{"title":"种族、土著知识和渔业政策研究中的关系选择","authors":"Nicole Latulippe","doi":"10.1016/j.marpol.2025.106600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper responds to the contemporary academic and policy interest in bridging, integrating, and co-producing knowledge across Indigenous and non-Indigenous difference. I draw on my work on fish and fish relations with Nipissing First Nation (NFN), a Nbisiing Anishinaabeg community that governs its fishing activities according to community-derived law. In the form of critical policy analysis, I respond to three core research questions driving a national research partnership on Indigenous and Western knowledge systems in fisheries governance: (1) How and to what extent are different knowledge systems incorporated into fisheries governance and processes by Indigenous nations in Canada at national, regional and local scales? (2) Can varied Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) be used to improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance at national, regional, and local scales in Canada and internationally? (3) Can various IKS be used to inform and enhance an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in Canada and internationally, given the complexities of ecosystems and additional uncertainties posed by climate-induced changes? Indigenous knowledge certainly could and already does improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance in Canada, but this occurs despite the dominant resource regulatory regime. At Lake Nipissing, NFN leadership and an exceptional case of provincial recognition and support for Nbisiing Anishinaabeg law and jurisdiction have resulted in the recovery of the lake’s most sought-after fish population. Ultimately, I argue against “knowing” racialized forms of difference and conclude with an alternative, relational approach to fisheries policy and knowledge research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48427,"journal":{"name":"Marine Policy","volume":"175 ","pages":"Article 106600"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Race, Indigenous knowledge, and a relational alternative in fisheries policy research\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Latulippe\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.marpol.2025.106600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper responds to the contemporary academic and policy interest in bridging, integrating, and co-producing knowledge across Indigenous and non-Indigenous difference. I draw on my work on fish and fish relations with Nipissing First Nation (NFN), a Nbisiing Anishinaabeg community that governs its fishing activities according to community-derived law. In the form of critical policy analysis, I respond to three core research questions driving a national research partnership on Indigenous and Western knowledge systems in fisheries governance: (1) How and to what extent are different knowledge systems incorporated into fisheries governance and processes by Indigenous nations in Canada at national, regional and local scales? (2) Can varied Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) be used to improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance at national, regional, and local scales in Canada and internationally? (3) Can various IKS be used to inform and enhance an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in Canada and internationally, given the complexities of ecosystems and additional uncertainties posed by climate-induced changes? Indigenous knowledge certainly could and already does improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance in Canada, but this occurs despite the dominant resource regulatory regime. At Lake Nipissing, NFN leadership and an exceptional case of provincial recognition and support for Nbisiing Anishinaabeg law and jurisdiction have resulted in the recovery of the lake’s most sought-after fish population. Ultimately, I argue against “knowing” racialized forms of difference and conclude with an alternative, relational approach to fisheries policy and knowledge research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Marine Policy\",\"volume\":\"175 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Marine Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X25000156\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Marine Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X25000156","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文回应了当代学术和政策对跨越土著和非土著差异的桥梁、整合和共同生产知识的兴趣。我利用我在尼皮辛第一民族(Nipissing First Nation, NFN)的鱼类和鱼类关系方面的工作,这是一个根据社区衍生法律管理其渔业活动的尼皮辛阿贝格社区。以批判性政策分析的形式,我回应了三个核心研究问题,推动了关于渔业治理中土著和西方知识系统的国家研究伙伴关系:(1)加拿大土著民族在国家、区域和地方层面上如何以及在多大程度上将不同的知识系统纳入渔业治理和过程?(2)不同的土著知识系统(IKS)能否用于提高加拿大和国际上国家、区域和地方尺度上渔业治理的有效性?(3)考虑到生态系统的复杂性和气候引起的变化带来的额外不确定性,能否利用各种IKS为加拿大和国际上基于生态系统的渔业管理方法提供信息和加强?土著知识当然可以而且已经提高了加拿大渔业治理的有效性,但这是在资源管理制度占主导地位的情况下发生的。在尼皮辛湖,国家自然资源联盟的领导和一个特殊的省级承认和支持nisiing Anishinaabeg法律和管辖权的案例导致了湖中最受欢迎的鱼类种群的恢复。最后,我反对“了解”种族化的差异形式,并以渔业政策和知识研究的另一种关系方法作为结论。
Race, Indigenous knowledge, and a relational alternative in fisheries policy research
This paper responds to the contemporary academic and policy interest in bridging, integrating, and co-producing knowledge across Indigenous and non-Indigenous difference. I draw on my work on fish and fish relations with Nipissing First Nation (NFN), a Nbisiing Anishinaabeg community that governs its fishing activities according to community-derived law. In the form of critical policy analysis, I respond to three core research questions driving a national research partnership on Indigenous and Western knowledge systems in fisheries governance: (1) How and to what extent are different knowledge systems incorporated into fisheries governance and processes by Indigenous nations in Canada at national, regional and local scales? (2) Can varied Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) be used to improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance at national, regional, and local scales in Canada and internationally? (3) Can various IKS be used to inform and enhance an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in Canada and internationally, given the complexities of ecosystems and additional uncertainties posed by climate-induced changes? Indigenous knowledge certainly could and already does improve the effectiveness of fisheries governance in Canada, but this occurs despite the dominant resource regulatory regime. At Lake Nipissing, NFN leadership and an exceptional case of provincial recognition and support for Nbisiing Anishinaabeg law and jurisdiction have resulted in the recovery of the lake’s most sought-after fish population. Ultimately, I argue against “knowing” racialized forms of difference and conclude with an alternative, relational approach to fisheries policy and knowledge research.
期刊介绍:
Marine Policy is the leading journal of ocean policy studies. It offers researchers, analysts and policy makers a unique combination of analyses in the principal social science disciplines relevant to the formulation of marine policy. Major articles are contributed by specialists in marine affairs, including marine economists and marine resource managers, political scientists, marine scientists, international lawyers, geographers and anthropologists. Drawing on their expertise and research, the journal covers: international, regional and national marine policies; institutional arrangements for the management and regulation of marine activities, including fisheries and shipping; conflict resolution; marine pollution and environment; conservation and use of marine resources. Regular features of Marine Policy include research reports, conference reports and reports on current developments to keep readers up-to-date with the latest developments and research in ocean affairs.