Reconciling risk and responsibility on Indigenous country: bridging the boundaries to guide knowledge sharing for cross-cultural biosecurity risk management in northern Australia
Kirsten Maclean, Cathy J. Robinson, Ellie Bock, P. Rist
{"title":"Reconciling risk and responsibility on Indigenous country: bridging the boundaries to guide knowledge sharing for cross-cultural biosecurity risk management in northern Australia","authors":"Kirsten Maclean, Cathy J. Robinson, Ellie Bock, P. Rist","doi":"10.1080/08873631.2021.1911078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Risks posed by new species entering local environments have instigated Indigenous peoples’ efforts to develop new knowledge and land management strategies in many regions. Working to share responsibility for the management of these risks requires new information, prompting government agencies, Indigenous organisations, industry groups, and others to advance new knowledge and different biosecurity practices. Tensions can exist between diverse interest groups advocating different versions of “biosecurity risk.” For example, which organisms should be governed as harmful, what kind of knowledge is useful to inform management practices, and what constitutes “risk”? We draw on research conducted with Indigenous organisations in northern Australia to better understand what risks they associate with “caring for [sick] country.” We argue that effective biosecurity practice in cross-cultural settings can navigate the bridge between different kinds of knowledge and capabilities to support diverse values, notions of responsibility to country, and related understandings of risk. Further, we argue that “biosecurity risk” as a boundary concept could provide the means for creating improved knowledge partnerships that value all interpretations of “biosecurity risk”. Partnerships that recognise multiple approaches for taking responsibility for the management of identified risks could support innovation for cross-cultural and collaborative approaches to biosecurity practice and management.","PeriodicalId":45137,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Geography","volume":"39 1","pages":"32 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08873631.2021.1911078","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2021.1911078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
ABSTRACT Risks posed by new species entering local environments have instigated Indigenous peoples’ efforts to develop new knowledge and land management strategies in many regions. Working to share responsibility for the management of these risks requires new information, prompting government agencies, Indigenous organisations, industry groups, and others to advance new knowledge and different biosecurity practices. Tensions can exist between diverse interest groups advocating different versions of “biosecurity risk.” For example, which organisms should be governed as harmful, what kind of knowledge is useful to inform management practices, and what constitutes “risk”? We draw on research conducted with Indigenous organisations in northern Australia to better understand what risks they associate with “caring for [sick] country.” We argue that effective biosecurity practice in cross-cultural settings can navigate the bridge between different kinds of knowledge and capabilities to support diverse values, notions of responsibility to country, and related understandings of risk. Further, we argue that “biosecurity risk” as a boundary concept could provide the means for creating improved knowledge partnerships that value all interpretations of “biosecurity risk”. Partnerships that recognise multiple approaches for taking responsibility for the management of identified risks could support innovation for cross-cultural and collaborative approaches to biosecurity practice and management.
期刊介绍:
Since 1979 this lively journal has provided an international forum for scholarly research devoted to the spatial aspects of human groups, their activities, associated landscapes, and other cultural phenomena. The journal features high quality articles that are written in an accessible style. With a suite of full-length research articles, interpretive essays, special thematic issues devoted to major topics of interest, and book reviews, the Journal of Cultural Geography remains an indispensable resource both within and beyond the academic community. The journal"s audience includes the well-read general public and specialists from geography, ethnic studies, history, historic preservation.