, the predominant ecological scale was at the species level, accounting for over two-thirds of the included studies. There were 24 distinct coastal and marine species of central focus across the studies. Nunavut had the greatest taxonomic coverage as studies conducted to date cover 13 different genera. The predominant methodology employed for combining and/or including Indigenous knowledge was case study design, which accounted for over half of the studies. Other methodologies employed for combining and/or including different ways of knowing included: (i) community-based participatory research; (ii) mixed methods; (iii) ethnography; and (iv) simulation modelling. There are a suite of methods utilized for documenting and translating Indigenous knowledge and an equally diverse tool box of methods used in the collection of scientific data. Over half of the case studies involved Indigenous knowledge systems of the Inuit, while another significant proportion involved Indigenous knowledge systems of First Nations, reflecting 21 unique nations. We found that demographics of knowledge holders were generally not reported in the articles reviewed. Conclusions The results of this systematic map provide key insights to inform and improve future research. First, a variety of methodologies and methods are used in these types of studies. Therefore, there is a need to consider in more detail how Indigenous and science-based knowledge systems can be respectively bridged across subjects while also recognizing specific place-based needs of Indigenous communities. Second, the work highlights the need to better report the demographics of knowledge holders. Further inquiry focused on the extent of knowledge co-production and assessing Indigenous participation across different stages of the research process would serve the research community well to improve future research and monitoring in support of, and to strengthen, evidence-based environmental management.Publication Flow dynamics of Byrd Glacier, East Antarctica(International Glaciological Society, 2014-12) Vanderveen, Cornelis J.; Stearns, Leigh A.; Johnson, Jesse; Csatho, BeataForce-balance calculations on Byrd Glacier, East Antarctica, reveal large spatial variations in the along-flow component of driving stress with corresponding sticky spots that are stationary over time. On the large scale, flow resistance is partitioned between basal (∼80%) and lateral (∼20%) drag. Ice flow is due mostly to basal sliding and concentrated vertical shear in the basal ice layers, indicating the bed is at or close to the pressure-melting temperature. There is a significant component of driving stress in the across-flow direction resulting in nonzero basal drag in that direction. This is an unrealistic result and we propose that there are spatial variations of bed features resulting in small-scale flow disturbances. The grounding line of Byrd Glacier is located in a region where the bed slopes upward. Nevertheless, despite a 10% increase in ice discharge between December 2005 and February 2007, following drainage of two subglacial lakes in the catchment area, the position of the grounding line has not retreated significantly and the glacier has decelerated since then. During the speed-up event, partitioning of flow resistance did not change, suggesting the increase in velocity was caused by a temporary decrease in basal effective pressure.Publication Weaving Indigenous science, protocols and sustainability science(Springer, 2015-04-02) Whyte, Kyle Powys; Brewer, Joseph P., II; Johnson, Jay T.The proceedings of the National Science Foundation supported WIS2DOM workshop state that sustainability scientists must respect the “protocols” of practitioners of Indigenous sciences if the practitioners of the two knowledge systems are to learn from each other. Indigenous persons at the workshop described protocols as referring to attitudes about how to approach the world that are inseparable from how people approach scientific inquiry; they used the terms caretaking and stewardship to characterize protocols in their Indigenous communities and nations. Yet sustainability scientists may be rather mystified by the idea of protocols as a necessary dimension of scientific inquiry. Moreover, the terms stewardship and caretaking are seldom used in sustainability science. In this case report, the authors seek to elaborate on some possible meanings of protocols for sustainability scientists who may be unaccustomed to talking about stewardship and caretaking in relation to scientific inquiry. To do so, the authors describe cases of Indigenous protocols in action in relation to scientific inquiry in two Indigenous-led sustainability initiatives in the Great Lakes/Midwest North American region. We claim that each case expresses concepts of stewardship and caretaking to describe protocols in which humans approach the world with the attitude of respectful partners in genealogical relationships of interconnected humans, non-human beings, entities and collectives who have reciprocal responsibilities to one another. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of Indigenous protocols for future dialog between practitioners of sustainability and Indigenous sciences.Publication Facing the Future: Encouraging Critical Cartographic Literacies In Indigenous Communities(University of British Columbia, Okanagan, 2005-01-01) Johnson, Jay T.; Louis, Renee Pualani; Pramono, Albertus HadiAs Indigenous academics researching and participating with various mapping initiatives, we have began to perceive that while many Indigenous communities have a long history of using Western cartographic techniques, including GIS, in their efforts to establish land claims, map culturally important sites and protect community resources, they were not critically aware of the science with which they are engaged. We have established our goal to assist and encourage the development of a critical literacy in cartography within Indigenous communities. We use the term literacy not to imply an ability to read and write, rather we are engaging the part of the word’s etymology which recognizes having competence in a system of knowledge. Western cartography is a complex knowledge system with a long history, much of its last 500 years being involved in furthering the colonial exploits of European crowns. Using the work of Paulo Freire (2000) on critical consciousness as a foundation, we have taken this concept a step further to describe a critical cartographic literacy which recognizes that as J. B. Harley states, “[m]aps are never value-free images… [c]artography can be ‘a form of knowledge and a form of power’ (1988).” Our article explores our development of a critical cartographic consciousness in order to aid Indigenous communities in how they engage with one of the most prevalent informational technologies currently in use in many of these communities’ modern cartography/GIS.Publication Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences: Diversifying our Methods (WIS2DOM) Workshop(2014-05-27) Johnson, Jay T.; Louis, Renee Pualani; Kliskey, AndrewThis report summarizes the findings of the February 13-16, 2013 workshop, entitled Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences to Diversify our Methods (WIS2DOM), held in Olympia, Washington at The Evergreen State University’s Longhouse. The workshop was funded by an NSF grant from the Arctic Social Sciences Program to Drs. Jay T. Johnson and Renee Pualani Louis, University of Kansas; and Andrew Kliskey, University of Alaska-Anchorage. The purpose of the workshop was to challenge key thinkers in the areas of Indigenous and sustainability sciences to cultivate mutually conducive and appropriate principles, protocols, and practices that address our common concern to sustain resilient landscapes in the midst of rapid environmental change. The WIS2DOM workshop brought together an internationally diverse set of Indigenous academics and community scholars with non-Indigenous academics interested in advancing this discussion. Workshop participants were asked to address the following four questions in their short papers and workshop deliberations: 1. What are the strengths of these two paradigms of science in sustaining resilient landscapes? 2. What are the limitations of these two paradigms of science in successfully sustaining resilient landscapes? 3. How can these two paradigms collaborate in their efforts toward sustaining resilient landscapes? 4. What protocols will aid in the collaboration of these two paradigms toward sustaining resilient landscapes?Publication Indigenous Knowledges Driving Technological Innovation(UCLA Asian American Studies Center Press, 2011-09) Johnson, Jay T.; Hi‘iaka Working GroupThis policy brief explores the use and expands the conversation on the ability of geospatial technologies to represent Indigenous cultural knowledge. Indigenous peoples’ use of geospatial technologies has already proven to be a critical step for protecting tribal self-determination. However, the ontological frameworks and techniques of Western geospatial technologies differ from those of Indigenous cultures, which inevitably lead to mistranslation and misrepresentation when applied to cultural knowledge. The authors advocate the creation of new technologies that are more conducive to Indigenous ontologies and epistemologies in an effort to break down the barriers to the expression and preservation of cultural heritage and cultural survival.Publication Kitchen Table Discourse: Negotiating the “Tricky Ground” of Indigenous Research(University of California, 2008) Johnson, Jay T.