“I spent the first year drinking tea”: Exploring Canadian university researchers’ perspectives on community‐based participatory research involving Indigenous peoples
Abstract
Community‐based participatory research (CBPR) is generally understood as a process by which decision‐making power and ownership are shared between the researcher and the community involved, bi‐directional research capacity and co‐learning are promoted, and new knowledge is co‐created and disseminated in a manner that is mutually beneficial for those involved. Within the field of Canadian geography we are seeing emerging interest in using CBPR as a way of conducting meaningful and relevant research with Indigenous communities. However, individual interpretations of CBPR's tenets and the ways in which CBPR is operationalized are, in fact, highly variable. In this article we report the findings of an exploratory qualitative case study involving semi‐structured, open‐ended interviews with Canadian university‐based geographers and social scientists in related disciplines who engage in CBPR to explore the relationship between their conceptual understanding of CBPR and their applied research. Our findings reveal some of the tensions for university‐based researchers concerning CBPR in theory and practice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Castleden et al. (2012) interviews indicate that tensions with dominant research conceptions are ongoing in community-engaged research.
“Not surprisingly, Castleden et al.’s (2012) interviews indicate that these are ongoing tensions in the practice of community-engaged research.”
From From Reflection to Resurgence: Co-Researching Through Storymaking and Truthtelling With Urban Indigenous Women (2026) · cites this paper as Castleden et al. (2012)
Cites
A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis
Aronson, J. (1995) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/1995.2069 · Cited by 1,758 · see citing works
Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage: A Global Challenge
Battiste, M., & Henderson, J. (. Y. (2000) · doi:10.59962/9781895830439 · Cited by 755 · see citing works
Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
Khaliq, Y. (2002) · Encyclopedia of Clinical Pharmacy · doi:10.3109/9780824706081.150 · Cited by 651 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Leeuw, S. D., Cameron, E. S., & Greenwood, M. L. (2012) · Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0064.2012.00434.x · Cited by 226 · see citing works
Adams, M. S., Carpenter, J., Housty, J. A., Neasloss, D., Paquet, P. C., Service, C., Walkus, J., & Darimont, C. T. (2014) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-06569-190305 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
Bridging knowledge systems to enhance governance of environmental commons: A typology of settings
Rathwell, K. J., Armitage, D., & Berkes, F. (2015) · International Journal of the Commons · doi:10.18352/ijc.584 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Ethical Challenges in Community-Based Participatory Research: A Scoping Review
Wilson, E., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2018) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732317690721 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Morton Ninomiya, M. E., Hurley, N., & Penashue, J. (2020) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/09581596.2018.1541228 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Di Pietro, N., & Illes, J. (2016) · Neuroethics · doi:10.1007/s12152-016-9281-8 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Gokiert, R. J., Willows, N. D., Georgis, R., Stringer, H., & Alexander Research Committee, *. (2017) · International Indigenous Policy Journal · doi:10.18584/iipj.2017.8.2.8 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Rieger, K., Horton, M., Cook, L., Copenace, S., Bennett, M., Phillips-Beck, W., Buss, M., Chudyk, A., Hornan, B., Horrill, T., et al. (2025) · The International Indigenous Policy Journal · doi:10.18584/iipj.2025.16.2.18451 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Boissoneau, A., Cox, R. D., Leveille, A., Morgan, R. K., Pidgeon, M., & Rosso, M. (2026) · AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · doi:10.1177/11771801261456796
- Authors
- Castleden, H., Morgan, V. S., & Lamb, C.
- Affiliations
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- University of Victoria (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Castleden, Heather
- Venue
- Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-05-30
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 160-179
- ISSN
- 0008-3658 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0064
- OpenAlex
- W1957490726
- Cited by
- 420
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 30 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 22.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Service-Learning and Community Engagement
- Keywords
- community-based participatory research, indigenous peoples, university researchers, researcher perspectives, knowledge co-production, research collaboration, research capacity, co-learning, theory-practice tension, Canadian geography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
