New Discourses on Energy Transition as an Opportunity for Reconciliation? Analyzing Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Communications in Media and Policy Documents

BackgroundIndigenous peoples in Canada have higher prevalence of modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The relative importance of these risk factors on AD risk management is poorly understood.MethodsRelative risks from literature and prevalence of risk factors from Statistics Canada or the First Nations Regional Health Survey were used to determine projected population attributable risk (PAR) associated with modifiable risk factors for AD (low education and vascular risk factors) among on- and off-reserve Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada using the Levin formula.ResultsPhysical inactivity had the highest PAR for AD among Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada (32.5% [10.1%–51.1%] and 30.5% [9.2%–48.8%] respectively). The PAR for most modifiable risk factors was higher among Indigenous peoples in Canada, particularly among on-reserve groups. The greatest differences in PAR were for low educational attainment and smoking, which were approximately 10% higher among Indigenous peoples in Canada. The combined PAR for AD for all six modifiable risk factors was 79.6% among on-reserve Indigenous, 74.9% among off-reserve Indigenous, and 67.1% among non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. (All differences significant to p < .001.)ConclusionsModifiable risk factors are responsible for the most AD cases among Indigenous peoples in Canada. Further research is necessary to determine the prevalence of AD and the impact of risk factor modification among Indigenous peoples in Canada.

Reading for Reconciliation?Indigenous Literatures in a Post-TRC Canada Aubrey Jean Hanson (bio) In december 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (trc) released its final report, and since then people in Indigenous and non-Indigenous contexts (literary and otherwise) have been working to understand that report's implications. As a Métis scholar whose work bridges the fields of Indigenous literatures and Indigenous education, I have been making connections between the report's recommendations and my ongoing scholarship on Indigenous literatures and learning. These connections raise generative questions about the educational aspects of reading literary texts and about the framing of social and political change between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada. In this paper, I focus on connections between Indigenous literatures and learning in order to better understand the reimagining embodied by the trc's transformative Calls to Action. I draw on perspectives from my current research on Indigenous literatures and resurgence—including conversations with teachers and with Indigenous writers—to ask what it means to read for reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada. What might it mean, instead, to read for resurgence? By interrogating the framework of reconciliation, I argue that, while the literary arts may be inspiring and reflecting Indigenous communities' resurgence, a great [End Page 69] deal of learning is required by the rest of Canada to develop responsive relationships with this work. In order to make this argument, I bring together examinations that occur across the distinct sections of this article. The catalyst for my considerations here—my starting point—is an example of public discourse around reconciliation, education, and Indigenous literatures—namely a conversation that occurred in the winter of 2015–2016 on Canada's public broadcast radio, the cbc. Specifically, I develop my argument in relation to a suggestion for Canadian learning made by Canada's Minister for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in a cbc interview and then look at Indigenous writers' responses to that suggestion in a subsequent cbc interview—responses that challenge the discourse surrounding reconciliation. Second, I build upon those responses to analyze the relationship, implied in the minister's suggestion, between non-Indigenous readers' engagements with Indigenous literatures and the learning precipitated by those engagements. Third, I read the trc's Calls to Action in order to highlight the educational dimensions embedded in that document's vision for reconciliation and to consider their implications for literary scholars. Fourth, I examine perspectives from my own research with writers and teachers in light of these understandings of reconciliation. Finally, I explore the possibility of reading for resurgence through a reading of Cree author Tracey Lindberg's novel Birdie. In concluding these arguments about literatures and learning, I seek to contribute to stronger understandings of what it means for non-Indigenous people to read Indigenous literatures at this particular moment in Canadian public consciousness. Reconciliation, in my argument, is not only fraught: it has the potential, if not carefully theorized, to be mobilized by official discourses in order to reinscribe Indigenous expression within the norms of the settler state. Reading for reconciliation and Indigenous book club month Shortly after the trc's Calls to Action were released in 2015, the Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister for Indigenous and Northern Affairs, was interviewed on the cbc radio program The Current. She was there to elaborate on the new Liberal government's commitment to renewing relationships with Indigenous peoples. The federal election, with its dramatic shift in leadership, took place shortly before the trc's conclusion. In addressing the Liberal Party's plans for renewing relationships, Bennett celebrates the feeling that things are changing for the better, while also pointing out the continuing prevalence of racism and hatred aimed at Indigenous people. She suggests in the interview that many Canadians are [End Page 70] indeed ready to step up and contribute to change but reiterates the responsibility of non-Indigenous people to educate themselves about Indigenous issues and connect with Indigenous communities. This learning is necessary, she emphasizes, to the work of reconciliation, in order "to eliminate the ignorance that we all had because it wasn't taught to us in school."1 As a scholar of...

Many non-Indigenous peoples in settler societies describe themselves as concerned with the legacies of colonialism and wish to become more engaged with that history and with Indigenous peoples. Paradoxically, however, many do not understand what that engagement might entail, how they could do it or whether, indeed, it is their place to do so. In this research, we survey findings from three sets of focus groups with non-Indigenous peoples in Canada conducted over a two-year period and intersecting with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process that has nearly concluded there. The goal was to see what ‘emergent’ discourses of reconciliation are at play in reflective conversations between non-Aboriginal Canadians. Some strong but complex themes arise from this research, in particular a mode of ‘delegation’ and another, of ‘embodiment’. These are expressed in different rhetorical styles and speak to variations in the geography, history and identity of the participants and their communities. A broad but tentative conclusion is that for reconciliation the politics of the local matter. We explore this finding with one eye toward policy innovations and as part of a broad comparative inquiry into non-Indigenous peoples' ideas of engagement and responsibility in settler colonial states.

Background:Substantial health inequities exist for Indigenous Peoples in Canada. The remote and distributed population of Canada presents unique challenges for access to and use of surgery. To date, the surgical outcome data for Indigenous Peoples in Canada have not been synthesized.Methods:We searched 4 databases to identify studies comparing surgical outcomes and utilization rates of adults of First Nations, Inuit or Métis identity with non-Indigenous people in Canada. Independent reviewers completed all stages in duplicate. Our primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included utilization rates of surgical procedures, complications and hospital length of stay. We performed meta-analysis of the primary outcome using random effects models. We assessed risk of bias using the ROBINS-I tool.Results:Twenty-eight studies were reviewed involving 1 976 258 participants (10.2% Indigenous). No studies specifically addressed Inuit or Métis populations. Four studies, including 7 cohorts, contributed adjusted mortality data for 7135 participants (5.2% Indigenous); Indigenous Peoples had a 30% higher rate of death after surgery than non-Indigenous patients (pooled hazard ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.09–1.54; I2 = 81%). Complications were also higher for Indigenous Peoples, including infectious complications (adjusted OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.13–2.34) and pneumonia (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.58–3.19). Rates of various surgical procedures were lower, including rates of renal transplant, joint replacement, cardiac surgery and cesarean delivery.Interpretation:The currently available data on postoperative outcomes and surgery utilization rates for Indigenous Peoples in Canada are limited and of poor quality. Available data suggest that Indigenous Peoples have higher rates of death and adverse events after surgery, while also encountering barriers accessing surgical procedures. These findings suggest a need for substantial re-evaluation of surgical care for Indigenous Peoples in Canada to ensure equitable access and to improve outcomes. Protocol registration:PROSPERO-CRD42018098757

Indigenous Peoples in Canada currently experience much higher rates of oral health problems than their non-Indigenous counterparts. A number of recent reports have shown that Indigenous children have very high rates of tooth decay, that large numbers of Indigenous people report experiencing ongoing and persistent pain in their mouths, and that significantly more Indigenous people than non-Indigenous Canadians have no teeth at all. These oral health inequalities are important, not just because they have a profound impact on Indigenous Peoples’ quality of life but also because poor oral health is linked to other health issues that currently disproportionately impact Indigenous communities, including diabetes and heart disease. From 1945 to 1979, the federal government made only limited attempts to provide oral health care to Indigenous Peoples despite treaty promises of health care. The government did not believe that it had any obligation to provide oral health care, and as a result, the services provided were rushed, inadequate, inconsistent, and sometimes cruel. Indigenous Peoples experienced much higher levels of tooth extractions and lower rates of denture provision than was the case among non-Indigenous peoples in Canada, with ongoing consequences for their oral health today.

Not paid to dance at the powwow: Power relations, community benefits, and wind energy in M’Chigeeng First Nation, Ontario, Canada

Higher rates of anxiety, depression, and attempted suicide are reported among First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people compared with non-Indigenous people in Canada. This systematic review summarises the key components of mental health interventions among Indigenous Peoples in Canada. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science between January 1,1970, and August 30, 2019. Studies needed to be an intervention addressing suicide, depression, or anxiety. There were 14 studies: 8 quantitative, 2 qualitative, and 4 mixed methods. By geographical location, 5 were urban, 5 non-urban, and 4 included multiple areas. Beneficial interventions included ceremony, being on the land, engaging in traditional food gathering, culturally grounded indoor and outdoor activities, and the sharing of Indigenous knowledge by Elders.

Geographic Accessibility to Radiotherapy in Canada and Greenland for Indigenous Populations: A Quantitative Approach to Highlighting Inequities and Exploring Solutions

Examining geographic accessibility to radiotherapy in Canada and Greenland for indigenous populations: Measuring inequities to inform solutions

Cultural safety is an approach currently used in health care that is meant to address health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples and colonizing practices in health care. It has been found to empower patient decision-making and result in a relationship where patients and providers work together towards effective care. In this commentary, we argue that such an approach needs to be employed in physical activity promotion and programs as another way of addressing health disparities that continue to exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. Further, we assert that cultural safety can address the critiques that have been made of attempts to use cultural sensitivity, cultural relevancy, and cultural competency training for physical activity providers and in implementing physical activity programs. Cultural safety in physical activity promotion and programs is not only an ethical practice, but also one that has the potential to significantly improve the health of Indigenous peoples, which could lead to related improvements in quality of life, lowering rates of morbidity and mortality, and resulting in considerable savings to the health care sector.

This paper will attempt to do four things. First, it will review some of the background essential to understanding how Indigenous leaders were involved in the patriation process and why section 35 was adopted as part of the patriation package. Second, it will elaborate on the role of former Premier Allan Blakeney of Saskatchewan in securing the adoption of section 35. Third, it will examine some of the expectations for significant structural change to the Canadian political system that were contemplated by the non-Indigenous participants involved in the patriation negotiations and, most importantly, why those expectations were never met. Finally, the paper will attempt to answer the fundamental question: are Indigenous peoples and their rights protected by the adoption of a general section 35, or has the existence of such a general provision actually hindered progress toward a more complete reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada?

Desire-based research provides people and communities the opportunity to share their dreams and hopes for a better future. However, conflicting desires are difficult to reconcile. We suggest that sociological research to understand conflicting desires is required to support reconciliation work by Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada. Our contribution begins by identifying much of current and past sociological research about Indigenous people and communities as damaged-centered, that is, identifying problems and obstacles in the hope that the knowledge will lead to change. This model of social change is flawed. We believe that most Canadians desire justice for Indigenous peoples while at the same time desiring land and access to resources, desires that deny that justice. How we as a society reconcile these desires will determine the extent to which true justice for Indigenous peoples will be achieved. We propose a sociology of the reconciliation of conflicting desires and suggest some practical ways that this type of research could move forward.

Racism continues to drive health disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. This study focuses on racism experienced by young Indigenous people who have used drugs in British Columbia (BC), and predictors of interpersonal racism. Cedar Project is a community-governed cohort study involving young Indigenous people who use drugs in Vancouver and Prince George, BC. This cross-sectional study included data collected between August 2015-October 2016. The Measure of Indigenous Racism Experiences (MIRE) scale was used to assess experiences of interpersonal racism across 9 unique settings on a 5-point Likert scale, collapsing responses into three categories (none/low/high). Multinomial logistic regression models were used to examine associations between key variables and interpersonal racism. Among 321 participants, 79% (n = 255) experienced racism in at least one setting. Thirty two percent (n = 102) experienced high interpersonal racism from police, governmental agencies (child ‘welfare’, health personnel), and in public settings. Ever having a child apprehended (AOR:2.76, 95%CI:1.14–6.65), probable post-traumatic stress (AOR:2.64; 95%CI:1.08–6.46), trying to quit substances (AOR:3.69; 95%CI:1.04–13.06), leaving emergency room without receiving treatment (AOR:3.05; 95%CI:1.22–7.64), and having a traditional language spoken at home while growing up (AOR:2.86; 95%CI:1.90–6.90) were associated with high interpersonal racism. Among women, experiencing high interpersonal racism was more likely if they lived in Prince George (AOR:3.94; 95%CI:1.07–14.50), ever had a child apprehended (AOR:5.09; 95%CI:1.50–17.30), and had probable post-traumatic stress (AOR:5.21; 95%CI:1.43–18.95). Addressing racism experienced by Indigenous peoples requires immediate structural systemic, and interpersonal anti-racist reforms.

Canada is known internationally for excellence in both the quality and public policy relevance of its health and social statistics. There is a double standard however with respect to the relevance and quality of statistics for Indigenous populations in Canada. Indigenous specific health and social statistics gathering is informed by unique ethical, rights-based, policy and practice imperatives regarding the need for Indigenous participation and leadership in Indigenous data processes throughout the spectrum of indicator development, data collection, management, analysis and use. We demonstrate how current Indigenous data quality challenges including misclassification errors and non-response bias systematically contribute to a significant underestimate of inequities in health determinants, health status, and health care access between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada. The major quality challenge underlying these errors and biases is the lack of Indigenous specific identifiers that are consistent and relevant in major health and social data sources. The recent removal of an Indigenous identity question from the Canadian census has resulted in further deterioration of an already suboptimal system. A revision of core health data sources to include relevant, consistent, and inclusive Indigenous self-identification is urgently required. These changes need to be carried out in partnership with Indigenous peoples and their representative and governing organizations.

Unemployment rates were lower, and participation and employment rates were higher for Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada in 2021. The meaningful improvements in 2021 are in comparison with the COVID-19-induced negative rates of 2020. The employment and unemployment rates have not fully recovered from their 2019 pre-COVID rates. This is the case for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. Employment, unemployment, participation, and wage rates are and have been more favourable for non-Indigenous individuals than for Indigenous individuals. When educational levels increase, employment, unemployment, and participation rates improve. Employment measures are examined by gender, age, and education, and Métis and First Nations employment measures are compared.