No abstract

This article provides analysis of the issues relating to movement towards new models for Indigenous-led conservation in light of Canada’s initiatives for greater protected areas representation through Target 1. We provide a background on Canada’s Pathway to Target 1, which is based on Target 11 from the Aichi Biodiversity Targets set forth by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We contemplate the past, present and future of colonization and reconciliation in Canada, and consider the influence of international declarations, programs and initiatives on the potential for the formation of Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs). We then provide an analysis of “wicked problems” that Indigenous communities, governments, and other stakeholders in protected areas will need to navigate towards implementing the IPCA approach in Canada. We outline the different types of Indigenous involvement in protected areas and how they potentially fit within the principles for the development of IPCAs. We then turn our discussion to the need to refocus conservation on reconciliation by restoring nation-to-nation relationships and relationships between the land and peoples. The lessons we draw have potential parallels for other nation states, particularly those signatory to the CBD and with a colonial history, aiming for biodiversity conservation and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples through IPCAs.

The trend towards the inclusion of diverse groups in environmental decision-making has led to the need to explore new forms of communication to engage communities in expressing their values and aspirations. Participatory art as an emergent methodology was explored with Traditional Owner groups involved in policy development through the Girringun Aboriginal Corporation in northern Queensland, Australia. The works began with a moderated focus group exploring the theme What does caring for country mean to you? Participants then worked collaboratively on one canvas over some six weeks. Individual expressions were discussed with participants during and following their creation. Themes emerging from the focus group and painting workshop included those related to culture, well-being, environment, politics, and holism, which was central to the discussions. The common thread of the work was that people need to interact with country in order to care for country.

‘Boundary work’ is a relatively new and innovative qualitative approach in place-based research and often involves the creation of ‘boundary objects’. Such objects can be created collaboratively with Indigenous communities, and can be used to communicate knowledge, values and aspirations across social and political boundaries. This article provides an account of boundary work within place-based research communities of practice developed between geographers and Indigenous communities. We draw on our own boundary work research and present a conceptual framework for geographers to draw on when engaging in boundary work and co-creating boundary objects with Indigenous communities.

Collaborative problem solving has increasingly become important in the face of the complexities in the management of resources, including protected areas. The strategy undertaken by Girringun Aboriginal Corporation in north tropical Queensland, Australia, for developing co-management demonstrates the potential for a problem solving approach involving sequential initiatives, as an alternative to the more familiar negotiated agreements for co-management. Our longitudinal case study focuses on the development of indigenous ranger units as a strategic mechanism for the involvement of traditional owners in managing their country in collaboration with government and other interested parties. This was followed by Australia's first traditional use of marine resources agreement, and development of a multi-jurisdictional, land to sea, indigenous protected area. In using a relationship building approach to develop regional scale co-management, Girringun has been strengthening its capabilities as collaborator and regional service provider, thus, bringing customary decision-making structures into play to 'care for country'. From this evolving process we have identified the key components of a relationship building strategy, 'the pillars of co-management'. This approach includes learning-by-doing, the building of respect and rapport, sorting out responsibilities, practical engagement, and capacity-building.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract