Indigeneity

2014 NAISA Presidential Address:Centering the “I” in NAISA Chadwick Allen (bio) THIS IS THE SIXTH ANNUAL MEETING of the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association (NAISA). Those of you who have been involved with NAISA from the beginning, however, will be aware that a total of eight meetings have actually occurred, if we include the two preparatory meetings organized before NAISA became a reality as an association for scholars, students, and community members engaged in all aspects of Indigenous studies. The first meeting, held in 2007 and organized by Robert Warrior and his colleagues at the University of Oklahoma, was titled “What’s Next for Native American and Indigenous Studies?” The second meeting, held in 2008 and organized by Jace Weaver and his colleagues at the University of Georgia, was titled “Who Are We? Where Are We Going?” The questions posed in those initial conference titles remain relevant and, indeed, vital for us as a scholarly organization, ones we still need to attempt to answer in 2014—and, undoubtedly, in the many years ahead. I have titled my address this evening “Centering the ‘I’ in NAISA.” The title is meant to provoke an obvious pun, but it is also meant to provoke interrogation of these initial, relevant, and vital questions from a particular location and in a particular direction. My address has a specific itinerary, and my humble hope is that its movements will serve as something of a personal and professional map for moving NAISA toward fully achieving the incredible promise of this organization’s original conception as a collective of scholars, students, and community-based intellectuals that is globally focused and globally relevant. Since that first exhilarating meeting in Oklahoma in 2007, the early organizers and leaders of our association have offered suggestions for naming potential precursors and antecedents for NAISA, including, most prominently, the First Convocation of American Indian Scholars held at Princeton University here in the United States in 1970 and, decades before that, the many gatherings of the Society of American Indians (SAI), which held its early [End Page 1] meetings on the campus of the U.S. academic institution at which I happen to be employed, The Ohio State University, in 1911 and 1912.1 Non-U.S.-based and non-U.S.-focused members of NAISA have noted, however, that although these potential precursors and antecedents are relevant to our contemporary organization and endeavor, they limit the story of Indigenous research, scholarship, reporting, and outreach, as well as the story of broader Indigenous political organizing, to a genealogy centered almost exclusively in the United States, and thus they limit the full potential of our conceptions and understandings of Indigenous research, scholarship, reporting, outreach, and organizing. Similar genealogies for Indigenous scholarship and activism can be constructed based in other parts of the world: in Australia, in Aotearoa New Zealand, in Canada, in northern Europe, in Oceania, in Mexico, in various parts of Central and South America, in various parts of Asia, and so forth. These multiple genealogies of Indigenous scholarship and activism, with their multiple points of intersection and, importantly, multiple divergences, provide a more accurate, more challenging, more politically relevant, and more intellectually adventurous account of where we have come from—and where we might travel in the future. Another approach to understanding our organization’s relationships to history, however, would be for NAISA to locate its primary genealogy in explicitly international, transnational, global, or what I would call trans-Indigenous gatherings and organizations. Such a genealogy would spotlight, perhaps most preeminently, associations like the World Council of Indigenous Peoples (WCIP), an international Indigenous rights organization incorporated in the mid-1970s that was formed and led by Indigenous peoples themselves, though they did welcome various kinds of outside assistance.2 Similar to NAISA, the WCIP was founded on the principle that the activities of Indigenous “research,” broadly defined, and the “reporting” of that Indigenous research to various publics and governing bodies, was the basis for all of its other activities (Massey 1986, 61). The point of my address this evening, then—the destination marked in my itinerary—is admittedly quite simple. I want to argue that to center the “I” in NAISA...

The possibility of a defined Indigenous Research Methodology is exciting to indigenous and non-indigenous scholars alike, though probably for different reasons. Present assumptions suggest that such a methodology would determine standards for authenticity of indigenous research, and would enable a more effective critique of research dealing explicitly with indigenous reality. The question of who should participate in the development of an indigenous research methodology is critical since every scholar who has any connection with indigenous research topics or indigenous people will feel directly impacted. Responses to the question will indicate the form or quality of interactions between indigenous and non-indigenous scholars grappling with the political, social, and personal issues that assuredly will arise in any discourse of an indigenous research methodology. Such a concept might be perceived as a threat to existing forms or models of knowledge and knowledge creation. While indigenous scholars must be aware of such reactions, they will nonetheless experience themselves as the "active-centre" in the process of any indigenous research which they choose to live through. They are a piece of the heart in the body of growing indigenous knowledge. Indigenous research methodology is and has always been the central structure of support for the creation of indigenous knowledge. There are some principles which underlay most indigenous research - where this is understood to mean research conducted by indigenous people. Moving however to a discourse which includes indigenous and non-indigenous participants in an academic focus on indigenous research methodology might profitaby include a consideration of such principles as (a) the interconnectedness of all living things, (b) the impact of motives and intentions on person and community, (c) the foundation of research as lived indigenous experience, (d) the groundedness of theories in indigenous epistemology, (e) the transformative nature of research, (f) the sacredness and responsibility of maintaining personal and community integrity, and (g) the recognition of languages and cultures as living processes.

Reviewed by: Sámi Media and Indigenous Agency in the Arctic North by Coppélie Cocq and Thomas A. DuBois Bronwyn Carlson (bio) Sámi Media and Indigenous Agency in the Arctic North by Coppélie Cocq and Thomas A. DuBois University of Washington Press, 2020 SÁMI MEDIA AND INDIGENOUS AGENCY IN THE ARCTIC NORTH written by Coppélie Cocq and Thomas A. DuBois is an interesting and timely contribution to the corpus of knowledge being produced on Indigenous peoples and media and communication. Indigenous peoples across the globe are typically early adopters of all forms of communication technologies. As the authors note, from as early as the 1990s Indigenous peoples have utilized digital technologies to connect with others across the globe to create a sense of global Indigenous solidarity for survival, connectivity, innovation, and social and political interactions as well as for pleasure. The book details Sámi use of technology, including digital platforms demonstrating the longevity of using technology to resist colonialism. Like other Indigenous peoples, Sámi utilize communication and media technologies for their own means and always have. From precolonial technologies to print media, radio, television to contemporary digital platforms such as social media, Indigenous peoples utilize technology in their efforts to promote and maintain their cultural practices, keep connected, and stay alive. As the authors note, "Sámi groups did not wait for the internet 2.0 to find a way to make their voices heard" (195). As rightfully noted by the authors, not all Indigenous peoples think alike or hold the same position on topics in relation to cultural knowledges and practices or the way in which technologies are used or are useful. Sámi are diverse, and indeed their homelands sit across multiple nation-states including Norway, Finland, and Sweden. In an interesting and innovative way, Cocq and DuBois have chosen to title each chapter using Sámi languages to describe "snow." For example, chapter 1 is titled, Åppås, a Lule Sámi term referring to newly fallen snow. The authors discuss the meaning of the terms but also how the meanings relate to their study, providing the reader with insights into Sámi languages and demonstrating how language is a powerful, very localized technology. The authors state, "Our choices of snow terms reflect the diversity of Sámi languages, so our choice of places to highlight is meant to underscore the diversity of terrains, ways of life, and hubs of activity" (33). Sámi are part of a global network of Indigenous peoples who use the [End Page 191] internet to connect, learn from each other, and support each other in efforts to undo some of the damage that colonization has inflicted upon our bodies and lands. The book outlines these efforts and draws the reader's attention to the way Sámi and other Indigenous peoples use digital technologies in their activism in what they suggest galvanizes support against forces that aim to disempower or coerce Indigenous communities. The authors also note the difficulty in covering the breadth and depth of Sámi activism due to the increasing numbers of talented people who are emerging from each of the Nordic locations on Sámi homelands. The book is filled with examples of Sámi ingenuity and creativity such as film, documentaries, text, artworks, song, joik performance, music, and much more. Other examples include Sámi activism like language resurgence and repatriation of ancestors, whose bodies have been stolen and kept in metal drawers and display cabinets across the world. "Thousands of Sámi remains [are] currently housed in anatomical institutes in each of the Nordic countries," a reality that resonates with most Indigenous peoples around the globe (131). The book could easily be described as "glocal": while firmly situated in the lived experiences of Sámi, the book speaks to the experiences of Indigenous peoples globally. This ensures the book's appeal to a diverse audience. Similar to other Indigenous peoples, Sámi remain Sámi online. Ways of knowing, being, and doing are firmly situated in Sámi practices and traditions as noted by the authors: "Social media in Sápmi is to a great extent a mode...

Issue Editors’ Notes Stephanie J. Waterman (bio) and D-L Stewart (bio) ACPA President Donna Lee launched the Association’s Strategic Imperative on Racial Justice. In response to critical feedback from Indigenous members of the Association, the strategic imperative evolved to become the Strategic Imperative on Racial Justice and Decolonization (SIRJD) under ACPA President Stephen John Quaye. This evolution was necessary as a focus on racial justice is inadequate without recognition that (a) despite being racialized, Indigenous Peoples are citizens of sovereign nations not racial groups, and (b) a discussion of racism without settler colonialism is incomplete, particularly for colonized territories such as North America. Further presentations and discussions on the SIRJD’s development continued with the SIRJD syllabus in use at the 2018 ACPA Convention in Houston, Texas, the home to three federally recognized nations: the Alabama–Coushatta, Kickapoo Traditional, and Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo. The Apache and Karankawa also live in relationship with these lands. Recognizing the need to promote scholarship that also engages racial justice and decolonization, Editor Deb Liddell and the JCSD Editorial Board announced a call for proposals for guest editors for a special issue that would engage the Strategic Imperative at the 2019 ACPA Convention in Boston, Massachusetts, the original homeland of the Mashpee Wampanoag, Aquinnah Wampanoag, Nipmuc, and Massachusett tribal nations. A special issue on the theme of racial justice and decolonization could not be timelier and yet not soon enough. Diverse scholars have centered their scholarship in and through critical race theories, decolonization, Indigenous methods, and other critical lenses for some time now. Embracing the call from an international organization of educators in colleges and universities, we the editors and authors acknowledge this extant literature and the importance of furthering such scholarship to reframe the field of student affairs to be deliberately racially just and decolonized on a foundation of scholarship and practice. As we considered exactly how to situate this issue within the SIRJD, we realized that relationship conceptually and relationships in practice were key to (re)building a racially just and decolonized practice in student affairs. To be in right relationship, as discussed by Indigenous scholars such as Sandy Grande (2004) and Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012), requires deep knowledge of and respect for the sovereignty of other people and the natural world. To pursue such a relationship is not just anti-Anthropocentric (la paperson, 2017) but also aligns with a love ethic through which we “utilize all dimensions of love—care, commitment, trust, responsibility, respect, and knowledge—in [End Page 675] our everyday lives,” (hooks, 2000, p. 94). Thus, this Special Issue on Race, Indigeneity, and Relationship in Student Affairs and Higher Education was conceived. We encounter multiple relationships and aspects of relationships in our work as scholars and practitioners of student affairs and higher education. These manuscripts illuminate those relations to some of our academic kin—students, professionals, faculty—and how the tacit assumptions with which we approach our kin can either damage or repair relationship. Many of these manuscripts elevate the voices of racially minoritized and Indigenous people, as students and scholars, through methodologies such as autoethnography and duoethnography, endarkened feminist methodologies, QuantCrit, and Indigenous quantitative methods. The special issue is organized into four areas: (a) empirical articles which spotlight institutional features or factors that affect the experiences of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC; Alejandro, Fong, & De La Rosa, p. 679; Garibay, West, & Mathis, p. 697); (b) conceptual papers that expose the afterlife of white supremacy and coloniality (Okello, p. 717; Jourian & McCloud, p. 733); (c) methodological discussions wherein the use of more appropriate analytical devices are considered (Lopez, p. 750; Morton, p. 765); and (d) practice-centered pieces that demonstrate how a racially just and decolonial lens can lead to a racially just and decolonial profession (Galvez & Muñoz, p. 781; Ward, p. 797; Castro & Magana, p. 814). The forwarding of epistemologies rooted in Blackness and Indigenous worldviews and methods that unabashedly make the research personal makes the manuscripts in this issue stand out from those which typically appear in academic journals. We question the sequestering of the work we offer here as “alternative,” “emerging,” or “contemporary.” Rather, these scholars have excavated the knowledges held...

Ethnocultural Minority Groups, Status and Treatment of

This article discusses Indigenous Evenki place names (hydronyms) on official topographic maps and handwritten sketches in a broader context of Soviet and Russian regimes of spatial inscription and toponymic policies and their legacies. The early Soviet policy of korenizatsia (indigenization) facilitated the incorporation of Indigenous place names into official nomenclature. As a result, a large number of Indigenous toponyms appeared on official maps. The aim of this article is to examine the evolving relationships between Indigenous place names and official place names of Indigenous origin across three historical periods (the 1920s, the 1950s, and the contemporary era) and in two politically distinct settings, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) and the Amur region. The data sets for this research were extracted from official maps and Evenki archival sketch maps collected by Glafira Vasilevich in Siberia between the 1920s and the 1960s. Using Quantum GIS in conjunction with ethnographic fieldwork, statistical analysis, and qualitative linguistic assessment, this research further investigates the evolution of Indigenous names on maps, focusing on the most characteristic changes in their inscription over the past century. This article concludes by highlighting the power dynamics between different Indigenous place-naming traditions in Siberia, where various Indigenous communities have historically distinct opportunities to influence toponymic policies.

Māori (the Indigenous Peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand) are disproportionately represented in cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevalence, morbidity and mortality rates, and are less likely to receive evidence-based CVD health care. Rural Māori experience additional barriers to treatment access, poorer health outcomes and a greater burden of CVD risk factors compared to Non-Māori and Māori living in urban areas. Importantly, these inequities are similarly experienced by Indigenous Peoples in other nations impacted by colonisation. Given the scarcity of available literature, a systematic scoping review was conducted on literature exploring barriers and facilitators in accessing CVD health care for rural Māori and other Indigenous Peoples in nations impacted by colonisation. The review was underpinned by Kaupapa Māori Research methodology and was conducted utilising Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodological framework. A database search of MEDLINE (OVID), PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre and NZResearch.org was used to explore empirical research literature. A grey literature search was also conducted. Literature based in any healthcare setting providing care to adults for CVD was included. Rural or remote Indigenous Peoples from New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the US were included. Literature was included if it addressed cardiovascular conditions and reported barriers and facilitators to healthcare access in any care setting. A total of 363 articles were identified from the database search. An additional 19 reports were identified in the grey literature search. Following screening, 16 articles were included from the database search and 5 articles from the grey literature search. The literature was summarised using the Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) Framework principles: tino rangatiratanga (self-determination), partnership, active protection, equity and options. Themes elucidated from the literature were described as key drivers of CVD healthcare access for rural Indigenous Peoples. Key driver themes included input from rural Indigenous Peoples on healthcare service design and delivery, adequate resourcing and support of indigenous and rural healthcare services, addressing systemic racism and historical trauma, providing culturally appropriate health care, rural Indigenous Peoples' access to family and wellbeing support, rural Indigenous Peoples' differential access to the wider social determinants of health, effective interservice linkages and communication, and equity-driven and congruent data systems. The findings are consistent with other literature exploring access to health care for rural Indigenous Peoples. This review offers a novel approach to summarising literature by situating the themes within the context of equity and rights for Indigenous Peoples. This review also highlighted the need for further research in this area to be conducted in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand.

I am grateful for the financial contributions provided by the Canadian Indigenous of Health Research (CIHR), Institute of Indigenous Peoples Health and Gender and Health, with First Nations Health Authority, the Canadian Nurses Foundation, and the University of Victoria.

A new multi-proxy paleo database for lake ecosystem and catchment change in Aotearoa New Zealand points to the potential resource and ecosystem service roles of Typha orientalis (raupō). In the context of chronic wetland degradation in Aotearoa New Zealand over the past century, this iconic yet enigmatic wetland plant can be viewed, alternately, as an invasive threat; a valuable cultural and economic resource; and a natural, indigenous agent for bioremediation. Our investigation reconstructs the history of raupō over the past ~1000 years, based on 92 new pollen records generated from lake sites across Aotearoa New Zealand. At almost every site where raupō is present today, its expansion is promoted to varying extents during periods of human activity and at 87% of sites investigated, raupō shows its maximum palynological abundance post human arrival. Multiple patterns of response over time point to a range of hydrological, trophic, and cultural scenarios that are conducive for raupō expansion, raising prospects for its potential role in mitigating the ecological impacts of disturbance. Raupō expansion, promoted by anthropogenic forest clearances and associated sediment and nutrient flux, would in turn have provided new opportunities for its use as a valuable food and material resource, prompting further questions as to the extent it was deliberately managed by indigenous populations. As both a benefactor from, and provider for, expanding populations, raupō may be regarded as a human associate in Aotearoa New Zealand prehistory. As well as being indigenous to Aotearoa New Zealand, T. orientalis also occurs naturally in Australia and east Asia and shares the intrinsic ecological and morphological attributes of the ~40 species or hybrids of Typha that span most of the planet. This work therefore may encourage wider application of the genus as a biocultural asset informed from its local natural history.

There is an Indigenous resurgence in education occurring globally. For more than a century Euro-western approaches have controlled the provision and quality of education to, and for Indigenous peoples. The World Indigenous Research Alliance (WIRA) established in 2012, is a grass-roots movement of Indigenous scholars passionate about making a difference for Indigenous peoples and their education. WIRA is a service-oriented endeavor designed by Indigenous scholars working in mainstream institutions to support each other and to provide culturally safe spaces to share ideas. This paper highlights how WIRA came to be, and outlines the nature and scope of these shared endeavours. Strategically, WIRA operates under the mandate of the World Indigenous Nations Higher Educational Consortium (WINHEC) who regularly report to the General Assembly of the United Nations Indigenous Peoples Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) pertaining to Indigenous Peoples and their education (United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, 2007). Indeed, this collaboration provides the opportunity to share best practices across respective countries, and to co-design interdisciplinary, dynamic and innovative educational research. Since the inception of WIRA, a number of research priorities have emerged alongside potential funding models we believe can assist our shared work moving forward. The launching of WIRA is timely, and sure to accelerate the goals envisaged by WINHEC, and Indigenous peoples aspirations in education more generally.

Abstract. Mixed-method bicultural research in Aotearoa New Zealand, including the weaving of Indigenous and other knowledge, is emerging within many academic disciplines. However, mātauranga Māori (the knowledge, culture, values, and world view of the Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand) and Te Ao Māori (the Māori world) is poorly represented within geomorphological investigations. Here, we review international efforts to include Indigenous knowledge in geologic and geomorphic studies and provide an overview of the current state of mātauranga Māori within research endeavours in Aotearoa New Zealand. We review three theoretical frameworks (i.e. methodologies) for including mātauranga Māori in research projects and three models (i.e. methods) for including Māori values within research. We identify direct benefits to geomorphology and discuss how these frameworks and models can be adapted for use with Indigenous knowledge systems outside of Aotearoa New Zealand. The aim of this review is to encourage geomorphologists around the world to engage with local Indigenous peoples to develop new approaches to geomorphic research. In Aotearoa New Zealand, we hope to inspire geomorphologists to embark on research journeys in genuine partnership with Māori that promote toitū te mātauranga – the enduring protection, promotion and respect of mātauranga Māori.

In First World colonised nations such as Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia, population statistics form the evidentiary base for how Indigenous peoples are known and 'managed' through state policy approaches. Yet, population statistics are not a neutral counting. Decisions of what and how to count reflect particular assumptions about Indigenous identity, ways of life and wellbeing. More often than not, the requirements and priorities of government take precedence over the informational needs and priorities of Indigenous communities. Whereas National Statistics Offices (NSOs) once rendered Indigenous peoples invisible in official statistics through non-recognition, the more pressing problem in the 21st century is that of misrecognition. In seeking to move beyond statistical misrecognition, we propose a set of guiding principles for bringing government reporting frameworks and Indigenous concepts of identity and wellbeing into closer proximity. We argue that a principled approach to collecting, disseminating and analysing Indigenous data not only avoids misrecognising Indigenous peoples but enhances the functionality of official statistics for Indigenous peoples and NSOs alike.

An ethnic gloss is an overgeneralization or simplistic categorical label used to refer to ethnocultural groups such as American Indians, Asian Americans, Hispanics, African Americans, and other nationalistic or indigenous groups where unique cultural and ethnic differences found among group members are ignored. An ethnic gloss presents the illusion of homogeneity where none exists, and therefore may be a superficial, almost vacuous, categorization that provides little or no information on the existence of numerous subgroups characterized by distinct lifeways and thoughtways. It is a sorting device that has little to do with the richness and cultural variation within ethnocultural groups that also guides a group member's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Furthermore, use of a broad ethnic gloss to describe an ethnocultural group can generate biased and flawed scientific research outcomes, and may promote stereotypes. Such sweeping references to ethnocultural groups are gross misrepresentations, and use of an ethnic gloss can violate scientific tenets concerning external validity, the ability to generalize findings across subgroups within an ethnic category, and erode any likelihood of an accurate and efficient replication of research results. This entry provides examples of the use of ethnic gloss, and recommendations for more adequate identification and sampling of research participants from diverse ethnocultural groups.

In mid-2006, the International Geographical Union established its Indigenous Peoples’ Knowledges and Rights Commission (IPKRC). Inaugurated at the IGU Regional Conference in Brisbane, Australia, the IPKRC represents an effort by the IGU to engage with the Indigenous issues and the relationships between the discipline and the rights, knowledge and interests of Indigenous peoples in the twenty-first Century. In lateOctober 2007, the IPKRC met jointly with the IGU Commission on Islands at the National Taiwan University in Taipei. That conference brought together more than 60 participants and included 52 formal presentations and papers. This special issue of GeoJournal celebrates that meeting by publishing some of the very best papers from that conference and demonstrates the value of a continuing dialogue between Indigenous peoples and geography. While the value of such dialogue is clear, the challenges facing the IPKRC are no small matter. There are relatively few Indigenous geographers in the discipline, and Indigenous geography has not been a major disciplinary focus. Indigenous issues have often been marginalized in the discipline as they were in the affairs of many settler and colonial societies. Indeed, like many scientific disciplines, contemporary geography has a regrettable colonial legacy to address. Colonial geography facilitated the occupation and possession of Indigenous peoples’ lands, waters and resources by the colonizing ‘other’. Through its contribution to mapping and describing Indigenous peoples’ territories, geography was a powerful handmaiden of the colonial project. In 1984, David Stea and Ben Wisner edited a special issue of Antipode that represented an important opening of the discipline’s reconsideration of its relationships with Indigenous peoples (Stea and Wisner 1984). A decade ago, in the case of Australia, Howitt and Jackson (1998, 155) argued that there had been ‘‘substantial change in the relationship between geography in Australia and indigenous people.’’ They went onto suggest that the relationship between the discipline and Indigenous people was ‘‘of great value to the discipline and the nation as we move towards more equitable and sustainable futures’’ (1998, 155). Similarly in New Zealand, Berg and Kearns argued that there was a ‘‘political edge’’ to the work of many cultural geographers in New Zealand, particularly those ‘‘with interests in Maori issues’’ (1997, 1). More recently, special issues of major journals such as Geografiska Annaler (Series B, Human Geography, 88/3, 2006) K. Frantz (&) Institut fur Geographie, Universitat Innsbruck, Innrain 52, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria e-mail: Klaus.Frantz@uibk.ac.at

Research on Indigenous participation in sport offers many opportunities to better understand the political issues of equality, empowerment, self-determination and protection of culture and identity. This volume compares and conceptualises the sociological significance of Indigenous sports in different international contexts. The contributions, all written by Indigenous scholars and those working directly in Indigenous/Native Studies units, provide unique studies of contemporary experiences of Indigenous sports participation. The papers investigate current understandings of Indigeneity found to circulate throughout sports, sports organisations and Indigenous communities. by (1): situating attitudes to racial and cultural difference within the broader sociological processes of post colonial Indigenous worlds (2): interrogating perceptions of Indigenous identity with reference to contemporary theories of identity drawn from Indigenous Studies and (3): providing insight to increased Indigenous participation, empowerment and personal development through sport with reference to sociological theory.