Meaningful engagement with Indigenous peoples: a case study of Ontario’s Great Lakes Protection Act

Lukawiecki, Jessica; Gagnon, Rhonda; Dokis, Carly; Walters, Dan; Molot, Lewis A.

doi:10.1080/07900627.2019.1681261

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scientists typically do not have access to, nor do they even think to consider this type of knowledge when conducting their studies; yet it is thought that this additional knowledge can help further western science. Though some research is focused on how TK was marginalized in the region (McGregor, 2014;Norman, 2017) and though there is some social science research into the engagement of Indigenous peoples and knowledge in the region (Lukawiecki et al, 2019;Reo et al, 2017), such attempts are limited.…”

Section: Lakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Effective stakeholder engagement would require more work and analysis on the basin-level and local levels of government. A stakeholder group often neglected are Indigenous communities as Indigenous knowledge, interests and rights are often ignored when it comes to water governance (Lukawiecki et al, 2019;McGregor, 2014, Norman, 2017, Phare, 2009. Indigenous communities are left at a disadvantage as they are more likely to experience lack of access to safe drinking water compared to other residents, and governments fail to address these issues within a timely manner (Phare, 2009).…”

Section: Section 10 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Geospatial Analysis of Indigenous Opinions in the Great Lakes Region and the Province of Ontario from the 2021 International Joint Commission Great Lakes Survey

Alvarez

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>This paper explores differences in opinions in the 2021 International Joint Commission (IJC) Great Lakes survey. Indigenous responses are compared with the full survey responses. Lake-wide comparisons are made between Indigenous respondents residing within different basins.</p> <p>Responses from the Province of Ontario are also analyzed at the postal-code level where a regression kriging model is built to predict responses and evaluate relevant variables for questions related to drinking water access and trust in wastewater treatment. This paper finds there are differences pertaining to concerns, opinions on severity of impacts, potential participation for protecting the health of the lakes and demographic variables that were seen between Indigenous respondents and the full survey averages. There was also differences Lake-wide in how Indigenous respondents felt about the ways in which they engage with the Lakes being threatened, as well as species of cultural importance being threatened due to the state of the Lakes. Huron and Superior respondents reported less concern, whereas Michigan, Erie and Ontario respondents reported higher concern. In Ontario, there was a contrast in the North and South pertaining to drinking water access for both the respondent and the respondent’s community, as well as perceptions in effective wastewater treatment. The North reported more disagreement with fair access to clean drinking water for both the respondents and the community, and less trust in the community’s wastewater treatment despite low response rates compared to the South.</p>

show abstract

Section: Lakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Section 10 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial Analysis of Indigenous Opinions in the Great Lakes Region and the Province of Ontario from the 2021 International Joint Commission Great Lakes Survey

Alvarez

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indigenous peoples in the U.S. and worldwide are the original conservation stewards of marine spaces, with rights, responsibilities, wisdom, knowledge, and connections to the places they have lived in and sustained for generations (Johannes, 1978;Berkes, 2018;Ban et al, 2019b;Lukawiecki et al, 2021;Office of Hawaiian Affairs et al, 2021). MPA managers at all governance levels have the responsibility and opportunity to work in partnership with and, where appropriate, enact co-management with Indigenous peoples (Cinner et al, 2012).…”

Section: Respecting and Empowering Indigenous Rights And Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Scientific Synthesis of Marine Protected Areas in the United States: Status and Recommendations

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a key tool for achieving goals for biodiversity conservation and human well-being, including improving climate resilience and equitable access to nature. At a national level, they are central components in the U.S. commitment to conserve at least 30% of U.S. waters by 2030. By definition, the primary goal of an MPA is the long-term conservation of nature; however, not all MPAs provide the same ecological and social benefits. A U.S. system of MPAs that is equitable, well-managed, representative and connected, and includes areas at a level of protection that can deliver desired outcomes is best positioned to support national goals. We used a new MPA framework, The MPA Guide, to assess the level of protection and stage of establishment of the 50 largest U.S. MPAs, which make up 99.7% of the total U.S. MPA area (3.19 million km2). Over 96% of this area, including 99% of that which is fully or highly protected against extractive or destructive human activities, is in the central Pacific ocean. Total MPA area in other regions is sparse – only 1.9% of the U.S. ocean excluding the central Pacific is protected in any kind of MPA (120,976 km2). Over three quarters of the non-central Pacific MPA area is lightly or minimally protected against extractive or destructive human activities. These results highlight an urgent need to improve the quality, quantity, and representativeness of MPA protection in U.S. waters to bring benefits to human and marine communities. We identify and review the state of the science, including focal areas for achieving desired MPA outcomes and lessons learned from places where sound ecological and social design principles come together in MPAs that are set up to achieve national goals for equity, climate resilience, and biodiversity conservation. We recommend key opportunities for action specific to the U.S. context, including increasing funding, research, equity, and protection level for new and existing U.S. MPAs.

show abstract

“…Approximately 185 First Nations, Métis or Native American Tribes' communities reside and have traditional Territories and homelands around the Great Lakes Basin which spans a shoreline of 17,000 km between Canada and the United States (GLOS, 2021). Indigenous Peoples living within the Great Lakes Basin have close subsistence, economic, spiritual and cultural ties with the water, land and ecosystems of the Great Lakes (Lukawiecki et al, 2021). These ties are protected by Treaty rights (Hudson & Ziegler, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Peoples‐related environmental research within the basin of the Laurentian Great Lakes: A systematic map protocol

Serville-Tertullien

Pirie

Buell

et al. 2023

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The North American Great Lakes Basin is the homeland for many First Nations, Métis and Native American Tribes. The terrestrial and aquatic ecological systems within this multinational region, which is of spiritual, cultural and subsistence significance to a diversity of Indigenous Peoples, are facing several natural and anthropogenic pressures. While there are many current and past research efforts and projects to address those pressures, the nature and range of environment‐related projects involving Indigenous Peoples or organizations remains unknown. This gap in knowledge presents a unique opportunity to identify and map past and current environmental and ecological research within the Great Lakes involving Indigenous Peoples. A systematic search strategy will be applied to identify and capture peer‐reviewed publications that pertain to past and current environmental research within the Great Lakes basin that involve or are connected to Indigenous Peoples, following the procedures outlined in this systematic mapping protocol. Publications that pertain to environmental and ecological research with, for and by Indigenous Peoples within the Great Lakes, as determined by the use of suitable keywords, will be retrieved from four proposed online bibliographic platforms and databases. Searches will only include peer‐reviewed publications in the English language. Final captures of the search results will be screened in two stages to identify potentially relevant papers. This will take place through (1) title and abstract screening and (2) full‐text analysis. Following the completion of the screening process, remaining papers will be coded and analysed through a narrative synthesis approach and descriptive statistics will be conducted. Environmental research captured through this systematic protocol will be geospatially mapped using the ArcGIS mapping software. It is anticipated that the information obtained from the resulting systematic map will be beneficial for identifying gaps in environmental research to support and inform future initiatives for environmental research planning, policy and decision‐making with, for and by Indigenous Communities within the Great Lakes basin.

show abstract

Meaningful engagement with Indigenous peoples: a case study of Ontario’s Great Lakes Protection Act

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Geospatial Analysis of Indigenous Opinions in the Great Lakes Region and the Province of Ontario from the 2021 International Joint Commission Great Lakes Survey

Geospatial Analysis of Indigenous Opinions in the Great Lakes Region and the Province of Ontario from the 2021 International Joint Commission Great Lakes Survey

A Scientific Synthesis of Marine Protected Areas in the United States: Status and Recommendations

Indigenous Peoples‐related environmental research within the basin of the Laurentian Great Lakes: A systematic map protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About