以社区为基础的监测能否促进土著人民的自决?努纳武特和格陵兰因纽特人领导的监测和治理

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Nicole J. Wilson
{"title":"以社区为基础的监测能否促进土著人民的自决?努纳武特和格陵兰因纽特人领导的监测和治理","authors":"Nicole J. Wilson","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Existing literature on Community-Based Monitoring suggests that participation in monitoring can increase the extent to which decision-making is informed by observed environmental trends. Yet, there is an ambivalence within the literature concerning the value for Indigenous peoples. Some scholars maintain that CBM programs replicate and reinforce colonial political inequalities while others suggest that such programs can and do support Indigenous self-determination. In this study, I explore such questions through empirical engagement with case studies of two established Indigenous-led programs in Nunavut, Canada, and Greenland that involve the collection of Indigenous Knowledge for use in decision-making. I contribute to the field by examining monitoring as a process through which knowledge and governance are co-constituted through politically unequal relationships. Considering this, I argue that Indigenous-led CBM can support self-determination in environmental governance given the right conditions. I identify three factors that are fundamental to achieving this. First, explicit legal acknowledgement of Indigenous rights, authority, and knowledge systems is key to mobilizing CBM data. Second, while the fundamental goal of such programs is to enhance the use of knowledge in decision-making, Indigenous leadership and data governance are important safeguards against extractive knowledge production. Finally, a theory of power is necessary to critically analyse both the directly observable and more subtle ways in which power influences the potential for CBM programs to promote Indigenous self-determination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 104215"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does community-based monitoring advance Indigenous self-determination? Inuit-led monitoring and governance in Nunavut and Greenland\",\"authors\":\"Nicole J. Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Existing literature on Community-Based Monitoring suggests that participation in monitoring can increase the extent to which decision-making is informed by observed environmental trends. Yet, there is an ambivalence within the literature concerning the value for Indigenous peoples. Some scholars maintain that CBM programs replicate and reinforce colonial political inequalities while others suggest that such programs can and do support Indigenous self-determination. In this study, I explore such questions through empirical engagement with case studies of two established Indigenous-led programs in Nunavut, Canada, and Greenland that involve the collection of Indigenous Knowledge for use in decision-making. I contribute to the field by examining monitoring as a process through which knowledge and governance are co-constituted through politically unequal relationships. Considering this, I argue that Indigenous-led CBM can support self-determination in environmental governance given the right conditions. I identify three factors that are fundamental to achieving this. First, explicit legal acknowledgement of Indigenous rights, authority, and knowledge systems is key to mobilizing CBM data. Second, while the fundamental goal of such programs is to enhance the use of knowledge in decision-making, Indigenous leadership and data governance are important safeguards against extractive knowledge production. Finally, a theory of power is necessary to critically analyse both the directly observable and more subtle ways in which power influences the potential for CBM programs to promote Indigenous self-determination.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"172 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112500231X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112500231X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于社区监测的现有文献表明,参与监测可以增加根据观察到的环境趋势作出决策的程度。然而,关于土著人民的价值,文献中存在矛盾的心理。一些学者认为,CBM项目复制并强化了殖民地的政治不平等,而另一些人则认为,这类项目可以而且确实支持了土著民族的自决。在本研究中,我通过对加拿大努纳武特和格陵兰两个已建立的土著主导项目的案例研究进行实证研究,探讨了这些问题,这些项目涉及收集土著知识用于决策。我对这一领域的贡献是将监测视为一个过程,通过这个过程,知识和治理通过政治上不平等的关系共同构成。考虑到这一点,我认为,在适当的条件下,土著主导的信任措施可以支持环境治理方面的自决。我确定了实现这一目标的三个基本因素。首先,在法律上明确承认土著居民的权利、权威和知识体系是调动信任措施数据的关键。其次,虽然这些项目的根本目标是提高知识在决策中的使用,但土著领导和数据治理是防止掠夺性知识生产的重要保障。最后,需要一种权力理论来批判性地分析权力影响CBM计划促进土著自决的潜力的直接观察和更微妙的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does community-based monitoring advance Indigenous self-determination? Inuit-led monitoring and governance in Nunavut and Greenland
Existing literature on Community-Based Monitoring suggests that participation in monitoring can increase the extent to which decision-making is informed by observed environmental trends. Yet, there is an ambivalence within the literature concerning the value for Indigenous peoples. Some scholars maintain that CBM programs replicate and reinforce colonial political inequalities while others suggest that such programs can and do support Indigenous self-determination. In this study, I explore such questions through empirical engagement with case studies of two established Indigenous-led programs in Nunavut, Canada, and Greenland that involve the collection of Indigenous Knowledge for use in decision-making. I contribute to the field by examining monitoring as a process through which knowledge and governance are co-constituted through politically unequal relationships. Considering this, I argue that Indigenous-led CBM can support self-determination in environmental governance given the right conditions. I identify three factors that are fundamental to achieving this. First, explicit legal acknowledgement of Indigenous rights, authority, and knowledge systems is key to mobilizing CBM data. Second, while the fundamental goal of such programs is to enhance the use of knowledge in decision-making, Indigenous leadership and data governance are important safeguards against extractive knowledge production. Finally, a theory of power is necessary to critically analyse both the directly observable and more subtle ways in which power influences the potential for CBM programs to promote Indigenous self-determination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
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