Suchergebnisse

In this paper, we critically examine the co-management of Indigenous peoples' cultural heritage as simultaneously a driver and product of the culturalisation of Indigenous peoples: the reduction of complex legal- political orders, anchored in specific lands, value systems, rights, and prac- tices, to material cultures. Co-management has been hailed as a defensibly imperfect, 'tweakable' system that benefits both Indigenous and state parties, and moreover, a stepping stone to Indigenous self-determination. Departing from these analyses, we argue that co-management is not just an administrative arrangement but also a state-ratified international rights regime, and accordingly, that it cannot do other than undermine Indigenous self-determination and imperil Indigenous peoples' cultural heritage. We suggest that cultural heritage can only thrive by being actively engaged with in situ: via the living practice of Indigenous governance. Operationalising our argument, we first consider the challenges of cultural heritage protection in Sápmi; specifically, the co-management of Laponia, in Sweden, and the unprotected sacred area of Suttesája in Finland. We then discuss a more promising framework: the Quechua 'Biocultural Heritage Territory' of the Parque de la Papa, in Peru. Finally, we apply the lessons of the Parque to Suttesája, showing how this opens up governance-based avenues to safeguarding Indigenous sacred areas.

Relašunalitehta prinsihppa lea eamiálbmogiid máilmmeipmárdusa vuolggasadji. Dat lea maiddái eamiálbmotdutkamuša vuođđodoaba, mii hábme ee. metodologiijaid. Moai evttohetne, ahte ovttastallan-doaba jadasa gullevaš vierut vástidit eamiálbmogiid relašunalitehta prinsihpa. Moai guorahalle njealje dábálaš ovttastallanvieru ja dan, mo ovttastallan sáhttá doaibmat otnábeaivuohkin ja metodan čoavdit hástaleaddji servodatáššiid. Dasa lassin suokkardetne mo ovttastallama vierut doibmet sámiid árbevirolaš soabadallanvuohkin, man mii dávjá geavahit muhto man árvvu dahje mearkkašumi mii eat álo fuomáš. Mo ovttastallan lea min árbevirolaš vuohki soabadit, čoavdit oktasaš hástalusaid, háhkat ođđa áddejumi ja oktasaš dieđu ja dáinna lágiin ovddidit servodathuksema ja buresveadjima? Manne lea dehálaš loktet ovttastallamavieruid árvvu ja sajádaga otná sámeservodagas?

This article compares three environmental assessment (EA) cases in Nunatsiavut, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories (NWT) to better understand how resource decision-making processes in northern Indigenous mixed economies are gendered. Advances in Indigenous jurisprudence and Indigenous peoples' assertions of their rights to lands and territories have influenced new cooperative resource management institutions and associated environmental assessment frameworks. Though previous research has pointed to the systemic ways in which EAs undermine self-determination, there has been little attention to how gender influences EA processes and outcomes. This article contributes to emerging scholarship on gender and EAs through a thematic analysis of the environmental assessments for the Voisey's Bay Mine and Mill in Nunatsiavut (1997); the Meadowbank Mine in Nunavut (2004–2006); and the Mackenzie Gas Project (2003–2009). The cases examined reflected a spectrum in the extent to which gender is accounted for and attended to in EA processes. Notwithstanding their differences, Indigenous women's interventions in each case challenged the narrowly scoped treatment of gender in EA processes by describing their broad concerns with development. Furthermore, in each case, EA processes emphasized participation in employment rather than community well-being, and inadequately addressed women's traditional harvesting activities. We argue that in failing to account for the totality of northern livelihoods, the EA process privileges resource extraction, re-inscribes gender hierarchies, and undermines Indigenous mixed economies. We conclude by offering several criteria for the successful inclusion of gender issues in the scope of EAs and reflecting briefly on new developments in the legislative framework for EAs and Indigenous governance initiatives that may support more fulsome inclusion of gender issues.