Confronting epistemic blinders in impact assessment and environmental health risk assessment processes.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-07-17 DOI:10.1111/risa.70073
Diana Lewis, Heather Castleden, Jeffrey Masuda, Chantelle Richmond, Dyanna Jolly
{"title":"Confronting epistemic blinders in impact assessment and environmental health risk assessment processes.","authors":"Diana Lewis, Heather Castleden, Jeffrey Masuda, Chantelle Richmond, Dyanna Jolly","doi":"10.1111/risa.70073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The driving epistemology of settler-colonial society in Canada is socially structured around the elimination of Indigenous Peoples' access to territory to expropriate its resources for their own purposes, active within state legislation and policies that disproportionately harm Indigenous Peoples through the continual extraction of resources and control over territory. Impact assessment (IA) processes have been pivotal in this strategy, deployed to rationalize settler colonial rule over land and people under the guise of probabilistic risk assessment. This epistemology is critiqued for its propensity, particularly in environmental health risk assessment (EHRA) processes, to reduce Indigenous Peoples' complex lives and land-based relations into reductive environmental exposures that serve to sanitize, homogenize, and normalize continued colonial violence on their bodies, to 'talk away' how Indigenous Peoples are impacted. This Perspective offers insight into how Indigenous Peoples' epistemological frameworks for health and wellbeing are neglected in IA processes. We add our voices to others who insist that EHRA must reflect the diversity of place-based relationships and epistemological ways of approaching Indigenous health and wellbeing. Government and industry must remove their epistemic blinders to recognize the need for multiple approaches, knowledges, and value systems to reflect and measure the cultural, social, and ecological consequences of development on Indigenous Peoples.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70073","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The driving epistemology of settler-colonial society in Canada is socially structured around the elimination of Indigenous Peoples' access to territory to expropriate its resources for their own purposes, active within state legislation and policies that disproportionately harm Indigenous Peoples through the continual extraction of resources and control over territory. Impact assessment (IA) processes have been pivotal in this strategy, deployed to rationalize settler colonial rule over land and people under the guise of probabilistic risk assessment. This epistemology is critiqued for its propensity, particularly in environmental health risk assessment (EHRA) processes, to reduce Indigenous Peoples' complex lives and land-based relations into reductive environmental exposures that serve to sanitize, homogenize, and normalize continued colonial violence on their bodies, to 'talk away' how Indigenous Peoples are impacted. This Perspective offers insight into how Indigenous Peoples' epistemological frameworks for health and wellbeing are neglected in IA processes. We add our voices to others who insist that EHRA must reflect the diversity of place-based relationships and epistemological ways of approaching Indigenous health and wellbeing. Government and industry must remove their epistemic blinders to recognize the need for multiple approaches, knowledges, and value systems to reflect and measure the cultural, social, and ecological consequences of development on Indigenous Peoples.

应对影响评估和环境健康风险评估过程中的认知盲点。
加拿大移民-殖民社会的主导认识论是围绕着消除土著人民进入领土为自己的目的征用其资源的社会结构,活跃在国家立法和政策中,通过不断榨取资源和控制领土而不成比例地伤害土著人民。影响评估过程在这一战略中起着关键作用,其目的是在概率风险评估的幌子下使定居者对土地和人民的殖民统治合理化。这种认识论因其倾向而受到批评,特别是在环境健康风险评估(EHRA)过程中,将土著人民复杂的生活和基于土地的关系减少为减少环境暴露,从而有助于对其身体进行消毒,同质化和正常化持续的殖民暴力,“谈论”土著人民如何受到影响。这一观点提供了洞察土著人民的健康和福祉的认识论框架是如何在内审过程中被忽视的。我们加入了其他人的声音,他们坚持认为EHRA必须反映基于地方的关系的多样性和接近土著健康和福祉的认识论方式。政府和行业必须消除他们的认知障碍,认识到需要多种方法、知识和价值体系来反映和衡量发展对土著人民的文化、社会和生态影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信