“What we see in the In-Between”: Navigating ethics and equity in the role of leading research projects with Alaska Native communities

More than 25 years after Australia received the recommendations handed down by the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) Australia’s Indigenous people are still being incarcerated at disproportionate rates compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts, regardless of the attempts made by government to reduce the over-representation of Indigenous people in Australia’s prisons. Scholars have studied prisoner reentry for many years, during which time several risk and protective factors of reincarceration have been identified. However, limited research has examined beyond the question of whether Indigenous people are more likely to return to prison compared to non-Indigenous people. While we know Indigenous people are over-represented at the back-end of the criminal justice system, as more Indigenous people return to prison, and return faster than non-Indigenous people, we have little empirical understanding as to why –Why are Australia’s Indigenous people compared to non-Indigenous people more at risk of reincarceration? The present thesis seeks to unpack this question and develop a better understanding of why Indigenous people are more at risk of reincarceration post-release than non-Indigenous people. In total, three studies using a combination of descriptive, Cox proportional hazard regressions, logistic regressions, chi-square and t-test analyses were conducted with 1238 Queensland Indigenous (n = 303) and non-Indigenous (n = 935) people. The first study (Chapter 3) expands our understanding by: (a) examining group differences in characteristics within and between reincarcerated and successfully reintegrated people post-release for both groups; (b) identifying whether Indigenous compared to non-Indigenous people are more likely to be reincarcerated post-release; and (c) identifying whether any difference in risk of reincarceration can be partially explained by Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples’ social experiences prior-to-prison, and/or their prison-life experiences. Results suggests that while there are group differences in characteristics between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, prison-life experiences can explain little to none of the difference in risk of reincarceration that exists between the two groups. Instead, evidence indicates the difference in risk of reincarceration can largely be explained by Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples’ static risk factors—those that occurred before incarceration (i.e. demographic, prior criminal history, and social experiences prior-to-incarceration). However, considering risk factors can potentially affect other risk factors, it is possible that by using a single statistical model that controls for Indigenous status any interactive effects with Indigenous status may have been masked. Study two (Chapter 4) expands on current empirical evidence in four ways. First, study two examines whether racial specific and racial neutral risk factors of reincarceration are present for Indigenous and/or non-Indigenous people. Results found evidence of racial specific risk factors of reincarceration being present for both groups. With evidence suggesting prisoner visitation is a racial specific protective factor against reincarceration for non-Indigenous people only. Study two further explored the visitation-reincarceration relationship to identify (a) if group differences in who gets visited exist; (b) whether there were differences in time to reincarceration for visited prisoners compared to non-visited prisoners; and (c) whether differences in visitation could be explained by social demographic circumstances prior-to-prison, criminal history, and travel distance for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. Evidence showed differences between groups in the amount people w ere visited, time to reincarceration for visited and non-visited prisoners, and in the likelihood of who got visited. Study three (Chapter 5) further develops our understanding of why Indigenous compared to non-Indigenous people are more at risk of reincarceration in three ways: (a) by examining whether risk of reincarceration for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people differ by residential location (i.e. city/urban vs rural/remote); (b) identifying how community disadvantage, remoteness, and accessing services post-release effects Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples’ risk of reincarceration; and (c) by exploring what support services are accessed post-release and by who. Results indicated that residential location does not affect risk of reincarceration for either group and no relationship was identified between community disadvantage and reincarceration for non-Indigenous people. However, results showed community disadvantage to be a protective factor against reincarceration for Indigenous people. Finally, evidence also indicated there are group differences in who accessed services post-release. Collectively, the three studies presented in this thesis make a significant contribution to existing empirical knowledge of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples’ risk of reincarceration. Each study builds on the previous, adding a new piece of the puzzle to what is a complex and multifaceted problem. Overall, the evidence presented in this thesis further demonstrates why it is important for re-entry programs to not only be individually tailored, but also tailored to one’s local environment and culture. The dissertation concludes with a discussion and synthesis of the overall research findings, limitations, and suggestions for future reentry research with Indigenous people in Chapter 6.

Indigenous Peoples research and data sovereignty is of paramount importance to a healthy relationship between Indigenous Peoples and the research enterprise. The development of Indigenous methods and methodologies lends itself to the hot discussion of research and data or, as we posit, knowledge born from Alaska Native communities’ experiences and observations since time immemorial. Within the context of climate change, Alaska Native communities in the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (Flats) are experiencing research fatigue. There are an extraordinary number of researchers applying constant pressure on Alaska Native communities on the Yukon Flats to engage with research ideas and pursuits that are not of their own needs. In concert with large and frequent grant dollars that are promoting research with Alaska Native Peoples and demand grant proposals have components of coproduction of knowledge intertwined with the research. With so much research directed at, not with, Alaska Native communities on the Yukon Flats, never has it been more important to shape research and data sovereignty with Alaska Native communities based on their needs and their worldviews. This article works to demonstrate how established Indigenous methods in collaboration with Alaska Native and Allies scholarship alongside Alaska Native communities inform the future of Alaska Native research and data sovereignty.

PurposeInterorganizational dependence is considered as a liability for each firm and needs to be managed properly. Rather than exploring the opportunistic outcome of dependence, the authors focus on the moderating role of supply chain boundary spanners' guanxi. This study tends to uncover the way and the conditions under which boundary spanners' guanxi influences dependence-opportunism relationships.Design/methodology/approachUsing a survey of 380 buyer–supplier exchanges in China, this study first examines the relationship between dependence and opportunism, then assesses the contingent role of boundary spanners' guanxi and further tests how unfairness perception and legal inefficiency alter the role of guanxi in managing dependence.FindingsThis study finds that buyer dependence increases supplier opportunism while supplier dependence lowers supplier opportunism. Boundary spanners' guanxi weakens the opportunism-facilitating impact of buyer dependence and mitigates the opportunism-restricting effect of supplier dependence. However, unfairness perception would attenuate the value of guanxi in restricting depended sides' opportunism but strengthen the value of guanxi in motivating depending sides' opportunism; legal inefficiency would amplify the value of guanxi in facilitating depending suppliers' opportunism.Originality/valueFirst, the study enriches supply chain dependence studies by incorporating interpersonal guanxi into the investigation of dependence-opportunism relationships. Second, the study adds to the supply chain management literature by uncovering a contrasting role of guanxi in influencing the dependence-opportunism relationship. Third, the study incorporates an agency view to uncover two boundary conditions under which guanxi is mobilized for personal interest seeking or for organizational purposes.

A boundary spanner is a person who breaks down the barriers or ‘boundaries’ between specific groups of society. To do this, they use their innate qualities and skills developed through experience to conceptualise a method which facilitates meaningful relationships between the two groups. As Indigenous knowledges in Australia and the world are increasingly elevated as meaningful and valid by the Western academy, and our planet faces global environmental challenges, it has never been more important to understand the role and characteristics of people who are boundary spanners—those that bridge the gap between Indigenous peoples and the Western academy. There are many characteristics exhibited by effective boundary spanners. Many, if not all, of these characteristics are innate, strengthened through their experiences with Indigenous peoples and grounded in ethics and respect for culture and customs, and very importantly, integrity and honesty. Being an effective boundary spanner, however, comes with challenges. These challenges include issues of trust, perception, respect, identity, burn out, time management, competing timeframes and the capacity to create pathways and repair relationships. The boundary spanner must find solutions for these challenges to build positive relationships between themselves, the academy and the Indigenous community. This is needed to collectively find solutions to environmental challenges. This perspective piece sets out to highlight the importance of boundary spanners, the characteristics they have and the challenges they face in the ‘in between’ place they occupy between the Western academy and Indigenous communities. The aim of this perspective piece was to help Western academy to identify and understand the value of boundary spanners and develop a language to move forward in a meaningful dialogue about Indigenous knowledges and peoples at a time when the need for boundary spanners is substantial in Australia and globally if we are to sustain Land, Sea and Sky Country. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Boundary spanning: Its role in trust development between stakeholders in integrated water resource management

Boundary organizations facilitate two-way, sustained interaction and communication between research and practitioner spheres, deliver existing science, and develop new, actionable scientific information to address emerging social–ecological questions applicable to decision-making. There is an increasing emphasis on the role of boundary organizations in facilitating knowledge coproduction, which is collaborative research with end users to develop actionable scientific information for decision-making. However, a deeper understanding of how boundary organizations and knowledge coproduction work in practice is needed. This paper examines the Alaska Fire Science Consortium (AFSC), a boundary organization focused on fire science and management in Alaska that is working to address climate impacts on wildfire. A case study approach was used to assess AFSC activities over time. AFSC’s boundary spanning involves a continuum of outputs and activities, but their overall trajectory has involved a deliberate transition from an emphasis on science delivery to knowledge coproduction. Key factors that facilitated this transition included a receptive and engaged audience, built-in evaluation and learning, subject matter expertise and complementarity, and embeddedness in the target audience communities. Recommendations for boundary organizations wishing to develop knowledge coproduction capacity include knowing your audience, employing trusted experts in boundary spanning, and engaging in frequent self-evaluation to inform change over time.

The need to diversify science includes increasing both the diversity of science practitioners and the voices included in decision-making processes. Indigenous communities have been sought out to provide Indigenous knowledge to mainstream science research programs. As working across the mainstream science and community boundary is increasingly codified into the future of natural sciences, models for equitable collaboration and roles within project structures are needed. The goal of this project is to present a framework for collaboration between mainstream science and Indigenous communities. Specifically, we are addressing an under-recognized role central to partnership, a boundary spanner, who acts as the fulcrum facilitating collaboration. To better understand the role of boundary spanners in collaborative projects, we engaged six boundary spanners who participated in semi-structured interviews and workshops. Emergent common experiences and perspectives of how boundary spanners can be supported and their role in collaborative projects were defined and articulated. The boundary spanners identified 10 characteristics that contribute to equitable partnership between mainstream science and Indigenous communities. From the perspective of the boundary spanners, they detailed how collaborative projects can be structured to increase long-term partnerships and community support of research projects. Equitable collaboration between Indigenous communities and mainstream science is frequently only achieved when individuals at the interface of the mainstream science and Indigenous community have a high level of cultural competency. Equally important is the support provided to the boundary spanners and early engagement of partner Indigenous communities. Through the use of story and metaphor, we highlight the voices of boundary spanners and how their contributions can best be used.

This research examines the correlation between Alaskan Native Corporations’ corporate social responsibility investment strategies and their impact on effectively creating entrepreneurial opportunities for Alaskan Native communities. Our analysis begins by examining factors affecting the alignment of Alaska Native Corporation values with indigenous cultural values (Anders & Anders, 1987). It then builds off further from previous research into social entrepreneurship and indigenous people (Curry, Donker, & Michel, 2016). We reviewed existing literature addressing connections between indigenous culture and entrepreneurial opportunities (Bardy, Drew, & Kennedy, 2011) and then adapted Donker, et. al.’s (2008) research model for assessing the relationship between corporate values and firm performance to establish a method for data collection and analysis. We hypothesize that there is a significantly positive and strong correlation between economic community development and corporate financial performance when Alaska Native cultural values are integrated into Alaska Native Corporations, when gender diversity is promoted in leadership roles within the corporations and within entrepreneurial businesses within Alaska Native communities, and when serious reasonable efforts are made to promote social well-being, economic, and educational development. In our assessment of cultural values and their impact on firm performance in Alaska Native Corporations, we used H. Donker, et. al.’s (2008) research model for assessing the relationship between corporate values and firm performance to provide a method for data collection and analysis. We also examined publicly available data regarding socio-economic factors to gauge labor participation including unemployment rates, high school Indigenous Rural Entrepreneurialism and Social Venturing in Alaska graduation rates, and student performance. This data was correlated with Alaska Native Corporation community investment programs to evaluate connections and test our hypothesis. We examined the gender diversity of Alaska Native Corporations Board of Directors to identify any impacts on firm performance, specifically how the gender diversity of corporate executive boards impacts investments in communities. Our data sample focused on the twelve regional Alaska Native Corporations, their respective non-profit foundations, and their affiliated communities.

Environmental public health hazards present unique challenges for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities due to their close cultural, physical, and spiritual associations with the environment. To raise visibility of these challenges among environmental public health professionals, this report summarizes findings from studies, news articles, and case studies. We categorized five major environmental public health challenges that affect AI/AN communities: climate change, environmental health hazards, air quality, water quality, and environmental prenatal exposures. A general explanation of each environmental health issue is articulated with contextual history, statistics, and reports. Discussion of these categories is followed by case studies of AI/AN communities affected by these environmental health challenges. Lastly, we point to efforts by Indigenous communities and allies who are working to improve AI/AN environmental public health within the U.S.

The foundational role culture and Indigenous knowledge (IK) occupy within community intervention in American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) communities is explored. To do this, we define community or complex interventions, then critically examine ways culture is translated into health interventions addressing AIAN disparities in existing programs and research initiatives. We then describe an Indigenous intervention based in the cultural logic of its contexts, as developed by Alaska Native communities. Yup'ik coauthors and knowledge keepers provided their critical and theoretical perspectives and understandings to the overall narrative, constructing from their IK system an argument that culture is prevention. The intervention, the Qungasvik (phonetic: koo ngaz vik; "tools for life") intervention, is organized and delivered through a Yup'ik Alaska Native process the communities term qasgiq (phonetic: kuz gik; "communal house"). We describe a theory of change framework built around the qasgiq model and explore ways this Indigenous intervention mobilizes aspects of traditional Yup'ik cultural logic to deliver strengths-based interventions for Yup'ik youth. This framework encompasses both an IK theory-driven intervention implementation schema and an IK approach to knowledge production. This intervention and its framework provide a set of recommendations to guide researchers and Indigenous communities who seek to create Indigenously informed and locally sustainable strategies for the promotion of health and well-being. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the types of justice that affect knowledge acquisition and opportunism in strategic alliances and how these justice mechanisms function.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from both top-level and operating-level boundary spanners in 295 strategic alliances in China (a total of 590 boundary spanners). A structural equation model (SEM) with bias-corrected bootstrap method was used to test the hypotheses.FindingsThe results show that although both procedural justice and distributive justice are important in deterring opportunism, procedural justice is more effective at enhancing knowledge acquisition than distributive justice is. The results also demonstrate that boundary spanners' helping behaviors are more effective at fostering knowledge acquisition, whereas boundary spanners' voice behaviors have more impact on mitigating opportunism. In addition, boundary spanners' citizenship behaviors partially mediate the relationship between justice and interfirm-level performance.Originality/valueThis study adds a boundary-spanning lens to justice literature by uncovering the missing link between justice and alliance outcomes.

Newborn screening in Alaska includes screening for carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A (CPT1A) deficiency. The CPT1A Arctic variant is a variant highly prevalent among Indigenous peoples in the Arctic. In this study, we sought to elicit Alaska Native (AN) community member and AN-serving healthcare providers' knowledge and perspectives on the CPT1A Arctic variant. Focus groups with community members and healthcare providers were held in two regions of Alaska between October 2018 and January 2019. Thematic analysis was used to identify recurring constructs. Knowledge and understanding about the CPT1A Arctic variant and its health impact varied, and participants were interested in learning more about it. Additional education for healthcare professionals was recommended to improve providers' ability to communicate with family caregivers about the Arctic variant. Engagement with AN community members identified opportunities to improve educational outreach via multiple modalities for providers and caregivers on the Arctic variant, which could help to increase culturally relevant guidance and avoid stigmatization, undue worry, and unnecessary intervention. Education and guidance on the care of infants and children homozygous for the CPT1A Arctic variant could improve care and reduce negative psychosocial effects.

Arctic sea ice is a vital component of the global climate system and a key indicator of climate change. Collaborations between Western scientists and Indigenous Knowledge holders advance understanding of the cryosphere by integrating diverse observations of sea ice physics, ecosystems, and food webs. As interest in collaborative research grows, co-production of knowledge (CPK) has emerged as a leading participatory approach in Arctic research. This study reviews multidisciplinary literature on sea ice knowledge co-production using a systematic literature review. Of more than 65 000 peer-reviewed articles on sea ice, only 461 mention engagement with Arctic Indigenous communities, and just 25 explicitly describe collaborative engagement with communities. By highlighting the presence and absence of key CPK tools and concepts in existing research, we uncover gaps in the documentation and practice of sharing research benefits with communities and identify opportunities for transparency in CPK practice.

Understanding and adapting to observed changes in the Alaskan Arctic: Actionable knowledge co-production with Alaska Native communities

With the intention of improve knowledge on the epidemiological situation of tuberculosis (TB) among vulnerable populations in Brazil, our objective was to analyze sociodemographic characteristics and operational indicators related to TB control, comparing indigenous and non-indigenous people, in Rondônia. We conducted a retrospective and descriptive epidemiological study of new TB cases reported between 1997, January 1st and 2006, December 31st. We excluded duplicate records and those for whom the results of treatment was change in diagnosis and transfer. TB cases were classified into two categories: indigenous and non-indigenous people and analysis was performed according to sex, age, origin (urban /rural), State of residence, clinical form, diagnostic tests, monitoring indicators and results of treatment. Altogether 4832 cases were reported, with 322 cases (6.7%) in indigenous people. There was a male predominance (ratios: 1.7 to 1.3 in non-indigenous and indigenous people). The majority of cases for indigenous people (82.6%) was in rural area and there was high concentration of cases (36.0%) in children < 15 years. The analysis of diagnostic tests showed a predominance of smear positive in non-indigenous (56.1%) and smear negative and smear not performed in indigenous people (31.7% and 35.4% respectively, P value=0.0001). There was difference in the monitoring in relation to smear of second month (6.1% positivity, P value = 0.0001) and exam at least one contact (69.6%, P value = 0.017) for non-indigenous. On the other hand, DOTS was more associated with indigenous people cases (23.6%, P value = 0.0001). Stands out the predominance of cure in both groups, with bigger concentration in indigenous people (90.4%, P value = 0.0001) and higher rate of noncompliance in non-indigenous (14.7%, P value = 0.0001). The approach showed useful for elucidate inequalities and has exceeded the usual analysis carried out surveillance on services that aim to delineate the epidemiological situation based only on rates or absolute values.