Indigenous knowledge and federal environmental assessments in Canada: applying past lessons to the 2019 impact assessment act
Open accessAbstract
Policy-makers ideally pursue well-informed, socially just means to make environmental decisions. Indigenous peoples have used Indigenous knowledge (IK) to inform decisions about environmental management for millennia. In the last 50 years, many western societies have used environmental assessment (EA) processes to deliberate on industrial proposals, informed by scientific information. Recently EA processes have attempted to incorporate IK in some countries and regions, but practitioners and scholars have criticized the ability of EA to meaningfully engage IK. Here we consider these tensions in Canada, a country with economic focus on resource extraction and unresolved government-to-government relationships with Indigenous Nations. In 2019, the Canadian government passed the Impact Assessment Act, reinvigorating dialogue on the relationship between IK and EA. Addressing this opportunity, we examined obstacles between IK and EA via a systematic literature review, and qualitative analyses of publications and the Act itself. Our results and synthesis identify obstacles preventing the Act from meaningfully engaging IK, some of which are surmountable (e.g., failures to engage best practices, financial limitations), whereas others are substantial (e.g., knowledge incompatibilities, effects of colonization). Finally, we offer recommendations for practitioners and scholars towards ameliorating relationships between IK and EA towards improved decision-making and recognition of Indigeno…
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?
Delineating what Indigenous knowledge is and how it operates has remained largely the purview of external organizations, governments, institutions and researchers rather than by Indigenous peoples themselves.
“However, delineating what Indigenous knowledge is and how it operates has remained largely the purview of external organizations, governments, institutions and researchers rather than by Indigenous peoples them/ourselves (Battiste & Henderson, 2000; Eckert et al., 2020; McGregor, 2004a).”
From “Two‐Eyed Seeing”: An Indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management (2021) · cites this paper as Eckert et al., 2020
Cites
Coming Full Circle: Indigenous Knowledge, Environment, and Our Future
McGregor, D. (2004) · The American Indian Quarterly · doi:10.1353/aiq.2004.0101 · Cited by 451 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
“Two‐Eyed Seeing”: An Indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management
Reid, A. J., Eckert, L. E., Lane, J., Young, N., Hinch, S. G., Darimont, C. T., Cooke, S. J., Ban, N. C., & Marshall, A. (2021) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1111/faf.12516 · Cited by 652 · see citing works
“However, delineating what Indigenous knowledge is and how it operates has remained largely the purview of external organizations, governments, institutions and researchers rather than by Indigenous peoples them/ourselves (Battiste & Henderson, 2000; Eckert et al., 2020; McGregor, 2004a).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- Authors
- Eckert, L. E., Claxton, N. X., Owens, C., Johnston, A., Ban, N. C., Moola, F., & Darimont, C. T.
- Affiliations
- University of Victoria (CA)
- School of Child and Youth Care, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty Road, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada
- West Coast Environmental Law, 201-2006 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V6J 2B3, Canada
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Venue
- FACETS
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2020-01-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 67-90
- ISSN
- 2371-1671 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3006331155
- Cited by
- 78
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7
- FWCI
- 12.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- FACETS (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- UVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Indigenous Studies and Ecology
- Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
- Keywords
- indigenous knowledge, environmental assessment, federal environmental policy, Indigenous engagement, resource extraction, indigenous rights, colonization
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