Improving risk and impact assessments via sustainability guidance from Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe-specific Indigenous Knowledge)

IF 7.2 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-06-11 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2026.104755
Margaret G. O'Connell, Kathleen Smith, Mike Wiggins Jr., Marvin DeFoe Shingwe Bines Name Clan, James Rasmussen, Esteban Chiriboga, Michael Waasegiizhig Price, Kimberly R. Marion Suiseeya, Jennifer B. Dunn
{"title":"Improving risk and impact assessments via sustainability guidance from Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe-specific Indigenous Knowledge)","authors":"Margaret G. O'Connell,&nbsp;Kathleen Smith,&nbsp;Mike Wiggins Jr.,&nbsp;Marvin DeFoe Shingwe Bines Name Clan,&nbsp;James Rasmussen,&nbsp;Esteban Chiriboga,&nbsp;Michael Waasegiizhig Price,&nbsp;Kimberly R. Marion Suiseeya,&nbsp;Jennifer B. Dunn","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2026.104755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many critical minerals underpinning green energy technologies are disproportionately located on or near Indigenous lands. Hence, there is a risk that an improperly managed green energy transition will violate Indigenous rights, thereby mirroring the extractive harms of current fossil fuel-based systems. There is a need to understand the capacity for current decision-making processes to engage with Indigenous Knowledge and uphold Indigenous rights. Several forms of impact assessment, risk assessment, and systems analysis exist to inform permitting, policymaking, and other decision-making processes. Here, we evaluate 18 such assessments to identify risks of Indigenous sovereignty violation. Contextualizing each aspect of our analysis within Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe-specific Indigenous Knowledge), we conduct a thematic analysis of over 50 assessment protocol sources in parallel with teachings shared by Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin holders. The teachings of Asemaa, Ma'iingan, and the Seventh Fire Prophecy emphasize consent, connection, and kinship as tenets of sustainability. Yet we find that consultation-based, often ambiguous participation protocols risk undermining consensus-building. Additionally, complex connections between assessments bely methods that isolate elements of sustainability in contradiction to Anishinaabe teachings of intertwined human and ecological well-being. Our analysis culminates in recommendations for co-developing more comprehensive, sovereignty-affirming assessment processes. The implementation of these recommendations will vary across contexts; however, the structure of our analysis provides a broadly applicable example of collaborative research that bridges knowledge systems. As depicted in the Seventh Fire Prophecy, we stand at a sustainability crossroads; ultimately, our analysis seeks to improve assessment protocols and guide decision making toward a more sustainable path.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"138 ","pages":"Article 104755"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629626002264","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many critical minerals underpinning green energy technologies are disproportionately located on or near Indigenous lands. Hence, there is a risk that an improperly managed green energy transition will violate Indigenous rights, thereby mirroring the extractive harms of current fossil fuel-based systems. There is a need to understand the capacity for current decision-making processes to engage with Indigenous Knowledge and uphold Indigenous rights. Several forms of impact assessment, risk assessment, and systems analysis exist to inform permitting, policymaking, and other decision-making processes. Here, we evaluate 18 such assessments to identify risks of Indigenous sovereignty violation. Contextualizing each aspect of our analysis within Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe-specific Indigenous Knowledge), we conduct a thematic analysis of over 50 assessment protocol sources in parallel with teachings shared by Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin holders. The teachings of Asemaa, Ma'iingan, and the Seventh Fire Prophecy emphasize consent, connection, and kinship as tenets of sustainability. Yet we find that consultation-based, often ambiguous participation protocols risk undermining consensus-building. Additionally, complex connections between assessments bely methods that isolate elements of sustainability in contradiction to Anishinaabe teachings of intertwined human and ecological well-being. Our analysis culminates in recommendations for co-developing more comprehensive, sovereignty-affirming assessment processes. The implementation of these recommendations will vary across contexts; however, the structure of our analysis provides a broadly applicable example of collaborative research that bridges knowledge systems. As depicted in the Seventh Fire Prophecy, we stand at a sustainability crossroads; ultimately, our analysis seeks to improve assessment protocols and guide decision making toward a more sustainable path.
通过Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe特有的土著知识)的可持续性指导改进风险和影响评估
支撑绿色能源技术的许多关键矿物不成比例地位于土著土地上或附近。因此,管理不当的绿色能源转型有可能侵犯土著居民的权利,从而反映出当前基于化石燃料的系统的采掘危害。有必要了解当前决策过程利用土著知识和维护土著权利的能力。存在几种形式的影响评估、风险评估和系统分析,为许可、政策制定和其他决策过程提供信息。在这里,我们评估了18个这样的评估,以确定侵犯土著主权的风险。在Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin (Anishinaabe特有的土著知识)的背景下,我们对50多个评估协议来源进行了专题分析,并与Anishinaabe Gikendaasowin持有者分享的教义并行。Asemaa、Ma' ingan和第七个火预言的教义强调同意、联系和亲属关系是可持续性的原则。然而,我们发现,以协商为基础的、往往模棱两可的参与协议有可能破坏共识的建立。此外,评估之间的复杂联系掩盖了隔离可持续性元素的方法,这些元素与人类与生态福祉交织在一起的教义相矛盾。我们的分析最终提出了共同开发更全面、更肯定主权的评估程序的建议。这些建议的执行情况因情况而异;然而,我们的分析结构提供了一个广泛适用的合作研究的例子,桥梁知识系统。正如第七次火之预言所描述的,我们正站在可持续发展的十字路口;最终,我们的分析旨在改进评估协议,并引导决策朝着更可持续的方向发展。
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
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
×
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
小红书