Framing Indigenous Bioenergy Partnerships

Abstract

The rapidly expanding forest bioenergy sector in Canada promises to support low carbon energy options that also support economic development and Indigenous involvement. Little empirical research has been conducted on Indigenous participation in forest bioenergy in Canada, which points to the need for a nuanced and reliable knowledge base to foster innovation in bioenergy that will contribute to community and economic development. However, before empirical research can be conducted it is important to understand the issues that influence Indigenous participation in the bioenergy sector. We therefore look to and conduct a frame analysis of allied sectors to develop insights about the policy and participatory landscape in which forest bioenergy in Canada is situated. Our analysis illustrates that identities and perspectives linked to energy and forestry can be complex and can shift depending on how business is done around such projects. Strengths in the current state of knowledge include the breadth of research regarding participatory natural resource management in Canada, particularly with regard to northern and Indigenous communities and territorial lands. Our review indicates that even the emerging bioenergy literature that exists now, when paired with that of allied sectors, can help analysts understand and make sense of energy and energy-related issues.

Sustainability management and social license to operate in the extractive industry: The cross‐cultural gap with Indigenous communities

“…The interviews conducted show that, despite the enduring mistrust on the part of many Indigenous communities and their sometimes conflictual relations with extractive companies, relations between Indigenous communities and extractive companies are beginning to evolve toward a collaborative rather than confrontational approach, as suggested in recent scholarly empirical literature (e.g., Fraser, 2021;Pinkerton, 2019;Wyatt, 2016;Zurba et al, 2016;Zurba & Bullock, 2018). This logic is notably explained by institutional pressures to take sustainable development into account and the need to obtain an SLO from local populations before implementing new projects.…”

A review of collaborative research practices with Indigenous Peoples in engineering, energy, and infrastructure development in Canada

“…Our assessment was conducted only based on the information contained in these reports, which were primarily written by the non-Indigenous collaborators and did not include any reports written in Indigenous languages. Therefore, what is framed as "collaborative" by the authors may not be collaborative from the perspectives of the Indigenous communities [16]. Ultimately, only Indigenous communities themselves can evaluate how respectful a given collaboration was.…”

“…The terms "collaborative research" and "collaborative technical research" are used interchangeably in this paper to refer to technical research projects that involve work between Indigenous communities and non-Indigenous researchers. From the researchers' point of view, they perceive the community as collaborators [16,17]. In contrast, the term "respectful research" prioritizes community perception of the partnership.…”

“…In contrast, the term "respectful research" prioritizes community perception of the partnership. In respectful research, the community considers the work to be collaborative [16], supportive of their struggle for nationhood, selfgovernance and self-determination [17], and relevant to their community needs [18].…”

Bioenergy development and the implications for the social wellbeing of Indigenous peoples in Canada

“…Bioenergy development in Canada has the potential to impact and/or benefit Indigenous communities in similar ways to other natural resources developments, such as forestry and other types of energy projects (Krupa 2012;Zurba and Bullock 2018). Benefits to Indigenous communities from resource development projects generally include short-and/or long-term economic gains, such as employment and other forms of community enhancements such as infrastructure (Caine and Krogman 2010).…”