Indigenous Government Research Articles

A Quiet Evolution: The Emergence of Indigenous-Local Intergovernmental Partnerships in Canada by Christopher Alcantara, Jen Nelles

Reviewed by: A Quiet Evolution: The Emergence of Indigenous-Local Intergovernmental Partnerships in Canada by Christopher Alcantara, Jen Nelles David Andrew Reece A Quiet Evolution: The Emergence of Indigenous-Local Intergovernmental Partnerships in Canada. By Christopher Alcantara and Jen Nelles. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2016. ix + 152 pp. Figures, tables, references, index. $24.71 cloth. For the past several decades, there has been a rapid expansion of interest in Indigenous peoples that has coincided with renewed studies of local knowledge and governance, especially in disciplines that involve natural resources. The shift in management approaches to ecosystem thinking, the explosion of “commons” research, and the wave of decolonizing movements spurred by postcolonial critique have all combined to thrust both these research areas into the spotlight. This book, A Quiet Evolution: The Emergence of Indigenous-Local Intergovernmental Partnerships in Canada, by Alcantara and Nelles, is unique and significant in its combination of these two realms: Indigenous studies and local governance. It examines an extensive dataset of agreements between municipal and Indigenous governments in order to understand the nature of the agreements and the factors that may have influenced their shaping. The book is specific and thorough, yet its content could be diversely applied across a range of disciplines. A Quiet Evolution is laid out in a fairly standard academic manner. I found this to be one of the many strengths of the book, as the authors go to great lengths to make it clear and concise. The introduction explains the intent of the study, the background of relevant literature, and the progression of the content. The first two chapters then elaborate on the data, classifying the 332 formal agreements using a typology scheme, and introduce the theoretical framework that will be used to analyze the factors that may have shaped the type of relationship between the community governments. This framework is divided into six factors on an axis of capacity (a community’s ability to act) and willingness (a community’s desire to act). To apply the framework, the authors construct a four-type relationship matrix to explain how the governments interact with one another. Chapters 3–6 focus in on four case studies, each one illustrating a different portion of the relationship matrix. These cases are carefully elaborated on and supported by a wealth of qualitative information from primary sources. Finally, the authors conclude with an evaluation of how the six factors affected the cases either positively or negatively, which was probably the only aspect of the study that I felt was somewhat vague and forced. Some findings were more surprising than others, but all of them were grounded in solid evidence. Overall, the book was pleasantly readable and engaging. This book makes use of mainly practical social theory concepts such as collective action, institutional capacity, community capital, and others to explain how various Indigenous-local agreements and relationships emerge and continue. These sorts of social frameworks frequently come with a variety of assumptions and oversimplifications, but they can still be helpful in pointing out the numerous factors that need to be considered when explaining collective interactions. Though the book is squarely situated within community-related literature and public policy concepts, it could also be useful in a wide variety of social disciplines. The authors are extremely careful not to make normative judgments, but rather “leave it to others to . . . situate it within the normative debates” (140). However, they do venture briefly into decolonization and some of the issues faced by Indigenous peoples. Overall, A Quiet Evolution is a rigorous and thorough contribution to the literature and a promising model for research in these rapidly evolving fields. David Andrew Reece Geography Department University of Missouri–Columbia Copyright © 2018 Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Brazilian agricultural sector: potentials and problems from different points of view

This paper aims to discuss potentials and problems for the Brazilian agricultural sector from different points of view by applying the surfing global change (SGC) methodology. The intention is to give relevant stakeholders room for statements and to find solutions to improve the overall situation. The contrarian perspectives of indigenous peoples, government, private sector and international organisations shows the difficulty of finding acceptable compromises, although poverty reduction is a common goal. Both private and public sectors are in favour of FDIs and other investments into agriculture by using partly neoclassical and Keynesianism approaches. Indigenous peoples and international organisations focus on human rights and the unequal power of resources. First, the previously mentioned SGC methodology will be explained in detail. Secondly, the paper takes a closer look at the underlying theories. Thirdly, the arguments of the four different points of view will be portrayed. Afterwards the authors present their consensus approach.

Research in action.

US states, counties, cities and indigenous governments offer sound career opportunities for putting science to use. US states, counties, cities and indigenous governments offer sound career opportunities for putting science to use.

Indigenous forest management.

Abstract Variants of Indigenous forest management reflect distinct historical and political-economic contexts. Indigenous forest management was largely unrecorded in the colonial period and, in the present, can range from industrial to ecosystem-based forest management, autonomous management and rentier practices. Evidence of Indigenous forest management has assumed political importance in those nation-states that require historical evidence of past land use and occupancy as the basis for negotiation of Indigenous-titled lands. The forms of tenure that include communal-titled lands, recognized or unrecognized claimed customary lands or time-limited licences influence the variations of Indigenous Forestry. The relative power held by constituency groups influence governance although the increasingly normative influence of guidelines such as Access and Benefit Sharing and Free, Prior and Informed Consent may lead to improvements across the board in all forms of forestry. Indigenous participation in voluntary, independent third-party certification schemes and the invocation of the Public Trust and Indigenous Trust doctrines by some Indigenous Peoples may also lead to improved governance of Indigenous Territories and resources by national and Indigenous governments.

Counting and Counter-mapping: Contests over the Making of a Mining District in Bristol Bay, Alaska

Over the past decade, the Bristol Bay region of southwest Alaska has been embroiled in a controversy over prospective mineral development in the headwaters of one of the world’s most vibrant salmon fisheries. Following the release of a state land-use plan whose maps appeared to promote large-scale mining in the region, a coalition of actors pursued a counter-mapping project, which drew on existing state data to restore priority to subsistence hunting, fishing, and gathering activities. In the contest over mining, maps and the data used to comprise them were created and contested by an array of actors, including indigenous groups, environmental organizations, and state and federal governments. Ethnographic research demonstrates how competing narratives took shape through vying efforts to empty out and fill up maps with representations of resources in the form of numbers based on scientific measurement. As quantification becomes the means through which environmental claims are staked, it reinforces the authority of scientific expertise at the same time it foregrounds other ways of knowing and establishing authority. The pursuit of numbers motivated various projects of adding together in Bristol Bay, including coalition building, which made space for alternative visions of and for the territory. The power of counter-mapping may lie less in the relationships it represents, then, and more in terms of those it helps create, insofar as it contributes to assembling new publics in opposition to resource-extractive designs.

Making Indigenous Culture the Foundation of Indigenous Governance Today: The Mi’kmaq Rights Initiative of Nova Scotia, Canada

Making Indigenous Culture the Foundation of Indigenous Governance Today: The Mi’kmaq Rights Initiative of Nova Scotia, Canada Maura Hanrahan (bio) We need to rebel against what they want us to become, start remembering the qualities of our ancestors and act on those remembrances. This is the kind of spiritual revolution that will ensure our survival. —GERALD TAIAIAKE ALFRED, WASÁSE: INDIGENOUS PATHWAYS OF ACTION AND FREEDOM Indigenousness in the Colonial Past and Present Fully aware of their disadvantaged political position, Indigenous leaders continue to engage in Canadian political processes. As Indigenous scholar Dale Turner notes, Canada is one of the world’s constitutional democracies that has, through its legal and political relationships, created political spaces, such as land claims policy, that facilitate the rights of Indigenous peoples.1 But these spaces are limited and, from an Indigenous perspective, inadequate and hugely flawed. The consent of the state is required for virtually any significant political change for Indigenous people, which indicates the ongoing lopsided power relationship between Canadian Indigenous people and the state. These processes are rooted in European and North American settler notions of Indigenous people, communities, and nations and are part of the ongoing colonial project. It is clear that the Mi’kmaq Chiefs of Nova Scotia recognize the necessity of working within the parameters set by colonial superstructures. But they also see the value in trying to strive for forms of sovereignty outside these parameters and in accordance with Mi’kmaq culture. The result of this is the tripartite Mi’kmaq Rights Initiative (MRI), aimed at just treaty implementation and governance and shared social and economic development in Nova Scotia. The MRI is unique in Canada and is not part of any existing Canadian political processes. Calls to reclaim the values that once made Indigenous governance effective are part of an ongoing pattern in which Indigenous ways of seeing, being, and living are seen and utilized as resistance strategies. As Creek/Cherokee scholar Craig [End Page 75] Womack explains, Indigenous cultures, as understood through oral tradition, are inherently political and are marked by flexibility and adaptability. Indigenous cultures allow Indigenous leaders to attempt to “reopen discussion of full national status rather than working within the current limiting legal definitions as if they are set in stone.”2 This is just what the MRI tries to do. Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Map of Nova Scotia, Canada. Indigenous governance structures as they exist today are the outcomes of an ongoing colonial process that began with European incursion into North America some four to five centuries ago in the case of the Mi’kmaq. The erosion of Indigenous governance and all that has happened in concert with it has deeply affected Indigenous people in what is now Canada. Indigenous people remain marginalized by political processes and structures in Canada and even from the national political conversation and public discourse. As the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) asserts, “The current relationship between First Nations and Parliament has been characterized by a long history of interference and mistrust, [an] outdated legislative framework inhibiting progress and growth . . . and education used as a tool of oppression.”3 Colonial policy destroyed Indigenous governments as well as governance practices with a combination of stealth and blunt instruments of political [End Page 76] oppression. In 1927, for instance, the Indian Act, which governs every aspect of the lives of status Indians, forbade First Nations people to form political organizations. Latterly, First Nations leaders were excluded from constitutional talks in Canada until the First Ministers Conference on Aboriginal Rights from 1983 to 1987. Referencing the desperate economic and social conditions of many First Nations reserves, especially in the North, the AFN refers to Canada’s system of “apartheid.”4 For these reasons, members of Namgis First Nation, British Columbia, performed a once-outlawed copper-cutting shaming ceremony on Parliament Hill in Ottawa in July 28, 2014.5 In this context come calls to return to the Indigenous values which long shaped and underpinned Indigenous governance. These calls are often heard in Indigenous community meetings, for instance, and they also come from such Indigenous scholars as Elizabeth Cook-Lynn, Angela R. Riley, Robert Porter...

Rapid recovery of Dungeness crab within spatial fishery closures declared under indigenous law in British Columbia

Canada’s constitution grants indigenous people priority access to marine resources, yet indigenous, commercial and recreational fishers target the same species. Avoiding conflict between different users, therefore, requires evidence-based policies that manage fisheries for conservation while respecting indigenous rights. From 2006 to 2015, Canada’s Conservative government demoted the role of science in resource management, stifling research by federal agencies like Fisheries and Oceans Canada. To address ensuing data gaps, during 2014–2015 the Heiltsuk, Kitasoo/Xai’Xais, Nuxalk, and Wuikinuxv First Nations conducted coordinated research on Dungeness crab (Cancer magister), a culturally-significant resource. These indigenous groups are experiencing declining catch rates of Dungeness crab and postulate that commercial and recreational fisheries are primary causes of local declines. Accordingly, they applied indigenous laws and declared spatial fishery closures for commercial and recreational fishers at 10 sites (closed) while allowing exploitation by all users to continue at 10 other sites (open). Sampling occurred repeatedly over time and analyses compared temporal trends in population characteristics between closed and open sites. Results were consistent with the hypothesis that fisheries decrease the abundance and size of exploited species, but spatial protection can reverse these effects. The body size and catch-per-unit effort of legal-sized males increased over time at closed sites but declined at open sites. Importantly, fishery status did not affect temporal changes in the relative abundance of unfished classes of crab–sublegal males and females–which is logically consistent with the hypothesis. Our study demonstrates that indigenous governance can create spatial closures for conservation and research when Canada’s government fails to do so. Long-term solutions, however, require collaboration in research and management between federal and indigenous governments. Towards that end, Canada’s newly elected Liberal government has begun to restore federal science and to address indigenous rights, thereby enhancing the possibility of such collaboration.

This land can sustain us: cooperative land use planning on the Oneida Reservation

Land use planning in indigenous communities often takes place within state-based planning initiatives, leaving indigenous governments to serve as token participants. Through these initiatives, state-based governments have the ability to wield their power and control the planning process to the detriment of indigenous governments. This study sets forth an alternative option involving cooperative land use planning practices where neither government controls the planning process. Drawing upon a case study of the Oneida Reservation in Wisconsin, USA, this study explores ways to increase cooperative land use planning relationships between indigenous and state-based governments. As one of the few empirical studies to apply critical planning theory to advocate for increased cooperative land use planning, this paper proposes a series of recommendations that can help indigenous and state-based governments avoid conflicts and work toward cooperative relationships.

The Teleology and Romance of State-building in Solomon Islands

ABSTRACTThe 2003–13 Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) is widely depicted as an ambitious ‘state-building’ project in the mould of contemporary interventions in Bosnia, Iraq, East Timor and Kosovo. Yet no new constitution was put in place in Solomon Islands, and, in practice, the core Australian policing components of the mission were largely substituted for their local counterparts. Unlike most state-building missions, RAMSI did not assume executive authority, and the critical relationship with the Indigenous government soon deteriorated, particularly after the election-related riots of April 2006. The teleological framing of RAMSI as a ‘state-building’ operation largely draws on heroic claims about future intentions made during the early phase of the mission, whereas, after the crises of 2006–07, RAMSI officials were engaged mostly in playing down expectations, narrowing the mission's objectives and preparing an exit strategy.

Social Enterprises in Canada: An Introduction

INTRODUCTIONThis special edition of ANSERJ is the result of two years of labour by researchers across Canada as part of the "International Comparative Social Enterprise Models" (ICSEM) project. The objective of this special edition is twofold: First, to provide researchers access to this cutting edge research, which examines social enterprises as they emerge amongst regional and cultural groups within Canada and, second, to provide a theoretical and practical "snapshot" of social enterprise at this important historical juncture. We hope that by taking and sharing such a snapshot, research on social enterprise in Canada and globally can be advanced. Therefore these articles focus on outlining the practice of social enterprises in various regions as it is emerging and not on final conclusions or singular interpretations. We believe however that on balance, given the surge in interest in social enterprise amongst practitioners, policy makers, academics and the public at large, the risks of publishing emergent research are outweighed by the benefits of moving the conversation on social enterprise forward.The articles that follow in this special edition are organized around geographical and cultural groups, outlining regional differences in the historical development and conceptual understanding of social enterprises across Canada. This introduction has been constructed to provide an overview of these articles, providing a high level analysis of the national characteristics of social enterprises in the regionally and culturally diverse country of Canada. For those interested in a more fully articulated version of this overview of the Canadian social enterprise landscape, they can look towards the Canadian report in forthcoming ICSEM working paper series, from which significant components of this introduction have been drawn. (Please see the ICSEM Canada website for further information on this project or to read the Canadian or Quebec reports: http://httpserver.carleton.ca/~fbrouard/ICSEMCanadagroup .)The main findings of the Canadian ICSEM report are that there are five main types of social enterprise practice in Canada, which cut across the cultural and policy regimes: cooperatives, nonprofit organizations, community development/interest organizations, Indigenous businesses, and business with a social mission. Further, the report argues that social enterprises are not simply the result of the activities of entrepreneurs, either collective or individual, but also provincial government legislation and major enabling institutions (e.g., university institutions, social networks and movements, entrepreneurial spaces, and funding agencies) that have a major influence on how we can understand the context and emergence of social enterprise models.This introduction will therefore outline the legislative, conceptual, and social enterprise models that frame the emergence of social enterprise in Canada. It is our hope that by so doing, we will provide a context within which the more focused regional articles that make up this special edition can be more broadly understood.UNDERSTANDING THE CANADIAN SOCIAL ENTERPRISE LEGISLATIVE CONTEXTMost readers will know that Canada is divided geographically into ten provinces and three territories and five main regions (Atlantic Canada, Quebec, Ontario, Western Canada and the territories of the North). These geographical and regional contexts are important because they form in significant ways the legislative frameworks within which social enterprises emerge. Legislatively, Canada is governed at four levels: the federal, provincial/territorial, local/municipal levels and by Indigenous governments. Legislative responsibilities are divided between the different levels of government based on a long history of colonization and decolonization, which has created significant overlap and tensions between the various levels' governments around policy jurisdiction. This ambiguity, and sometimes outright conflict, at the legislative level creates numerous problems for emerging sectors and institutions, such as social enterprise, because it is not entirely clear which level of governmental jurisdiction they fall under, whose responsibility it is to promote these kinds of activity, how to harmonize these policies, and how to facilitate and formalize activity that emerges from the activity of practitioners as opposed to politicians. …

Two thematic manifestations of neotribal capitalism in the United States

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how Elizabeth Rata’s (2000) concept of neotribal capitalism can be used to better understand and illuminate the nature and practices of contemporary indigenous governments in the United States. The focus is especially on the workings of neotraditionalist ideology: how it conceals and depoliticizes the class relations at the heart of neotribal society; how this ideology serves to insulate these neotribes from criticism; and how it serves to promote capital accumulation. This is done through an examination of two thematic groupings of relevant issues in contemporary indigenous and scholarly discourses: the interconnected and interrelated issues around labor, class consciousness, and unionization within indigenous communities; and the issues of indigenous identity, tribal citizenship, and the politics around the movement for disenrollment.

Domestic Policy Focus Highly Important For Protecting Primary Forests

We applaud Mackey et al.'s (2014) recent piece in Conservation Letters (Policy Options for the World's Primary Forests in Multilateral Environmental Agreements) that highlights the lack of international recognition of the critical importance of the world's primary forests. These last, remaining forests that are free of large-scale industrial development are desperately in need of a focused effort to protect them from future loss and degradation. Mackey et al.'s focus on multilateral environmental agreements, however, may provide an incomplete outlook on the full range of opportunities to best achieve protection of the world's primary forests. International treaties and other policy instruments can certainly be incredibly important in providing incentives or disincentives, increasing funding support, and providing novel economic mechanisms to achieve further protections of primary forests. However, as Mackey et al. point out, about half of the world's remaining primary forests are found in five developed countries (Canada, United States, Russia, Australia, and New Zealand). We contend that conservation opportunities in at least some of these nations are currently most effectively pursued by focusing on domestic policy options. Canada, for example, holds an estimated 25% of the world's remaining primary forest within its Boreal Forest region—an area of approximately 5.6 million km2. The region stores a minimum of 208 billion tons of carbon (Carlson et al. 2009) and supports some of the world's largest populations of northern large mammals including some that undertake large-scale annual migrations, a phenomena lost in much of the world (Bradshaw et al. 2009; IBCSP 2013; Wells et al. 2013). The region is estimated to support between one and three billion nesting birds, most of which migrate south to populate temperate and tropical ecological communities (Wells & Blancher 2011). Importantly, Canada's Boreal Forest region is home to hundreds of indigenous communities where the inhabitants still maintain their cultural traditions including extensive use of native fish and wildlife for food. Management decisions about the use of these lands generally now sit with provincial governments and indigenous governments. In the last 15 years, more than 870,000 km2 of new protected areas have been established across Canada's Boreal Forest region. The provinces of Quebec and Ontario, which are each larger than about 90% of the world's nations, are actively moving toward official conservation goals that together would result in an additional 858,000 km2 of primary forest becoming strictly protected (IUCN categories I–IV). Indigenous governments throughout Canada's Boreal Forest region have been particularly effective in moving forward protections for primary forest through their own initiatives. In the Northwest Territories, indigenous governments have carried out leading-edge land-use planning that has led to the development of over 425,000 km2 of protected areas and interim protected areas. In Manitoba and Ontario, five indigenous governments working collectively with provincial government, have protected 30,000 km2 of primary forest within an area they call Pimachiowin Aki. In Australia, although not focused on forest habitats, indigenous conservation efforts are also impressive with the area of land in Indigenous Protected Areas increasing from 568 km2 in 1998 to 500,347 km2 in 2014 (Woinarski et al. 2014). One of the more innovative and promising innovations in Australia is that of indigenous ranger programs that now involve more than 700 indigenous rangers in various environmental land management activities across at least 35 Indigenous Protected Areas (Woinarski et al. 2014). Efforts to protect the world's primary forests and other intact habitats through changes to international multilateral agreements are vitally important, but in some countries the most substantial on-the-ground results will likely be achieved through efforts instead focused on domestic policy options.

Guidelines for Considering Traditional Knowledges in Climate Change Initiatives

Guidelines for Considering Traditional Knowledges (TKs) in Climate Change Initiatives is a publication intended to be an informational resource for tribes, agencies, and organizations across the United States interested in understanding TKs in the context of climate change. The Third National Climate Assessment issued in May 2014 contained a chapter dedicated to the impact of climate change on tribal peoples. In light of the increasing recognition of the significance of traditional knowledges (TKs) in relation to climate change, a self-organized, informal group of indigenous persons, staff of indigenous governments and organizations, and experts with experience working with issues concerning traditional knowledges (The Climate and Traditional Knowledges Workgroup – CTKW), felt compelled to develop a framework to increase understanding of issues relating to access and protection of TKs in climate initiatives and interactions between holders of TKs and non-tribal partners. The Guidelines were originally developed to inform the Department of Interior’s Advisory Committee on Climate Change and Natural Resource Science (ACCCNRS) in May 2014.

Book Review: Mon-Khmer: People of the Mekong Region

Worldwide, Indigenous tourism has grown in importance over the last few decades, thus placing peoples, their territory, culture, customs, views of the world, and natural environments at the center of attention of an array of Indigenous and non-Indigenous organizations and governments. Australia, Brazil, and New Zealand are home to many Indigenous communities, and this paper aims to identify the key elements related to the contemporary role of indigenous groups and communities in tourism operations and management in the context of these countries. Desktop research for this study included a review of academic and grey literature, secondary data, and the authors’ collective experience in the field. Current approaches to indigenous tourism suggest that engagement of ethnic indigenous minorities in a leadership, and even a protagonist role, is good for sustainable tourism operations and management, particularly if they incorporate self-determination, control, and empowerment.

Centering Indigenous Nations within Indigenous Methodologies

Centering Indigenous Nations within Indigenous Methodologies Duane Champagne (bio) How do we understand Indigenous individuals, communities, and nations as research subjects, researchers, and beneficiaries of research? The primary focus of Indigenous methodologies and research should center on the issues and concerns of Indigenous nations or peoples. Indigenous nations, cultures, governments, and issues should be the primary research units and the primary focus of theory, policy, positionality, and analysis within Indigenous studies approaches and paradigms. Western research institutions and academic disciplines express their values, goals, and research results when addressing policy, political, or academic issues found in Western nations and cultural and intellectual traditions. Often Western researchers theorize and study Indigenous peoples as part of their own “universal” research, policy, and theoretical interests. This is the main body of research in regard to Indigenous peoples that currently takes place in the world. Indigenous peoples have widely differing cultures, territories, and conceptions of self-government, and goals and values that usually differ from the research goals conducted by institutions supported by nation-states. There is nothing wrong with differing research paradigms and perspectives, if researchers are truly seeking reliable knowledge and understanding. Just as mainstream-supported research serves the goals and interests of nation-states, Indigenous studies should foster the goals and values of Indigenous governments, nations, and communities. Research [End Page 57] conducted among Indigenous nations should respect their worldviews and forms of government, community, culture, and nationality. Indigenous nations have their own culturally informed ways of sustaining self-government, culture, territory, and economic well-being. Indigenous nations cannot be summarized by a discussion of race, ethnicity, marginalized-colonized populations, cultural groups, or minority groups. Indigenous nations predate contemporary nation-states and were not parties to the formation, agreements, or constitutions of nation-states. Indigenous people usually are not consensual citizens of their surrounding nation-states. In the contemporary world, Indigenous nations are often at odds with their surrounding nation-state in regard to a variety of issues including language, territory, self-government, cultural worldviews, and citizen status. Indigenous peoples and nation-states usually do not agree on the fundamental rules of political, cultural, and economic order. Indigenous nations do not necessarily want to challenge the legal and political structures of nation-states, but nation-states often require legal and normative conformity from Indigenous peoples on disputed issues. These incommensurate cultural and institutional outlooks frame the current contentious context of Indigenous peoples and nation-states. Indigenous peoples do not directly challenge nation-states, but the very fact of their carrying on their own institutional, political, and cultural orders is often incompatible with the laws and rules of nation-states. Western academic scientific theory and social interpretations are positivistic, materialistic, reductionist, objectivist, and focused on compartmentalizing knowledge into specialties. Indians are seen as subjects—or objects—of research, and are conceptualized in ways alien to Indian understandings of human groups and their place in the universe. Indigenous peoples have holistic interpretations and values that provide knowledge about the interrelatedness of humans and nonhuman forces in the world. Some Indigenous knowledge and viewpoints are gaining attention and validation in the scientific world. Medicine is exploring holistic medical practices and discovering that many pharmaceuticals known to be effective today were often used by Native peoples. In addition, environmentalists look to Indigenous perspectives for visions of sustainable holistic cosmic order. Policy makers in development theory are increasingly discussing Indigenous knowledge, and traditional ecological knowledge is gaining interest and study. When classical scientific viewpoints clash with Indigenous worldviews and values, however, distrust and misunderstanding can result among Indigenous peoples.1 Claims by Western researchers of neutrality, universalism, and objectivity are difficult for Indigenous peoples to accept and comprehend both politically and culturally.2 Researchers who are conducting research in Indigenous nations and among Indigenous peoples are transitioning from one worldview [End Page 58] or way of life to another. Not to recognize Indigenous nations’ cultural and political clashes with nation-states, and their different goals and values, is to fail to recognize Indigenous peoples’ diverse understandings, values, and ways of being. The diversity and even the presence of Indigenous nations are often not explicitly articulated in many theories and methodologies. These methodologies therefore cannot adequately explain...

‘We’ve got better things to do than worry about whitefella politics’: Contemporary Indigenous graffiti and recent government interventions in Jawoyn Country

This paper explores whether Aboriginal people have used graffiti to display resistance to the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007. One of the first studies of graffiti in a remote Aboriginal community, this research was undertaken on Jawoyn lands in the Northern Territory, Australia. It encompasses the Aboriginal communities of Barunga, Manyallaluk and Beswick, where graffiti was recorded at 277 road signs along the Central Arnhem Road and Manyallaluk Road, and at three roadside shelters. This study shows that graffiti in Jawoyn communities primarily serves the intragroup purpose of reinforcing relationships between community members, in contrast to the use of graffiti by non-Indigenous people to propagate political and social messages between different social groups. It also provides material insights into a fear of government. Contrary to our expectations, graffiti in Jawoyn Country is not a mode of resistance to government intervention. Instead, the near absence of graffiti on Northern Territory Emergency Response signs in areas where surrounding signs have high densities of graffiti provides unique and materially-based insights into a fear of the Australian government that is felt by Aboriginal people in remote communities. The analysis suggests that Aboriginal people nurture community relationships partly to deal with alienation from government and, to some extent, the wider Australian community.

Mediating intercultural bureaucratic encounters

Governments throughout Australia have deployed Aboriginal specific positions within government departments in an effort to improve access to government services for Aboriginal people. This small-scale study uses a qualitative interpretive interview approach to explore the communication strategies that enable two Aboriginal staff to act as mediators between the bureaucracy and Aboriginal communities. The paper also reveals unique types of professional pressures, which may not be evident in the wider public service. Although focused on Australia, the findings may have implications for other intercultural communication contexts that involve interaction between indigenous people and government bureaucracies.

Costs of participatory monitoring and evaluation of joint management of protected areas in the Northern Territory, Australia

Joint management of protected areas by indigenous people and government management agencies is being promoted at the international level as a tool to strengthen the protection of biodiversity and the recognition of indigenous peoples' interests in protected areas. Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of joint management is, however, in its infancy. To help managers, we calculated the costs of participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) of joint management in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia relative to other joint management expenses. Costs of the process constituted only 1.3–1.5 per cent of the total joint management budget of over AU$10 million over three years. The preparation and validation/feedback phases of PM&E demanded most time and money, with contractor costs, particularly for external facilitators, representing the largest proportion of expenditure. The relatively low costs of PM&E are in contrast with common perceptions of the process as time-consuming and expensive.

La gerontocracia y el consejo de ancianos

Anthropologists and ethnologists, who generalized this institution as a rule of government of native peoples, studied the power exercised by the old through the council of elders, as a system of indigenous government. Elders in this system are seen as possessed with wisdom, prestige, power and leadership; traits of high social status that homogenized for the aged population, making believe that reaching advanced age was entering a gerontocracy paradise. This paper discusses the intergenerational struggle for power and the changes of social and political organization of Indian peoples, and how the organization of Government, with a negative balance for the elderly population has been modified. Today are remnants of what one day was the council of elders, and their functions have been relegated to ritual matters, where does not put at risk political and economic decision-making in the community.

Reflecting on the State of the IIPJ and the Condition of Indigenous Peoples Around the World

As we come to the end of 2012, it is natural for the IIPJ contributors, readers, staff, and volunteers to reflect on the work of the Journal and on the reason we all contributed to that work. The year has been, by any standards, a real success. Yet, when we look worldwide, there is still much work to be done. Take, for example, the continuing gap in well-being; it is clear that there are some common problems across the more developed countries. Where efforts to create real partnerships between Indigenous peoples and governments have started, we hope they push forward. Where they have not, then they must start. May this upcoming year, 2013, be a year we look back on with pride for the accomplishments that occur.